<p>by counting the weeks you study and the amount per day you study</p>
<p>For me, it’s the SAT I, but it really depends on how many subject tests you’re taking and what prior knowledge you have. Obviously if you’ve taken AP U.S. History, you’re not going to have to study much for that particular SAT II.</p>
<p>I’d say two SAT II’s, but that’s just me…</p>
<p>Not even close SAT I. Most people do little to no prep for SAT II and 3 SAT IIs are still much less important than 1 SAT I.</p>
<p>considering that the SAT II actually tests content knowledge, and SAT I just gauges general skills, definitely the former. No contest.</p>
<p>One can get by with no SAT I prep (I did just fine), but SAT IIs are by definition impossible without studying the subject at hand, whether in school or otherwise.</p>
<p>Thats the point SAT II’s do not require prep outside of school for the most part…SAT I does</p>
<p>It depends on how good your teachers were for the subjects you take the SAT IIs in.</p>
<p>SAT I by faaaaaaaaaaaaaar…3 years SAT I compared to 1 month SAT II</p>
<p>I didn’t study for either outside school; neither really requires any substantial amount of studying unless you haven’t taken a course in the subject you wish to take the SAT II in.</p>
<p>why do people keep saying SAT2 as a whole. all the subject tests are different, geez.</p>
<p>if ur fluent in french and chinese, and you take french and chinese, then it will take no review whatsoever.
if u take ushistory and biology e, then u have to review more.</p>
<p>sat1 is really just practice and getting the hang of it, sat2 is learning the content for the test. its different, i dont really like the question.</p>