|
0 members (),
284
guests, and
13
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
I don't encourage 'practicing' for any test used similarly to an IQ test,
Grinity The SAT is useful even though there is much more preparation material available now than 40 years ago. Ideally other tests used for selection would be similarly robust. I know we disagree on this but the SAT is currently an achievement test and has been for many years. The custom in the US is currently to study for the SAT and the publishers of the test are in the test prep business as well. When the publishers of CoGat publish test prep books and post them on their website Ill know that things have changed. The founders of Google agree with me that the SAT is an intelligence test, according to a book review in today's WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304066504576351650017002270.htmlHow Google Got Going by David A. Price (review of the book I'm Feeling Lucky By Douglas Edwards (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 416 pages, $27)) 'Also embedded in Google's mindset was a belief in hiring only the best engineers. Of course, every company claims to seek the strongest talent. What impressed Mr. Edwards were the extremes to which Google took this policy, particularly during a boom time when it seemed like companies were hiring any techie with a pulse. The first Google systems administrator Mr. Edwards encountered was a self-taught networking whiz with a Yale medical degree�a reflection of the weight that the Messrs. Brin and Page gave to elite academic credentials, even if not in computer science. Google demanded to see job candidates' high-school SAT scores, Mr. Edwards says, confident that the numbers revealed intelligence, not just "scholastic aptitude."' Besides this anecdotal evidence, there is research by Detterman on the SAT and ACT and IQ.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,172
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,172 |
Back when Google was doing this, they were probably looking @ SAT scores from the time when it did correlate with IQ. As mentioned earlier, groups like Mensa take older SAT scores as equivalent to IQ but not newer versions. When I took the SAT years ago, it was the Scholastic Aptitude Test. SAT now stands for Scholastic Assessment or Achievement Test.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,457
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,457 |
Besides this anecdotal evidence, there is research by Detterman on the SAT and ACT and IQ. I think it's also interesting that the test itself has been renamed the "SAT Reasoning Test".
Striving to increase my rate of flow, and fight forum gloopiness. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
Back when Google was doing this, they were probably looking @ SAT scores from the time when it did correlate with IQ. As mentioned earlier, groups like Mensa take older SAT scores as equivalent to IQ but not newer versions. When I took the SAT years ago, it was the Scholastic Aptitude Test. SAT now stands for Scholastic Assessment or Achievement Test. No, the letters "SAT" no longer stand for anything officially. I have read that, and the Wikipedia SAT article confirms it.
"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." - George Orwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,172
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,172 |
Okay, but either way the newer SAT reasoning test isn't what was being looked at in research that said that the SAT was essentially equivalent to an IQ test. I don't believe that there has been any research indicating that the newer SAT is anything more than an achievement test.
Back on the original thoughts, though, and despite the fact that prep is widely done and places kids who don't prep at a disadvantage, I still can't condone prepping. IMHO whether everyone else is doing it or not and whether the test is being misused or not, studying for a test that is being used as an ability test is not right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,207
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,207 |
I would guess that ALL achievement tests are rather highly correlated with 'g' with IQ tests being a bit more highly correlated, yes?
I don't know the actual cut offs for 'g' correlation of the various Achiement tests and IQ tests. It would be nice to see them on a graph and see some dots clustering together in 2 eyeball-able groups.
In considering my co-workers, I appreciate both 'high enough' IQ and 'good enough' work ethic. One without the other is a pretty severe limitation at times.
((shrug))
Grinity
Coaching available, at SchoolSuccessSolutions.com
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,457
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,457 |
More information on the correlation with IQ: http://wikien4.appspot.com/wiki/SAT
Striving to increase my rate of flow, and fight forum gloopiness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,457
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,457 |
Okay, but either way the newer SAT reasoning test isn't what was being looked at in research that said that the SAT was essentially equivalent to an IQ test. The implementation of the "newer SAT reasoning test" seems to have been just a rename, at least at the time of the name change. From the encycwopedia: In 1993 de name was changed to SAT I: Reasoning Test (wif de wetters not standing for anyding) to distinguish it from de SAT II: Subject Tests.[34] This change was instituted because of sharp criticism and wongitudinaw studies showing dat de originaw meaning was no wonger accurate; de SAT did not accuratewy measure what it said it was measuring.[citation needed] In 2004, de roman numeraws on bof tests were dropped, and de SAT I was renamed de SAT Reasoning Test. Did the basic nature of the SAT change recently? Although the SAT has certainly had changes, I wouldn't jump to a conclusion that the IQ correlation results are invawwid because of the changes.
Striving to increase my rate of flow, and fight forum gloopiness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
Okay, but either way the newer SAT reasoning test isn't what was being looked at in research that said that the SAT was essentially equivalent to an IQ test. The implementation of the "newer SAT reasoning test" seems to have been just a rename, at least at the time of the name change. From the encycwopedia: In 1993 de name was changed to SAT I: Reasoning Test (wif de wetters not standing for anyding) to distinguish it from de SAT II: Subject Tests.[34] This change was instituted because of sharp criticism and wongitudinaw studies showing dat de originaw meaning was no wonger accurate; de SAT did not accuratewy measure what it said it was measuring.[citation needed] In 2004, de roman numeraws on bof tests were dropped, and de SAT I was renamed de SAT Reasoning Test. What's with the bizarre spelling in the above quote? Deliberate garbling imposes a needless inconvenience on readers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,172
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,172 |
The implementation of the "newer SAT reasoning test" seems to have been just a rename, at least at the time of the name change. From the encycwopedia: In 1993 de name was changed to SAT I: Reasoning Test (wif de wetters not standing for anyding) to distinguish it from de SAT II: Subject Tests.[34] This change was instituted because of sharp criticism and wongitudinaw studies showing dat de originaw meaning was no wonger accurate; de SAT did not accuratewy measure what it said it was measuring.[citation needed] In 2004, de roman numeraws on bof tests were dropped, and de SAT I was renamed de SAT Reasoning Test. Did the basic nature of the SAT change recently? Although the SAT has certainly had changes, I wouldn't jump to a conclusion that the IQ correlation results are invawwid because of the changes. What I was looking at was the 2005 update -- the time at which it became what is often referred to as the "new SAT." From the wiki article quoted above: 2005 changes:
In 2005, the test was changed again, largely in response to criticism by the University of California system.[30] Because of issues concerning ambiguous questions, especially analogies, certain types of questions were eliminated (the analogies from the verbal and quantitative comparisons from the Math section). The test was made marginally harder, as a corrective to the rising number of perfect scores. A new writing section, with an essay, based on the former SAT II Writing Subject Test, was added,[31] in part to increase the chances of closing the opening gap between the highest and midrange scores. Other factors included the desire to test the writing ability of each student; hence the essay. The New SAT (known as the SAT Reasoning Test) was first offered on March 12, 2005, after the last administration of the "old" SAT in January 2005. The research that correlates IQ with SAT scores was all looking at administrations of the test prior to the 2005 changes. My understanding was that things like the analogies, which were removed in 2005, were the parts that were the most g correlated on the SAT. I took a psychometrics class a few years back at a local university as well in which the professor, a psychometrician, said that the new SAT (2005 and later) was more similar to the ACT and no longer considered a test of aptitude or ability.
|
|
|
|
|
