<p>I come from a pretty intelligent, but not competitive mid-west school. No one ever thinks of going to Ivy's, but 10% of our class scores 30+ every year on the ACT. Out of 200 kids, we usually get about 4 34's, 2 35's, and rarely a 36. Those are some HUGE numbers, but my school also sucks at the SAT (like our 34ers score 2050 tops). My mom's friend, who goes to a rich district was telling me that they start doing SAT words early in elementary school. They have similar ACT scores, but amazing SATs (2300+). It's obvious the SAT is a test of tricks and studying while the ACT is straight-forward. Why do so many schools base everything off the SAT though? They must know this.</p>
<p>Well, not to be annoying, but I must start off by saying that it is "Why don't," not "Why doesn't." Sorry, that just bugged me, lol. :) Um, I haven't taken the ACT so I really can't comment on it, but maybe colleges think that SAT demonstrates critical thinking skills because if the "tricks" that are components of the exam. I really don't know, that's the only explanation (admittedly mediocre) that I can offer...</p>
<p>well to do well on the SAT you have to have a certain level of intelligence, meaning that you can't just memorize everything and expect to do well</p>
<p>More like, the SAT requires that the test taker be white, live in a stable household with an upper middle class income and have had everything in life come easy to them...</p>
<p>
[quote]
More like, the SAT requires that the test taker be white, live in a stable household with an upper middle class income and have had everything in life come easy to them...
[/quote]
LOL. Not saying I disagree, but where do you put that on the form? ;)</p>
<p>I dont completely agree with that. I'm white, but I come from a lower middle class income with non college-educated parents and I just happen to do well on standardized tests. Standardized tests are stupid, but I dont see the racial aspect. Or you know, maybe you're right. But you'll have to explain it to me. I know old white guys make the test, but how does that help me, a white teenager? Do we like speak a secret language that other ethnicities dont? I dont get it. Eh, it's too late. I ask dumb questions when it's late. But yeah, explain this to me sometime, I'm all ears. I'm also not being sarcastic, lol.</p>
<p>To the OP:</p>
<p>All colleges use the SAT so I don't get what you're complaining about.</p>
<p>
[quote]
More like, the SAT requires that the test taker be white, live in a stable household with an upper middle class income and have had everything in life come easy to them...
[/quote]
Ha, NONE of the above applies to me and I got a 2250. Personally, I've never seen the supposed "racial bias" that the SAT has...</p>
<p>One thing I noticed when I used to practice on these standardized tests, when they ask me to read a long passage and I am familiar with the topic, I can get all 6 answers correctly. Not only that, I only need to read the passage once. If the passage is something I cannot relate, I would get about 3 of 6 right and probably spent more time going over the passage. The difference in scoring can be huge. </p>
<p>For example, if you're reading a passage about a particular culture that you are familiar with, you would be in hog heaven. If you have no idea what that culture they are writing about, then please be very careful when you are reading the passage and good luck. Another example, if you are not into baseball and the math question assumes you know what is a batting average, good luck to you also. </p>
<p>Can they write a test that I can ace? Yes. Can they write a test that I can flunk? Yes. If they write me a test about other people's cultures or subjects that I cannot relate, I will struggle mightily.</p>
<p>"It's obvious the SAT is a test of tricks and studying while the ACT is straight-forward."</p>
<p>The SAT doesn't have any tricks... I don't know where you got that.</p>
<p>Yes, you can study the SAT, but you can also study the ACT, it's just most people don't need to, since it tests what you were supposed to have learned in school (unlike the SAT, which tests what people who go to private schools were supposed to have learned in school--which is how to take the SAT).</p>
<p>The SAT is straightforward, as well... I mean, all you do is answer the questions... you don't answer them in a special order use a colored pencil on all question numbers that are prime.</p>
<p>If you actually try to do well on both, you'll be able to get a similar score.</p>
<p>"More like, the SAT requires that the test taker be white, live in a stable household with an upper middle class income and have had everything in life come easy to them..."</p>
<p>So really, where is this idea from? I've never noticed a bias towards white people on the SAT or towards the wealthy. If you mean that the wealthy can afford tutoring or more options for education then I'd have to agree, but outside of that I don't know what you mean. And I still don't know what being white has to do with it. Can someone explain?</p>
<p>Because white people are innately smarter, geez ;-). And the SAT is a test of intelligence, not athletic ability.</p>
<p>I am talking about statistically. Obviously there will be exceptions. Especially people who post here. As a general rule, the scores have a direct correlation to family income, and education level of parents. Also, blacks and hispanics do an average) </p>
<p>These results are for the old old old SAT (before the 1995 change) so there has been improvements, but nothing incredibly significant. That is why the SAT needs to be taken into the context of the tester's life especially when it comes to college admissions. </p>
<p>The SAT was never designed to be a college admissions test (it was just a test Harvard used to give scholarships) and never made any changes to become a college admissions test until pressured by colleges to change (which it did in 2005). However, the changes (adding a writing section and essay, changing the math a bit, removing analogies) did not really change the problems.</p>
<p>@fhqwgads2005</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Where are the graphs for the ACT? I bet they will show a similar trend.</p></li>
<li><p>Rich people do better on tests because they're more motivated than many inner-city kids. How is asking the grammatical error of a sentence or the square-root of a number racially-biased? It's not.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Everybody just wants everybody to be equal. It's just not possible. Then people like many in this topic will say that these tests favor rich, white/Asian kids. Well, duh! These are the types of kids who generally do the best in school.</p>
<p>If you people keep marketing these gaps in scores and grades as a result of race and income, then guess what? These kids will just keep on coasting through life, believing "the man" is out to get them, when really they are just not trying hard enough.</p>
<p>While you guys argue that the SAT is biased against poor minorities, I will propose a much more reasonable assertion: The ACT is biased against 1st generation immigrants. How you might ask? The ACT has a strict time limit, and many immigrants can't read and understand a passage as quickly as others. If the ACT had more time, then you would notice the gap closing.</p>
<p>totally agree with afruff23. just b/c you suck at the SAT doesn't mean there is a problem with it. the problem might be with you.</p>
<p>Please stop showing biased information, it's annoying. If you're going to show a statistics chart of the SAT, show one of the ACT too. thank you.</p>
<p>the SAT has NO tricks. what are you guys always talking about?... Unless you consider the ability to read a question correctly or add numbers in your head a trick,</p>
<p>@afruff</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I agree. That is why I think test scores should be taken with a grain of salt (as they are, but only recently) and the applicant's background should be considered.</p></li>
<li><p>I think if you spent a few minutes thinking about what you just said, you would understand why it is ridiculous. Rich kids are more "motivated" because they can go home every day and listen to their ipods and play their XBoxes and have their parents pay for them to go to tutors and camps. They also can go to sleep at night with food in their stomach every night and not be scared their drunken parent is going to beat them. (And, those questions are racially biased, because the schools that most of the non-white/asian kids go to lack the resources to teach them these things as effectively)</p></li>
<li><p>In case you didn't notice, the SAT has time limits too. I am much more crunched for time than I am on the ACT. I always finish the ACT with time to spare, but on the SAT I use all the time. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>I agree that there are many cultural factors. For example, many Asian immigrants who had terrible financial woes were able to work the hardest and do well in school because academic success is such a part of their culture. As a society, we can't just allow other races to fall behind because believe it or not, blacks, hispanics, native americans and others are actually part of America. I don't want to live in a country where large groups of people are consistently the most undereducated, unsuccessful and poverty stricken. If you can't handle that, maybe you should consider one of the numerous all white or all asian countries that exist in the world.</p>
<p>There are many political changes that need to be made, including</p>
<p>As much as everybody would love to be considered as whole, it's just not entirely possible in the competitive college admissions of today.</p>
<p>Take for instance that story of those Vietnamese twins who came here when they were ~5 years old and scored a 1900 on the SAT. I know tons of people who came to America at that age and scored better on the SAT.</p>
<p>Most schools would pass up these kids, but not Harvard since they "struggled" so hard. My point is that holistic admissions oftentimes displace kids who excel at test scores for kids who show "promise".</p>
<p>I'm not saying it's entirely bad, but just look at the data for SAT scores correlating highly to first-year college performance. If everybody wants to argue holistic admissions and admit people who do tons of EC's yet have mediocre test scores, then college drop-out rates will increase as these kids are the ones who don't have great analytical skills.</p>
<p>The fact of life is that if you really want to change your future, don't go crying about racism, instead pave your own path. There are thousands of rags to riches stories, some of which involve abusive/alcoholic people in their lives.</p>
<p>As a society, we can allow these people to fail. Why? Because if we constantly help these people get ahead just because of their skin color and/or personal lack of motivation to study for a 4 hour test, then we will breed a culture of lazy people who expect their work to be less than everybody else just because of how they were raised.</p>
<p>"Rich kids are more "motivated" because they can go home every day and listen to their ipods and play their XBoxes and have their parents pay for them to go to tutors and camps."</p>
<p>So? The poor kid with an alcoholic father can go to the library and study an SAT book. Nobody can control your parents, and it is VERY obvious that they are one of the greatest reasons for success of children. How come these 2nd generation kids with poor Asian parents end up going to great places and becoming rich? I'll give you a hint, it's not the affirmative action against Asians and Whites, it's their parents putting pressure on them to succeed.</p>
<p>As a society, we can't just generalize about a whole group of people and say "Oh, you're Black; you're probably poor, work a job, and have an alcoholic single mom". No, we must let the extraordinary applicants from the bottom rungs shine through for themselves.</p>
<p>Remember, college is not for those who get 4.0's by memorizing lots of info. It's meant for people with analytical skills, which standardized tests are all about. Preparing with a tutor will only do you so good. To get a good score, you have to have innate smartness and a drive to succeed, things which people from all parts of society can possibly have.</p>
<p>Is SAT biased? Not intentionally. But think about this: If you are not baseball savvy, and a few math questions are based on slugging percentage, total bases, etc. Then it tells you a player has so many singles, doubles, triples, and home runs. Will you be able to answer all the questions correctly? While the author may define slugging percentage and total bases, the author may also assume you know what is a single, a double, a triple, or a home run. Even if the test taker can get them all right, he/she would probably spend a lot more time working on the questions than someone who understands baseball well.</p>
<p>Just glancing over the official SAT study guide 2005, there is a passage on Internet. It never defines website, on-line news, etc. Granted, most folks can relate to it. But the poor folks who cannot afford DSL or cable in their whole life will find the passage very confusing. It can also apply to folks living in the middle of nowhere, without cable or DSL. I think they would have a harder time understanding the passage. And unfortunately, they will never get a passage that benefits them, like all the steps to milk a cow plus the entire process of making milk (LOL), because those materials are not mainstream and SAT authors usually do not write those passages.</p>
<p>If you are not a golfer, would you want them to assume you know what is a bogey, par, or birdie? Read the passages with an open mind and you will find many words will not be defined.</p>
<p>If you are a 800 scorer, someone can write 2 passages that are totally unfamiliar to you. There may be a few words that you are not sure what they mean. You get a few wrongs and waste a few more minutes on the passage, and your 800 suddenly becomes a 680. </p>
<p>Intentionally biased? Probably not. But until you can put on other people’s shoes, you will be surprised how hard it is to relate to some of the questions. And it doesn’t take much to go from 800 to 650, or 600 to 500.</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure everybody int eh US has heard of the internet. Anyway, if you don't know what the word means that doesn't mean you can't answer correctly. Remember that the SAT tests your comprehension.</p>