<p>Hey, </p>
<p>I am just wondering what exactley do the SATs measure? I have heared it measures your ability to take tests but i know plenty of people who have done poorley on thier SATs and have high GPA's. As for myself, I have a low SAT score but a relativley high GPA, it just doesnt make sense? </p>
<p>What are your views?</p>
<p>In my opinion it doesn't measure much, except your ability to comply to a certain way of thinking, forced upon society by a small group of elite people who decide that intelligence is this and ability is that, and if you don't fit that narrow desciption you're stuck in a mediocre life.
Otherwise yeah I think they measure logic and test ability etc.</p>
<p>I think it measures your ability to perform basic, necessary skills that every high school student should know how to do.</p>
<p>Speaking of which, have you ever noticed that the ONLY people who speak against the SAT are the ones who perform the worst? The people with 1500-1600 scores never say a word.</p>
<p>According to the College Board itself, the only thing it is designed to do is that your score along with your high school GPA when considered together provide a good predictor as to whether you will pass your classes (i.e., get at least a C) in your first year of college. The College Board disclaims that it measures innate inteligence or IQ, that it predicts that you will be a top or average student, or that you will actually complete college. And for those who believe it shows whether someone is and will do better than another be aware there are several studies that show that among college graduates the mean and median college GPA's of those who scored in the 1400 and 1500's and those who scored in the 1000 and 1100's are about the same.</p>
<p>lol fabrizio I never took the SAT, or the ACT, or any other test. I'm just against the whole concept and the undue importance universities place on it.</p>
<p>nick3333 did u go to college?</p>
<p>I'm sixteen, and as far as I know, not an academic genius... So no, I didn't. I will though, right now I'm in 11th grade and I finish high school in 13th grade (so that would be the equivalent to AP grade 10).</p>
<p>I want to get in a top university such as Cornell.
Yes, that is ironic considering I am against the way education works now, but hey it's not like I'm going to march in the streets and cause a revolution, my name's not Che Guevara.</p>
<p>So I want to ride the system out, and use it to my advantage so I can finally change it (I want to go into law).</p>
<p>The SAT measures critical thinking, reasoning, and writing skills students have developed over time and some of the skills they need to be successful academically.</p>
<p>Exactly. Academically. Academics are not the only thing in life, and-
you know what forget it I'm going to bed</p>
<p>They measure test-taking ability, to be specific. However, I don't mean that in as cynical a way as most do; test-taking ability is often a strong correlate of the types of intelligence necessary to do well in college. But anyone who thinks it is anything more than a statistical correlation is fooling themselves.</p>
<p>Also, I am puzzled that people keep bringing GPA into comparison. GPA measures how lazy/not lazy you are, which has very little to do with what the SAT measures. A hard-working dumbass can get a 4.0 just as easily as a slacker genius can get a 2.0 (and I know several examples of both types of people).</p>
<p>Your ability to study- really HARD.</p>
<p>Ah the life of a slacker genius.</p>
<p>And I agree with killaerone on his beautiful statement we should all take to heart.</p>
<p>I feel like pizza right now.</p>
<p>The SAT measures your ability to take the SAT.</p>
<p>that last one made me cry. so simple and yet so true. someone pass me the tissues</p>
<p>
[quote]
have you ever noticed that the ONLY people who speak against the SAT are the ones who perform the worst? The people with 1500-1600 scores never say a word.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why bite the hand that feeds you? It's just like how a student's most disliked teacher is usually the one that gives him or her the lowest grades. A below average teacher who gives great marks will still fly under the radar most of the time.</p>
<p>I don't think that you can get a very high GPA just by "working hard", at least not at my school. You still need that all-around academic sharpness. But since GPA is stretched over a period of years, it's a better measure of your work ethic than the SAT. I don't know any "dumbasses" at my school who have 93%+ GPAs just because they work really hard. Usually those kids are at the 86 to 88 mark.</p>
<p>The SAT I is basically a measure of how well you can read and comprehend passages, follow logic, grasp the conventions of the English language, apply the knowledge you learned in math class (to often very strangely worded problems), and the ability to work under time pressure. Many of these skills you definetely will need to know in college. Unfortunetely, some of the brightest students don't do so well on the SAT because of the time constraints and the fact that it's administered early in the morning, but with additional practice a poor test-taker can overcome these.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In my opinion it doesn't measure much, except your ability to comply to a certain way of thinking, forced upon society by a small group of elite people who decide that intelligence is this and ability is that, and if you don't fit that narrow desciption you're stuck in a mediocre life.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>True, the SAT I doesn't test the full range of intellectual qualities needed in a college education. It only provides a snapshot of a persons intellegence--it can never prove that a person has creative, artistic, musical, athlethic talents, etc or has a good work ethic. It doesn't test innate intelligence either, since you can prep for test to improve your score. Still, it is a test of basic skills, and is of considerable importance in college admissions since it can validate a person's GPA. They use this because the curriculum and course diffculty of different high schools across the country vary. For example, if a student has a 4.8 W GPA but an 1110 SAT score, the adcons see that some MAJOR grade inflation is going on. If a student has a 1570 SAT score but a 2.9 W GPA, the adcons will realize that this guy is indeed intelligent, but doesn't work to his potential. Because high schools across the nation vary in difficulty and rigor, standardized tests are the only objective yardstick of whether a student can be successful at a particular college. With increased "proofreading" by parents on the application essays and grade inflation, the SAT is likely to have an even more prominent role in undergraduate admissions.</p>
<p>The NEW SAT will, compared to the old SAT, measure more your school achievement, than your aptitude. It has become less and less of an IQ-like test, and more of a how-strong-is-your-highschool-curriculum test. In many regards, it will also test how well you prepare for the test itself, be it through reading classical novels, memorizing vocabulary lists, or exceling at college prep math.</p>
<p>The good thing is that the new SAT is not a vocabulary maze like the old one. You need to know some big words, but not a lot.</p>
<p>It's all about studying. Of course, some people are better off than others...</p>
<p>I love how everyone who does worse than expected on the SATs labels it the scourge of modern society, demanding another yardstick to be measured by. </p>
<p>People always want to be measured by what they are best at, and thus would come up as being smartest in their class, whether it's writing, math, science, debate, or even chess.</p>
<p>Bottom line: Colleges need a filter. The filter must be consistent. That is where Standardized tests succeed whereas GPA fails. I was reading a biography of John Nash, and it said that the top schools brought admissions counselors to his highschool and each had its own test that was administered to students.</p>