21–30 of 94 posts
I know a guy who honestly tried on the math section. He got the single point for signing his name, but missed all the questions. The first question is "2+2".
This reminds of me playing Hearts on a PC. You can try really hard to get a good score, or you can get the worst score possible and win the round[1]. I didn't read the whole article, but it was pretty clear that to get the lowest possible score you have to know the correct response to every question. (A little less black & white for the essay section, but you get the gist.) Colleges should have a lottery admission av…
This reminds of me playing Hearts on a PC. You can try really hard to get a good score, or you can get the worst score possible and win the round[1]. I didn't read the whole article, but it was pretty clear that to get the lowest possible score you have to know the correct response to every question. (A little less black & white for the essay section, but you get the gist.) Colleges should have a lottery admission av…
Not exactly. To get the lowest possible score, you only need to know a incorrect response to every questions. This is a very different thing, as it is not uncommon for a question to have some obviously incorrect answers.
The SAT is an important measure of a humans intelligence and performance in the real world, that's why the best companies always filter candidates and select the ones with highest SAT scores. It's a good thing we have tests like these and pay large sums of money to the people who maintain it. Otherwise interviewing might be totally screwed up and completely fail at its intended purpose in this country.
Yes, it's clear (to me at any rate) that you're being sarcastic. But, speaking as someone who once was a SAT taker and now is in a position to hire people based on their SAT scores, your sarcasm is unwarranted and you're looking at the SAT in an incorrect light: the SAT, all things considered, does reflect something . It's not a random number the College Board pulls out of their backside. At the end of the day, havin…
I'm disinclined to believe this statement. Would you mind taking the time to prove this for me? Also, what is considered an "ace" score?
In my experience the PSAT and SAT were tests that measured how well you can take tests and I do not consider my personal test scores to be the result of years of hard work and dedication.
A lot of the SAT-apologist comments here missed one of the most amazing parts of the post: > "The correlation between [...] combined verbal and math scores and freshman GPA is .52;" .52! And it's pulled straight from the College Board's Terms and Conditions! And later on, it goes on to explain that high school GPA's correlation is just .54! The graph he produced to visualize the scatter involved with a .52 correlatio…
That is interesting.How would you account for the fact that i increased my score by 130 points upon a retake without the help of a tutor(Too bad my new score was useless since i already had a fullride)?These tests can be gamed.Heck ,even iQ scores arent stable over a lifetime if anyone has bothered to read current research(Fynn Effect blah blah)
The log tables, of course, were more than sufficient for whatever complex multiplication and division that had to be done.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it's clear (to me at any rate) that you're being sarcastic. But, speaking as someone who once was a SAT taker and now is in a position to hire people based on their SAT scores, your sarcasm is unwarranted and you're looking at the SAT in an incorrect light: the SAT, all things considered, does reflect something . It's not a random number the College Board pulls out of their backside. At the end of the day, havin…
"(believe me, it takes MONTHS (or even years) of dedication to actually ace the PSAT or SAT)" I'm disinclined to believe this statement. Would you mind taking the time to prove this for me? Also, what is considered an "ace" score? In my experience the PSAT and SAT were tests that measured how well you can take tests and I do not consider my personal test scores to be the result of years of hard work and dedication.
This reminds of me playing Hearts on a PC. You can try really hard to get a good score, or you can get the worst score possible and win the round[1]. I didn't read the whole article, but it was pretty clear that to get the lowest possible score you have to know the correct response to every question. (A little less black & white for the essay section, but you get the gist.) Colleges should have a lottery admission av…