It took awhile to sort things out on collegeboard.com but...
I finally got my SAT scores back!!!!!
1380: 670 Math (89th percentile) 710 Verbal (96th percentile)
Not bad, I know, and I honestly am thrilled since I wasn't exactly in top form on the day of the test but still... Grrr, I wanted a 1400. The verbal score is great, though. That one I really just wanted to pass the 700 mark on. And the math is great considering the fact that I hate math with a passion. But still, couldn't I have an extra 20 points for ... oh, I don't know, taking the silly test in the first place?
[ April 13, 2004, 05:48 PM: Message edited by: Pixie ]
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Life sure is a lot easier once you have a number to tell you how good you are. I can't wait until I have a yearly salary.
[ April 13, 2004, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by Pixie (Member # 4043) on :
I don't know about that, Book. If you ask me, teachers and the like would make a heck of a lot more if the how-good-you-are idea worked for yearly salaries.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Nah, see, I was just voicing a stupid opinion that basically said that the number defined you, you don't define the number. I think it was sarcasm, but sometimes I get a few okay numbers, so I'm fine with those.
[ April 13, 2004, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
I wish I had had a forum like this on which to brag about my standardized test scores back in the day.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Go ahead. Do it now. It's okay.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
I'm with you, U -- just not the same to be bragging about my SAT scores now that I'm 35 (though I did get... oh nevermind). Kinda depressingly telling about the life I've led since then, though. And I don't really want to base my worth on my income level, either.
Now I just brag about my wife and my kids. That's good enough for me.
And this chair, and this paddleball, and this remote control, and that's all I need!
Oh, and I need this....
--Pop
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
No, because:
1) half the people on the forum would hate me, and
2) the other half will have scored better anyway.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
Also, I'm probably most proud of my LSAT score, but so few people take that test that it would be meaningless. Besides, after you actually get into law school, it's considered super tacky to mention your LSAT score.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Hee hee. You're absolutely right about the breakdown.
Ah... hee. Come on. Tell your LSAT score. Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Also, I'm probably most proud of my LSAT score, but so few people take that test that it would be meaningless. Besides, after you actually get into law school, it's considered super tacky to mention your LSAT score.
I know - isn't that annoying? Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
It is, and yet I was always afraid that I would find those one or two people in my class who scored better than I did. It's probably better that scores not be mentioned in that setting. It's already competitive enough.
And kat, I am tempted, but I think I'd better not. For one thing, I'm almost certain that Dagonee beat me. That darn smiley makes me nervous.
[ April 13, 2004, 06:20 PM: Message edited by: UofUlawguy ]
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
But I didn't get into Law school and I got... Oh wait, this is like the joke about that little girl who kept the other kids from seeing her underwear by now wearing any, isn't it?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*coaxes* If you want to, that shouldn't stop you. I personally didn't take the SAT, but Pixie didn't have a problem posting hers. And she did great! I'm so proud!
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
I wouldn't have had a problem posting scores if I were her, either. For one thing, she did great (Good job, Pixie!) and for another, she just took the test, so it's relevant.
Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
Heh, dude, when your opening post declares that you wish you could brag about your standardized test scores, then goes on to insist, no, no, I really couldn't, no, it's just not right, I couldn't possibly share... You're already bragging, dude. I promise, if anyone's shallow enough to resent you for having high standardized scores -- and I doubt many will, given, as you said, most people here are in the top 2 percentiles as is -- they can do so from your already-existing posts.
There are so many better things to play coy with, why start with test scores?
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
If you could come up with a better word than "grrrrrr" to express your displeasure, you might have made it into the 97th percentile on the verbal.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
Because I'm having fun.
But also, I'm serious. So much pressure is placed on students to do well on standardized tests. Then, so much emphasis is placed on those scores. If you do well, you are so thrilled, and for a while it seems to have such a huge impact on the direction your life will take.
Then, all too soon, it ceases to matter. Nobody cares what your scores were. You are judged on entirely different achievements or failures. Sometimes you really wish you could say, "Sure, I may not impress you now, but you should see what I scored on my ACT!" But you can't. And if you did, you would just be laughed at.
I guess this is in part a commentary on the role of standardized tests in our system. But it is also an observation on human nature, and on growing up.
So, for probably the final time in my life, I will say that I got a 176 on my LSAT. And then I promptly failed the bar exam on my first try.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Haha, that was classic, Dobbie.
But seriously, what is a good score on the LSAT? I ask because my mind wanders towards law school more and more nowadays... I know that it's not something you can really prepare for, like the SAT's, the worst part of it is the excruciating length.
But just to prove that grades and numbers are totally meaningless, I got a 1440 on my SAT's and I am repeatedly humbled by people on these boards, often concerning things like misspelling "Texas" or "sea," or forgetting my own gender and not knowing how to check. To quote the movie Barcelona (which is good) from memory:
Greta: Your cousin must be very hard to score so high. Freddie: Well, he tests well.
[ April 13, 2004, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
Pixie,
It is a great score. I'm so happy for you!
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
The bar exams usually are very, very tough, right? I know they very from state to state (California has the worst, I believe), but they're usually extremely difficult, right?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
176 is a VERY good score - it's out of 180, 150 is the median score. It's not quite as good as a 177, of course, but impressive nonetheless.
To give you an idea, this page lists the 25% and 75% LSAT grades for most law schools.
Dagonee
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Bar exam is hard, but the study courses for it are very refined in most states. Studying for the bar is a separate step done after law school - no one graduates knowing everything needed for the bar.
Dagonee
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
The difficulty of bar exams varies greatly. The questions themselves tend to be fairly tough, but what really matters is how they are graded. The body that administers the test determines beforehand about how many should pass the test, and the whole thing is then structured to meet that target. So what really matters is how the particular state approaches it, and how any particular test taker compares to all the others. In Nevada, where I took the test (twice) the pass rate is consistently between the high 50's and the low 60's. It is supposed to be one of the toughest (along with California, New York and others). Utah, however, (where I went to school) routinely passes up to 95% of those that take the bar exam, and there are other states that do the same.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
I have to take the GREs soon. *makes face* Not sure how I'll do one them...verbally I always do well, but math has always been a problem because of stupid mistakes. But now I'm on a stimulant for adhd...which could make a hell of a difference.
Hmmmm.
And pixie, complain about a 1380 again and I'm going to have to kick your ass by proxy.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
I knew I didn't like the look of that smiley.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
A really good score on the LSAT would be 120. With a score that low there would be absolutely no risk of ever becoming a lawyer.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
Correction. There would be no risk of getting into law school. But, IIRC, there are states where you don't have to have a law degree. You just have to be able to pass the bar exam. I think California is one of those states.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
Thank you for taking my remark so literally. Some people might have taken it as a joke.
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
OK, these guys are too modest to say it so I'll say it FOR them.
Anything above a 175 is a freakishly awesome score. If I had a 175, I would have made a T-shirt with a big red 175 on it. I would wear this shirt everyday, make my friends wear it, and perhaps distribute this t-shirt for free at homeless shelters.
I had a 166, good enough for public school, but not quite Ivy league.
In California, you can take the bar without going to an accredited law school. However, I think you will be subjected to an additional testing requirement: a baby bar that tests all the first year subjects.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I wish Virginia was one of those states. I'd take the bar before third year and then really have some fun. Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
In some states, while you do have to graduate from law school, you can take the bar exam early, before you actually graduate. A guy I used to work with did that here in Nevada last year. But you still have to graduate.
Posted by HollowEarth (Member # 2586) on :
Mack, I took the gre back a couple weeks ago. If you know a little math you'll do fine. It seemed to me anyway that you had a lot more time than you do on the sat. Also since its all multiple choice you can always guess.
I don't think any of the math i've learned at college was even on the test.
the verbal section on the other hand was rough. There were questions where i'd never even seen or heard any of the words before.
So anyway my point was that you're smart and you'll do fine on it.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:In some states, while you do have to graduate from law school, you can take the bar exam early, before you actually graduate.
If either New York or New Jersey is one of those states I guess I owe Lisa S. Benjamin and Nina Combs an apology.
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
quote: And this chair, and this paddleball, and this remote control, and that's all I need!
Pop, I'm glad this isn't an onanism thread...
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Pix, 1380 is good!
I haven't taken the SAT yet, I'm supposed to take it in July. I'm totally screwed over, too. Because I'm homeschooled, college admissions people go more by the SAT scores. Despite all my reading I've never been very good at the verbal stuff (heck, I only recognized about 5 words on the PSAT), and I'm not very fast with the math (the part I need to get really high scores on) so I can't answer all the questions, even though I get most of them right. Plus, I didn't need to take a math course this year, so I'm a bit rusty right now. And I didn't do so great on the PSATs, either.
The nightmares have already started.
[ April 13, 2004, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: Eruve Nandiriel ]
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Now THAT is a chipper outlook.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
All I really need is my dog...
quote:Grrrrr
I don't need my dog...
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Standarized testing always annoys me :-/ I do really well on it, but it still annoys me.
I plan on being a teacher, so I guess I better learn to like numbers on peices of paper.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I got a 25 (of 32) on the ACT, which I was told would have been a 1250-1300 on the SAT.
I liked the ACT better, because it tests 4 areas of knowledge, and I'm not very good (read as horrible) at math.
I got a 31 of 32 in the social science area, a 98% (of 99%), and that is a rating of where you rank among those who take the test that year, not of how many you answered correct/incorrect.
And I now sell suits at JC Penneys, proving that it isn't how you score that matters, but what you do with it....
Kwea
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
But for all the risks and choices, I was one step ahead of them.
After all, I knew that this was just one test in thousands I'd be taking in my life.
None of them final, none of them irrevocable. And the way I saw it, maybe life was a risk. But this time, I was ready.
--Kevin Arnold
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
I come from a wonderful land where there are no standardized tests to worry about and universities mysteriously accept people who never applied to their school.
That or there's someone who shares my name who's pretty pissed off that none of the schools he applied to accepted him.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Pixie, that's a great score! I'm very proud of you! Way to go!
Posted by reader (Member # 3888) on :
Pixie -
If you'd really like to get a better score, there's nothing to stop you from taking it again, is there? (Unless your deadlines have already passed....) I took it a second time - because I hadn't prepared for it at all the first time around - and I jumped 50 points, from a 1450 to a 1500. Furthermore, the jump was all in Math, since I'd gotten an 800 on Verbal the first time around as well. Since you have room to improve on your Verbal score as well, there's no reason why you can't improve your score by a significant amount if you find a book from the library which reviews SAT math, and perhaps look through a book which summarizes the various kinds of analogies....
Particularly since you say you weren't feeling your best on the day that you took the test, if you still have time before your deadlines for college applications, you might want to think about taking it again - SAT scores are one of the big determiners of scholarships and such. (You definitely did very well - but if you really feel you could do better, why not?)
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
Sometimes I wonder what I'd have gotten if I'd taken the SATs... I took the ACTs instead, and depending on where you are, people just give you a blank look when you say your score. ACT always seemed like SATlite to me....
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Not really, as it tests more areas of knowledge. Only the top third of all hig school student take the ACT, so if you score well percentage-wise, it isn't against all students (almost everone takes the SAT) but the best ones, on average.
The ACT is huge in the Midwest, or it was way back in 1988...oops, now I am dating myself!
Kwea
Posted by angelily (Member # 6298) on :
Bush got a 1250 on his SAT's. Considering his occupation, that's not bad at all. You can live with a 1380.
Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
You're kidding. I don't expect much out of the man, but only a 1250? And he got into Yale?
But yeah, look at the man's occupation. With your scores and a CIA Director daddy, you can be President, too!
Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
By the way, Book, now that I've seen Firefly, I must ask -- what inspired your screenname?
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
Kwea, really? I know that it's big in the Midwest, that's where I am. But I didn't know that about the ppl who take it...
O_o Wow. I test WELL.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Man, I got no idea what you're talking about. I wanted my name to be kinda bland, I guess, something that everyone remembered because it was so random, so I thought back to Dark City where they all had names like Mr. Hand and such, and the main guy was named Mr. Book. That was about it.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
That movie amused me
Posted by angelily (Member # 6298) on :
I'm sorry, I mis-stated Bush's SAT score. Apparently he only got 1206 (verbal: 566; math: 640). He also graduated Yale with a C average.
Posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan (Member # 5626) on :
It is out of 36. And EVERY high school student who's going to college in the South takes the ACT, so I doubt that top-third-percent thing.
I took both the SAT and the ACT, and the SAT had only one testing place near me, and it wasn't even in the same county. The ACT was at all the high schools in the county.
My score on SAT sucked, but I got the highest score in my school on the ACT.
[ April 14, 2004, 03:08 AM: Message edited by: Rappin' Ronnie Reagan ]
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote: A really good score on the LSAT would be 120. With a score that low there would be absolutely no risk of ever becoming a lawyer.
I laughed at the interweb.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Can I be tacky here? I want to. And I took the test in the last six months, and I'm applying for grad school, so its relevant.
I don't remember the math score, I think it was 620/800 , but analytical was 5.5/6.0 (stupid grammar), and my verbal score on the GRE was 800/800. Woohoo! This actually lowers my opinion of the test!
Posted by Magson (Member # 2300) on :
The ACT only goes up to 32 now? It went up to 36 when I took it. I took the ACT and SAT. Don't know why, since the only school I was interested in used the ACT as its measure for admission, but. . . there you have it. I even remember the scores for those 2 tests too. I took the PSAT too, but since I was a couple of points shy of "Finalist" I do't remember what I got on that one. Oh well. Not like it matters anymore.
Edit: I see that's already been said about the ACT going to 36. .. .that's what I get for not going to and reading page 2 before posting. . . .
[ April 14, 2004, 07:42 AM: Message edited by: Magson ]
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
Almost nobody in Utah takes the SAT, because all Utah colleges used the ACT for admissions. Those few that want to go to schools on the east or west coasts might take the SAT, as well as anybody who is trying for a National Merit scholarship. That last reason is why I took the SAT.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Not to be too picky, but the SATs were recentered sometime ago (after I took them), so a 1206 prior to the mid-90s is better than a 1206 now.
Dagonee
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Hah that Baby Bush score is hysterical. I scored higher than him in '92 before they re-centered it! (well higher combined) My verbal was higher than my math.
AJ
[ April 14, 2004, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
quote:And EVERY high school student who's going to college in the South takes the ACT, so I doubt that top-third-percent thing.
um, no.
Almost nobody at the high school I went to took it, and few of my high school students take it.
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
And yeah, the SAT was recentered, so add about fifty points or so to anybody's score from back then to compare.
I just read an article about this, because the state of Virginia will now accept SAT scores in lieu of their Praxis exam for teacher certification, so if you need more specifics, I can look them up when I get home.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Sweet - does that mean I become a teacher now?
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
Well, there are other requirements. This just takes care of the general knowledge exam. Then again, I don't live in VA, so I don't know . . .
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Texas, or at least Houston has only the SAT. There was hardly any mention of the ACT.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
All right, time for me to brag then. I got a 33/36. Not the highest score in my school by any means. I believe a guy who graduated two years before me got a 35... O_o But our school was MASSIVE. Apparently. The University I'm going to right now has probably 1500 fewer people than my high school did.
Anyway, I also took the SAT 2, but I didn't do so well on that. I took Writing, French and... Dammit. Something else which I can't remember. I got an 800 on the writing section (my essay was about Lord of the Rings! ) but a bad score in French. I can't remember. I think I got like a 700 on whatever the heck the other test thing was. Wow. I really should look into that at some point. O_o
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
quote:The University I'm going to right now has probably 1500 fewer people than my high school did.
o_O
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
No lie. My University is pretty small... we were verging on 3000 people in my HS.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I HATED the SAT IIs. I *had* to take them in case I went to a UC school because they required them. I loathed the writing section and scored pretty bad. Did mediocre on the Math too because I was sick and didn't care. However the optional subject test I took was Chemistry. It was fun considering I'd had way more chemistry than the test writers I think. I got an 800 on that section. I bet the people looking at the scores were confused trying to figure out how I got the chem section perfect when I did so crappy on the math section.
I shouldn't point it out, but what the heck I'll be arrogant, I'm sure there's people who have done better than me here at the 'Rack
In '92 when I took the old SAT I mentioned above I was 13. 650 Verbal, 570 Math Grand total 1220... higher than our sitting President...
AJ
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Re: SAT v ACT, the SAT is much, much more common, and while there's a tendency for more advanced students to take it, exact practices vary widely by state/locality (as you may have noticed).
Everyone should read the Mismeasure of Man, by Gould. It does an excellent job of explaining why, except for certain broad general statements in cases of widely disparate scores, the SAT measures very little in terms of intelligence, and not much more in terms of taking tests like it well. The book explains a lot of other things as well; its a survey and critique of intelligence testing methods throughout history.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
Yeah, I agree with that. I'm struggling with my writing abilities here at school. The only thing is that I test well.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I lived on an entire dorm Floor of National Merit Scholars. The only thing we all had in common was that we read. And this can be explained because the NMSC used to double the verbal score and add the math to give verbal more weight so more girls would qualify.
It was there I was introduced to Ender actually. In fact I know a guy who had one of the earliest ICQ "Ender" handles in existence. He got expelled from the school for LSD...
AJ
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
It's such a truism that SATs are worthless. And one doesn't dare disagree, because people who don't test well or suffer from test anxiety will feel hurt by it if you suggest that they have some validity.
*shrug*
The thing is, though, that different high schools have vastly different standards, making grades an even more worthless indicator of success in college. For instance, I went to a very strict and rigorous Jesuit high school. Cs were truly the average grade, and we had high admission requirements, which meant that our C students would likely have been honor roll students in other schools. In fact, it very frequently happened that students would fail out of my school, only to end up immediately on the honor roll at whatever school they transferred to. It was murderously competitive as well. Because we were basically not allowed to take electives, though, we had fewer AP options than most other schools, so there went another possible GPA booster. Our only real options in that vein were AB Calculus and English, which I took, and Chemistry, Programming, Physics, History, and Spanish, which I did not. And you could not load up on all of them: you could only take these senior year, and you had to choose between chemistry or physics, you could not take both. Our valedictorian graduated with like a 3.7. I was much closer to a 2.0. I know in my heart that my 2.0 is worth more than many people's better GPAs, but cannot quantify that. However, I tested extremely well, and this got me scholarship offers I would not have gotten otherwise. And I was extremely successful in college, grad school, and beyond.
And I get frustrated at having to politely nod while everybody says these tests are worthless. They're almost the first academic indicator that ever saw any worth in me.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Yeah, the SATs were re-centered. A year (two?) after I took the darn things!
Now you can get a 1600 without getting every single question right?! That's just wrong!
I almost took them again after the re-centering, just to see how I'd do. But I'd always done best on the antonyms, and they'd removed those, so I figured better not. Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
I went to a Jesuit high school as well (actually, Jesuit High School (in New Orleans)). It definitely wasn't that hard to make A's though (although we were academically one of the strongest schools in the state (edit: and every other which way too, for that matter)). And they let us take all the AP we wanted and we were required to take both chem and physics. Which makes alot more sense if your goal is to get your students into good colleges. Then again, this was only a few years ago, I don't know if things were different in the past.
But anyway, my standardized test scores pretty much reflected where I stood in relation to my peers in high school.
[ April 14, 2004, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: jehovoid ]
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
They're changing the SATs again next year to make them harder. Partly why I want to do well the first time is so I don't have to take them again when they're harder!
[ April 14, 2004, 01:13 PM: Message edited by: Eruve Nandiriel ]
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
quote:Now you can get a 1600 without getting every single question right?! That's just wrong!
This has always been possible. The 400 - 1600 is a scaled score and varies along with several factors.
-o-
I didn't say all Jesuit schools were like mine: I mentioned that it was Jesuit to give some sense of what type of mentality was behind it. I'm sure it was also significant that it was a Cuban Jesuit school, with all of the educational conservatism that implies.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Back in 1991, I got 800V/790M.
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
Beatcha. Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
The SATs aren't worthless. Reread what I said, and read the book. They are not very useful as anything but a general distinction. The "intelligence" difference between someone who gets a 1350 and a 1400 is exceedingly low; or rather, the ability to predict any intelligence difference based on the scores is. Even making distinctions based on differences of a hundred or more is relatively fruitless (1550 vs 1450, for instance). Now, the distinction in test taking skills is very clear -- I guarantee someone outscoring you by 100 has better test taking skills.
Much larger differences can be useful to make general distinctions. A person who scores 1550 is pretty likely to be more intelligent than someone who scores 1250 or 1300.
The problem isn't in using the SATs and other standardized tests to make general distinctions, its when people act as if a 10, or a 20, or a 50, or a 100 point difference somehow means one person is less intelligent than the other.
Re: school standings with SAT rankings -- yes, SAT scores will generally tend to approximate the perceived relationships in intelligence, particularly among groups of friends. You have had similar experiences, similar preparation, that sort of thing. So you approach the test in a similar manner. This removes some of the variations, and thus results in a somewhat more accurate reflection of relative "intelligence". However, there are also other forces at work -- schools in general tend to reward people for the same qualities the SATs reward people. Hence people who do well at school tend to do well on the SATs. This doesn't necessarily mean much about intelligence.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
Ic: You're right. But this is analgous to people saying that, say, being overweight isn't as bad as it is purported to be. This doesn't have any bearing on those who are underweight, but they might still be affected by it, and feel that they need to gain more weight to be closer to the norm.
Ok, it's a bad analogy. What I mean to say is that for people who test badly, it's unfair to say that the SAT is the definitive test of intelligence. There's really nothing that is a definitive test of intelligence, and that is perhaps what should be being said instead of "The SAT is a poor, inapplicable test"
Wait, Ic, you got a perfect score? O_O!
[ April 14, 2004, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: Ryuko ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I did much better on the ACT than the SAT. I think that's because the SAT penalizes for guessing, forcing me to second-guess myself too much.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
(psst...Ryuko, there's the IQ test... )
(edit: I can't believe I spelled it wrong! )
[ April 14, 2004, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: Eruve Nandiriel ]
Posted by reader (Member # 3888) on :
There are plenty of people who say that IQ tests aren't necessarily accurate either, but they definitely are more accurate than SAT tests. After all, if preparing for an SAT can improve one's score by a significant amount, than correlations between SAT marks and intelligence are obviously very loose.
Still, it is definitely true that in general, more intelligent people score higher on the SAT.
(Edited to add: Personally, I think that scores on the Verbal section are less likely to be influenced by preparation, whereas Math scores can be vastly improved by a bit of studying. When I took my PSATs in 11th grade, I had never seen an SAT test in my life, had no idea what it would be testing, and since I was on the advanced Math track, I hadn't done any SAT sort of math since 9th grade, so I only got a 1380 - and that was with a verbal score of 800, which means that my math score was only 580. Once I'd actually reviewed the Math - relearned it, so to speak - I shot up to 700. I'm pretty sure that if I went over the math more throughly, I'd be able to improve my score even more - but as tempting as the thought of getting a higher score is, I already have my scholarship for college, so what's the point? Obviously, though, if studying can influence scores so dramatically, the SAT can't be any sort of definite measure of IQ.)
[ April 14, 2004, 02:10 PM: Message edited by: reader ]
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Gould likes IQ tests a lot less than he likes the SATs. People who interpret the SATs for professional reasons generally understand the limitations of the test, generally speaking. IQ tests, on the other hand, are often viewed as something magic when they're really worse than the SAT as commonly administered.
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
fugu, I didn't say you said they were worthless . . . I was just commenting on a general attitude.
-o-
quote:After all, if preparing for an SAT can improve one's score by a significant amount, than correlations between SAT marks and intelligence are obviously very loose.
Well, I'm just speaking through my rectum here, but I suspect that preparation for IQ tests could also improve scores by a significant amount, but we aren't aware of it because nobody does that.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Sorry 'bout that
I highly recommend the book, though.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
My general impression is that IQ tests are considered even less accurate than standardized tests.
...
Which makes me sad because my IQ is genius-level.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
The people I know (myself included) who did well on the SATs often believe the test was worthless. Why? because they could beat it and come out on top of the percentiles by filling in some stupid circles.
Maybe it is some sort of collective "survivor's guilt". It isn't popular or Nice, to say you are smarter than most other people. Even when it is demonstrated to you abundantly that you can out think most the people around you most of the time. So you believe you are just average and that the test doesn't actually say much about who you really are, even if it is nice it got you into college. And you find places like Hatrack where you can discuss your ideas without people looking at like you like you just decended from another planet.
AJ
[ April 14, 2004, 03:50 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
Yeah, I agree. I didn't like talking about my test scores in HS, but when I got to college and started hanging out with... OK, I have to face it, with the nerds... I felt better telling them my score because it wasn't so weirdly high. One of my friends got the same score as me on the same day!! Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Interesting thing, I've taken the SATs 3 times once the old version and twice the new version. Clearly you can improve your score over time but when close together it doesn't change much.
Old SAT Age 13 Combined- 1220 650V 570M New PSAT Age 17 Combined- 1490 800V 690M (yes I added an 0 to the score for convienience) New SAT Age 17 Combined 1490 780V 710M New SAT Age 18 Combined 1470 790V 680M
Grin, I signed up it the last time because I was trying to break 1500 but I was physically in much poorer shape when I took it, had the flu or something.
AJ
Note: so even if you spot me 50 points or so on the combined score from the old test, over a 4 year time frame my score did go up ~200 points.
The math section I always ran out of time on so I had to guess about the last 7-10 questions.
[ April 14, 2004, 04:13 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by Pixie (Member # 4043) on :
quote: Our valedictorian graduated with like a 3.7
I can definitely see what you meant by saying that your 2.0 was worth more than that of some of those with better grades. The student ranked 1st in my class has a 4.5 GPA. She is, however, a known cheater amongst the students and will soon (I hope) be known as such amongst the teachers as well.
Also, I honestly do struggle in most of my classes. Math has never been a strength for me and my science marks tend to be lower as a consequence. I'm also just a lot slower in doing my work than a lot of the others in my classes because a) I'm a perfectionist when it comes to my work and b) since I tend to have a better understanding of more developed concepts or theories vs just the basics, it takes me longer to actually learn how to apply the fundamental steps that save time, etc.
It's just a little frustrating at times to be struggling along in the same classes as those who easilly make top-marks. Basically... I screwed up in my freshmen and sophomore years and ended up with a 3.4 in each. Hence, while I'm in the top 10 for this year alone (4.3 GPA for my junior year so far), I'm just barely in the top ten percent overall with a 3.7 GPA because I was... well, stupid. I'm working so much harder than I've ever done before so, while I'm ashamed of the two previous years, I'm proud to have come so far.
I'm still scared, though. Will admissions officers see the work I've done both in and out of school? Or will they go for the 4.3 GPA-getting, multi-sport athlete, student government officer who doesn't even have to work at what she does? (I know this girl, by the way. She's a good friend, but is the "perfect college applicant" in a very obnoxious way.)
... BTW, on the topic of ACT scores, I get mine two weeks from now and I am very nervous. Hopefully they'll be good and cancel out some report card induced badness?
Edit: BannaOJ, that's great! My marks went from a 1030 when I was 13 to a 1210 when I was 15 and then to a 1300 last year. How on earth did you manage to START with over 1200?!?
[ April 14, 2004, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: Pixie ]
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Wow.
I just realized I'm dumb. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I got a 32 on my ACT, and I always like to say my ACT score and GPA (3.20) were the same.
That wouldn't have helped if I'd wanted to go to a name school, but I spent a fabulous several years in college, have no student loans, and my parents never paid tuition, so in the end, it didn't really matter.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
I often wonder what type of score I'd get now -- anyone know of an online test available anywhere? One where I don't have to pay money to find out my score?
Our school didn't allow for adding the extra points for calculating GPA for in-school, though when applying to college it was avaiable. Even so, of a graduating class of 112, we had five people tied for valedictorian at 4.0. They were all smart and hardworking, though -- it wasn't a weak school by any stretch. Maybe the lack of sports at the school affected the amount of time people spent doing homework?
--Pop
Posted by Pixie (Member # 4043) on :
Mack, you are definitely NOT dumb.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
Hey, kat. I got the same ACT score as you did! And I got the same SAT as Banna.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Interesting Pixie.... over the same period of time you had had 300 point jump, that seems compariable to my 200 point jump.
The problem being that they only have "gifted" 6th and 7th graders taking it for the most part.
I wonder how much a predictor of a pre-high school SAT would be for late high school test scores.
Maybe it is all about the quality of your elementary education and the vocabulary you have before high school that determines how well you do on the test....
AJ
Posted by Slash the Berzerker (Member # 556) on :
I prefer to brag about my friends.
My lawyer friend got her masters degree in philosophy from Oxford in less than four years, then graduated top of her class, including writing for the law review, from UCLA, and then nailed her bar exam on the first try.
Beat that, suckers. Oh yeah, and even being that smart and that cool, she still hangs out with me.
So there.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
I got a 1220. o_O
Apparently that qualifies me as dumb. Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
No. 1300 is kinda a big turning point. 1220 isn't that bad.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
<grin> Actually my friend Sarah is far smarter than I could ever dream. She got a scholarship to med school at the Mayo Clinic, because she got the MCAT darn near perfect. I plan to see her and ElJay if I ever get up to Minnesota.
AJ
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
And me??? What about me??
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
Ok, I'll bite, Slash. But I only brag about my family.
My cousin has her MD as well as specialization in haematology, internal medicine and a PhD in the History and Philosophy in Science that she did in Finland in a language she did speak at the time she started. There are some other degrees in there, but they're escaping me...
She's one of the leading haematologists on the planet and did all the scientific research that wound up being used to prove the third miracle that lead to the canonization of the first Canadian saint.
She's the usual medical expert for the CBC radio show Quirks and Quarks and is also an accomplished musician, professor and mother.
In closing, lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!
[ April 14, 2004, 06:42 PM: Message edited by: Bob the Lawyer ]
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
mack, I bet you got better grades than I did. Did you ever fail a class and have to go to summer school? I did. Twice.
And I bet you haven't lost your W2 form tonight.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
I'm dumber than the PRESIDENT! Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
I can make spaghetti.
Posted by StallingCow (Member # 6401) on :
Okay, Slash...
My friend got a 1550 on his SAT, was president of the Nat'l Honor Society, valedictorian, got 5's on six separate AP exams, and graduated magna from Duke.
He then went on to Harvard law where he got a 4.0 his first semester, and is holding in the 3.8+ range after 1.5 years. And he just married an awesome girl who's in Optometry school.
Granted, he *is* a Mets fan. But no one's perfect.
[edit: Okay, BtL has me beat, I think]
[ April 14, 2004, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: StallingCow ]
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
Yeah, he does.
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
My friend told me that MENSA has a fairly low standardized test score threshold for membership purposes. After reading this board, she proclaimed that you are all potential members. Is that true? Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
How to answer that without sounding arrogant as heck . . .
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
Wait, what do you have to do to be in MENSA?
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Be smart.
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
I dunno... paying $35 a year to hang out with smart people while I can post at Hatrack for free may not be the smartest thing in the world. Posted by Daedalus (Member # 1698) on :
I joined MENSA for the sake of my resume, and the only standard I needed to meet was to have an IQ in the top 2% of the country. Though I hear there's also an LSAT cutoff. I don't know of any other standards you can meet.
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
Yeah, v. One reason I don't belong. I don't have to be a member to buy their books. Belonging seems pointless and self-congratulatory. I don't mind being self-congratulatory, or pointless, but not both!
[ April 14, 2004, 11:49 PM: Message edited by: lcarus ]
Posted by HollowEarth (Member # 2586) on :
hey everybody look! i pay for people to tell me how smart i am.
Posted by StallingCow (Member # 6401) on :
What they need is a Mensa dating service. I'd join for that.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Again, why pay for that when there's hatrack?
I suck. I only got a 31 on the ACT. Didn't take the SAT. Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
I've never done any standarized testing, but I like to think I would have gotten at least a 300 on my SATs.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Well, yeah, that's easy to say. 1000 is a much better "at least."
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
In my experience, MENSA basically IS a dating service. The only reason to go to the meetings if you AREN'T looking to hook up with other certifiably "intelligent" people is to advertise the fact that you have been certified intelligent.
The problem arises -- and this is why I left MENSA -- when you discover that merely being good at certain measures of intelligence does not make someone more likely to be a good conversationalist, a decent human being, or even someone who has anything at all in common with the other intelligent people who decided to show up.
MENSA would work much better, in my opinion, if it was a boardgame and puzzle club and got rid of the ridiculous "intelligence" angle.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:And I bet you haven't lost your W2 form tonight.
OH CRAP!! I KNEW I was forgetting something!
Added: I found my W-2 the other day, and I have most of my receipts, so maybe I can go home during lunch, so I can get to the post office. I think that will be okay.
Oh, for crying out loud. Uh, Boon? Exactly how bad is it if I forget?
[ April 15, 2004, 10:19 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I believe they kill you. And then fine you. And then kill you again.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
And as there's no statute of limitations, the cycle is stuck on rinse, repeat.
(stupid missing t's)
[ April 15, 2004, 10:27 AM: Message edited by: mackillian ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Killing I'm willing to risk. Fining I can't.
Okay, long lunch it is.
[ April 15, 2004, 10:29 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
File for an extension. It's what I'm doing, and you can do it by phone. Until midnight.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Do it now. It's okay.
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I'm totally screwed over, too. Because I'm homeschooled, college admissions people go more by the SAT scores. Despite all my reading I've never been very good at the verbal stuff (heck, I only recognized about 5 words on the PSAT), and I'm not very fast with the math (the part I need to get really high scores on) so I can't answer all the questions, even though I get most of them right. Plus, I didn't need to take a math course this year, so I'm a bit rusty right now. And I didn't do so great on the PSATs, either. ![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Grand total 1220... higher than our sitting President...![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)