| The Xiggi method
I wholly endorse the Xiggi method. I have credentials here -- I've taught SAT prep to over 2000 students. Their reported improvements last year averaged 126.7 points.
We use exclusively College Board materials for practice tests. They were abundant until the March SAT came along, but the four available tests in the current format are adequate to give students a sense of the range of questions, the timing they need, and the subjects for extra study.
Xiggi is right that you want to do more than just take the tests score them and be done. Pore over them when you are done to know your weaknesses. Then either via a book, a teacher, or a private SAT tutor, learn the skills to shore them up.
I'm biased towards having an SAT tutor because for the ambitious student who will put the time into taking and dissecting College Board tests, having the tutor to then help is more EFFICIENT than struggling with your own way to get that kind of question right in the future.
I'm sensitive that tutoring costs a lot. The way to minimize those costs is by being a MATURE STUDENT. Do your own corrections, find the dumb mistakes, then present to the tutor just the answers that were troublesome. Include those you got right but weren't sure of.
A book called "Perfect Score 1600" gives characteristics of the students who landed 1600 scores on the Old SAT. There was only ONE common characteristic -- nearly 70% said they took a lot of practice SATs.
For students starting with far from a perfect score, I have to add this to the Xiggi advice: devour vocbulary words. Though analogies have been removed from the SAT, the sentence completions and Reading Comp answer choices are punitive if not armed with a good vocabulary.
Mark Greenstein |