<p>Because they didn’t know that the option of taking all the history exams was available and felt pressured to fulfill a 3-Subject Test requirement. :(</p>
<p>But I don’t know why I’m angsting over this. My college admissions process is over. :)</p>
<p>Unfortunately, several colleges do require that one of your subject tests be Math II, or that your tests be across different subjects. That’s where the “voluntarily” comes in :S</p>
<p>I think I could’ve successfully argued that World History and U.S. History were two separate subjects. Alas, it did not occur to me at the time to do so.</p>
<p>Math II is too easy… I really have no faith in my own mathematical abilities, and I scored a 750 on the exam. Now, to the untrained eye a 750 looks pretty good, but we CCers know that it is merely a 75th percentile score. A 750 on the Math section of the SAT I is a ~95th percentile score (can’t be bothered to look this up, I’m almost certain it’s over the 90th percentile). Why is the Math II curve so much more lenient?</p>
Perversity on the part of the College Board; they’re trying to mix up test takers by making an exam where it’s possible to succeed. And, barring that, it’s much harder.</p>
<p>It is perhaps worth noting that the SAT 1 and SAT 2 serve different purposes. SAT 1 is intended to show where a student stands relative to the entire group of test-takers, and therefore must be fit into a fairly standard bell curve. SAT 2 is meant to show competency and need not be so curved. If all the takers of , for example, Math 2 are , at least , competent, then there will be very few low scores.</p>