Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion The SAT

You need to be careful here about mistaking correlation with causation. While statistically, it might be true that admission rates correlate to the highest scores, my experience leads me to believe that is not the *reason* for the admissions.

The elite schools (including the one I attended) have the ability to fill their entire class with valedictorians, or those with 2400 on their SAT. Yet they do not. I had a few classmates with scores averaging around 600 per subject! The fact of the matter is that SAT scores are not a huge factor in the decision-making process (yes, this is coming from someone who makes a living tutoring the SAT.) The top-tier schools are looking to create a class of very special individuals and thus are looking much more closely at what unique contribution each applicant can make to their student body. People who can distinguish themselves from the masses of other high-acheivers are the ones who get in.

In less competitive schools those perfect SAT scores can make a difference, but because a 2400 actually might serve to distinguish someone at that school, unlike at a Harvard, Stanford, MIT....

Again, my experience is strictly anecdotal (and a little bit based on conversations with admissions departments), but it is extensive. Once a kid is over 700, that SAT score isn't going to keep them *out* of anywhere. By the same token an 800 will never get a kid *in* at an elite school. Once you are in the 700-800 range, the other parts of your package are going to have a much more substantial impact on your application. While it may be true that there are more interesting applicants who score an 800 than interesting ones who score a 700, the interesting applicant who had the flu on test day and scored a 700 as a result has no less chance of getting in than he would have had with an 800.

How about a question (on a multi-choice test without calculators) like:

14.2697541/0.1379=

[A] 1.03479
[B] 10.3479
[C] 103.479
[D] 1034.79
[E] 10347.9

Actually my example supports point (1) but contradicts point (2). The best approach for this specific type of question is to look at the options and choose the best option. Nobody, regardless of their personal test-taking style, should be first actually calculating 14.2697541/0.1379 and then looking at the options.

Agreed - just glancing at the answers reveals that there is only one option with the correct order of magnitude - the others are all ridiculous. This is why a true number sense/ability to estimate the range within which a sane answer exists is way important than learning a mechanical algorithm - not to mention what a time suck doing that under the clock would be followed by then finding the closest answer LOL

How exactly is someone who often gets confused and/or slowed down by the options in multiple choice tests supposed to know that these particular options wont confuse them or slow them down without looking at them? Such a student would have to play the percentages, and if ignoring the choices and working the problems is a net benefit, then that's what they will do every time.

If that's what they do in this example, they deserve to do badly and I hope they will, because I don't want someone who blindly follows their favourite method, without considering whether it's appropriate in this case, in my university class, thank-you-very-much!

Specifically, an amount of test-savviness that would lead someone to think "wow, that's a hard sum, bet I'm not really supposed to work that out" and decide not to use their usual procedure here doesn't seem too much to ask.

That said, from what I've seen of SAT questions specifically, the kind of question you couldn't sensibly work out first is rare, perhaps non-existent, on that test.

For SAT math preparation, it might be a good idea in the early stages for students to work on SAT multiple choice questions with the choices concealed (treating them as short answer questions), to see what math they can do. As the test date approached, the preparation would more closely resemble an actual exam, with students not required to work every problem from scratch.

Thanks for all the input - think I'm a little clearer on it now - sure glad I don't have to do it!

Somehow I forgot to mention the inadvertent method of SAT math prep that I used: I was a teacher's assistant for geometry my junior year.

I agree with this-- and honestly, there comes a point at which it's nearly impossible for a person to move a math score much, either.

DD is in that boat with math. 96th-98th percentile is about as good as it is ever going to get for her because of her issues with careless errors (and test questions written to discriminate ON that basis and without a way to 'sense-check' answers) and her relatively slow calculation speed are her enemies. It wasn't the mathematical concepts in question-- because what she misses is completely random. She'll miss as many 'easy' questions as hard ones.

Interesting-- DD also maintains that tutoring pre-algebra through geometry was excellent preparation. She definitely has a rock-solid grasp of the math itself. Her calculation difficulties aren't the same thing at all, in spite of what they do to her scores in math.

Test "prep" actually hurt her ability to do critical reading, so we ditched that early on and just let her see the formatting enough times to get a feel for it. She went right back to perfect/near-perfect scores.