cornell75

I don't think the test prep courses are necessary for all students but they are really beneficial for some and I think the characterization of taking a course or working with a tutor as "cheating" is inappropriate. After all, the student still has to do the test on their own. My daughter studied on her own, she's a pretty focused kid naturally, and she scored well on all the tests she took. My son however is somewhat disorganized and needed some help on how to take the test. He had a tutor who helped him bring his score up considerably and along the way taught him some grammar that he hadn't gotten in school as well as tips on how to take math tests. It was well worth it for him.

I think it depends on the kid.

JustLookin

I couldn't afford test-prep classes but I have a few friends that did take them and I have to say they did improve their scores significantly. I went with self help books and I think they did help me, but my scores didn't reflect a huge improvement. It's a lot harder to stay dedicated & focused when you're doing it on your own.

awb1989

They only have so many essay questions. The second time I took the test, I got a question that I had already seen a dozen answers to. I still used my own examples and ideas, though. (Although some of those answers that I had seen came from my own studying from the blue book, which you can get with or without a tutor. So the test in and of itself is pretty stupid with it being some sort of scholastic achievement test or something and the producers of the test releasing all kinds of information on how to "prepare" for it, though I'm sure you've all heard much on this before.)

Narcissa

okay, so it DOES depend on the kid. However, an unmotivated kid who goes through a rigorous and intense prep class (which most of them arent...they just cheat your money, seriously) will still be unmotivated, and no amount of prep can bring up motivation (in fact, it usually decreases motivation). unless it's motivation to get out of the class as soon as possible. and despite intense drilling and homework and tests (btw Latin roots is one of the best ways to study vocab! besides knowing and using all those vocab when you talk, of course) scores will improve minimally with even the best programs. motivation (discovering a dream college, peer motivation, etc) are usually the best and the least painful. if your child is awfully unmotivated, an expensive and rigorous program might make him/her hate math, cr, and writing for the rest of his/her life, but it will probably increase their score somewhat (after all, unless you TRY to do bad, 1 + 1 is 2 and even retarded kids will be able to spit back exactly the same information after doing 100 1+1 problems). and if you're on the borderline, and any money for any number of points is crucial, by all means, do the class. but it's nowhere as effective as actually wanting to score well yourself, buying books, and reading them with full concentration. That cannot be done with $

awb1989

You improve your English vocabulary by reading books (and to a lesser degree (and when you're younger) by talking and watching movies, etc.). If you happen to have studied Latin and you actually KNOW the language, then great, think about the Latin roots you know if you don't know a certain word on the test. Otherwise, it's a stupid activity for improving your vocab.

Exactly. The first time around, I had no idea where I would want to go to college.

I just hated getting up on Saturday mornings to go to this stupid class. And it was a little less of a pain to do the assignments, but still somewhat annoying. I don't think it will make anyone hate math/reading/writing for the rest of his or her life. Typically SAT classes come when you're in high school, and not an infant. It's just a class the student will hate (and when the student gets to college, s/he'll probably have already forgotten most of the details of it, not to mention his/her scores on the actual SAT).

And as for the math section, if I recall correctly, very little of it was actually algebra, geometry, precalc (whatever that is), etc. It was mostly logic stuff.

chink182

I'm confused on how you can think SAT tutoring is considered cheating...Nonetheless I think that if you can find the right program and the right tutor, you can definitely improve yourself. Also those classes are aimed mostly at the people with low test scores already and have lots of room for improvement.

Personally I take SAT tutoring because my parents make me. I had motivation for it in the beginning but I lost interest very quickly. My teacher sucked because he was basically reading the answer explanations to me. So yeah I've had a pretty bad experience with a tutor. On the other hand, I did improve my score (most likely because I studied at home a lot too).

apathy

It depends on the kid and it depends on the prep organization. Everything in here is anecdotal; my common sense tells me that motivated kids can probably achieve the same thing without test prep as unmotivated kids with test prep, but I don't know that for sure.

Here's my story anyway.
I got a 2400 with a tutor. I didn't appreciate the class and I don't want to believe that him teaching me helped my score, chiefly because I didn't even USE his stupid methods on the SAT (they were straight out of the Princeton book, btw, so now I have a Princeton and a Barron's book sitting unused in my house) but hey, we got results. Parents happy, kid goes back to normal life.

hollyert

OK, test prep is bad. It compromises the effectiveness of the test.
However, not prepping is bad. It compromises my ability to get into ____.

That's why I'm doing (moderately expensive) one-on-one test prep. The guy knows how to do it! Thanks to him & his great way of teaching I genuinely understand how to think outside the box when it comes to math. It's an acquired skill. ...aaaaand I'll be a NMSF... that doesn't suck either.

I'm a quick study, and in some roundabout way SAT prep produces scores for me that reflect that, even if they don't reflect some inherent "reasoning" ability.

I totally would recommend one-on-one tutoring, but not really the class sessions.

Narcissa

okay maybe it was a bit exxagerated.

and i agree, reading is a wonderful (and long term) way of remembering and learning new words. if you want to seriously improve your SAT vocab, i suggest reading the classics--shakespeare, jane austen, charles dickens--if you can understand easily (or even enjoy???) them, you will have more than enough vocab skills and reading skills to last you for the SAT!

latin is the short-term and QUICK/EFFECTIVE! way to learn it all. don't go out of your way to learn it, cuz it can get quite annoying, but if you ever want to take like a CTY class and don't know what you want to do, taking latin there mite be a good suggestion.

CountingDown

No external test prep here at our house. Kids signed up for CB's online SAT Q of the Day (free) in sophomore year. Took PSATs in 9th and 10th grade absolutely cold -- this gave us a baseline, and the PSAT score reports these days offer some valuable info for analyzing one's strengths and areas for improvement.

DS1 did some practice for the PSAT at the beginning of junior year -- a total of two tests, done in sections, over a month. He also took the full-length CB PSAT that was part of the registration package the weekend before the PSAT. PSAT went up 190 points from soph to junior year, and the SAT was 40 points higher than that. SAT practice involved a few practice essays (to make sure he could complete one in 25 minutes) and focused on sections in CR and W where he missed Qs. We bought the Blue Book -- never got past Test #3.

DS2 went up 220 points on the PSAT from 9th to 10th grade. He'll need more intense work in math, but W & CR are in good shape. Expect we'll take a similar preparation philosophy with him.

We just never saw the need to spend the $$$. DH and I were willing to work with them as needed. That's probably a significant differentiating factor right there. I do understand that some parents and kids are like oil and water when it comes to this stuff, and that some parents are unable (whether because of economics or language) to offer more help. This is where the test books come in so handy. The CB Blue Book costs under $20, and there are online resources, too. Our schools' career centers have a ton of test prep books and computers for kids to use if they can't get these things at home.

Nevertheless, all of this requires some initiative and commitment on the student's part, and not just in the month before the test. Read, read, read. No vocab flash cards. Know the types of math Qs. Learn what they are asking. Study hard, pay attention in class, and it's possible to do well on these tests without intense preparation. Those are good skills for life, too.

enderkin

I have taken many SAT prep courses in my high school career. I am the son of very worried Asian parents, so I have been ferried from Princeton Review, Kaplan, and even a Korean SAT program (CCB), with self-study in between. I have had several years to judge these various prep courses, and I want to try to help people in the future who are concerned about this test.

For the record, I received a 2240 (710 CR 730 M 800 W 12 E) on the actual SAT exam, taken in November 2006 (my junior year). I had taken the test only once before-in June 2005, the end of my freshman year (when the new test first came out). I took the test then cold, to see what the test was like. I received a 1960 (670 CR 600 M 670 W 9 E). I decided not to take the test again after I took the ACT and scored a 34--enough was enough at that point. PSAT sophomore = 203; PSAT junior = 227.

No matter what, I feel that self-studying is CRUCIAL to getting a good score on the SAT without natural talent/luck. If you do not self-study, these courses mean nothing.

Here is my judgment for the courses I have taken.

Kaplan and the Princeton Review:
General: Before CCB, my parents were concerned that I hadn't spent enough time (and apparently they not enough money?) on the SAT, so I was brought to each of these courses in the spring of my sophomore year (about 4 months total, on Saturdays 12-3 or so). In my opinion, these are pretty much the same exact thing. Teachers teach from the book, are trained to think using the book's methods, and do not stray from the book at all costs. I recommend that this course be used only for those who currently score below 2000 on practice tests...
*controversial tangent*
...tests (plural) that you yourself have taken at home or elsewhere. I believe the diagnostic tests that these two programs give are made deliberately harder or different in order to convince customers that they really need help. Both the Kaplan and Princeton Review diagnostic tests gave me 2100s. I consistently received 700 on the writing section despite a near perfect MC score--why? The testers gave my essays low scores, which effectively dropped my section score about 50-100 points every single time. I sat through each class, learned nothing from these two programs, and I got a 12 on the real essay; Kaplan/TPR gave me 6-9, which would have been OK if the essay graders had ever told me why they gave me that score, or criticized me, or told me anything at all. The other sections fluctuated wildly--I got a 650 on one math section, only to get a 780 on the next with no change in testing strategy.

Atmosphere: Very bland, to be honest. You go in, sit down, and listen to the teacher talk. He reads the book and you do a few drills. There is a break every once in a while. Then, a change in section or a vocabulary game. Then, you leave. I found myself unable to pay close attention to my teacher's explanation of the course methods. To get an understanding of the people who can work for these test prep courses, my PR teacher was a Rutgers undergraduate (senior) who came in late one weekend because he had gotten drunk the previous night and broken his leg dancing on a table. He was an adequate teacher overall, but the things that you are taught in Kaplan/TPR seem to be for people who honestly do not know or have the time to learn the actual material. You do not learn how to actually do the math problems in the math section--you learn tricks to get around knowing the material, tricks that are often just as difficult to remember as knowing how to solve the problem itself. For instance, one of the lessons is actually something along the lines of 'Doing the math without algebra'. If you know your algebra, this is utterly useless for you-practicing the algebra would be infinitely more practical and versatile. Overall, I do not believe that this for people who know the stuff but need practice. This is for people who need a way to perform well on the SAT with limited skills or a very short period of time to do so. I sat down, did the assigned work, and left. I wish my parents had not spent money on this course.

One of TPR's promotions was that if they couldn't raise my score by something like 200 points, they'd automatically offer me another course in anything, SAT I or II, for free. I ended up declining the offer.

CCB: A Korean SAT day camp, basically. I took this in August of junior year. This is the hardcore of the hardcore. About 30 of us were placed in 3 rooms and had 3 different teachers, each one teaching a different section of the test. The course has 8 hour sessions for 4 days a week, and a test on Fridays. We had a grammar nazi for a writing teacher, an ethereal, philosophical 30-something year old man for a CR teacher, and a..well, an old-school middle-aged Asian man for a math teacher. This actually worked, mainly because it's structured like actual classes. I won't talk much about this class because probably none of you know or want to sign up for this course. It is not for the weak-willed, but it will get you results. My initial scores here were about a 2150 (with harder writing MC but perfect essay score), and improved to 2200-2250 by the end of three weeks (with perfect writing score). I highly recommend it.

Self-Study: I did a lot of this before, in between, and after all of these courses. I took every book that I could find, every test, every diagnostic. Do this regardless of whether you take a prep course or not-it is the most important part, regardless.

I suggest this method in order to not burn out and want to stab yourself after a few weeks/days/hours/minutes. I still never wanted to do another SAT ever again after the test, but I got through OK.
1) Do a single large test, and then find out your lowest/least confident section.
2) For the next week or two, very slowly do only that section, dedicating time you might normally be taking for the other sections on that section alone.
3) Meticulously analyze every wrong answer, every error--and analyze the question; what it means, how it's worded, what the intent is.
4) Understand your problems:
a) Vocabulary requires practice and usage and is generally hit or miss. You do not need to memorize the dictionary. Breaking down an unfamiliar word usually works wonders, and words that sound like other words tend to be similar in definition as well.
b) Critical reading passages require that you understand the mindset of the reading (which to me is also unfortunately hit or miss). I read fast, so I always read the passage first and answered the questions afterwards by rereading the parts mentioned. Some people also just go straight to the questions and read only the necessary areas, but I feel that this prevents the tester from understanding the passage well. The general rule for answering questions with quoted phrases is to read the 4 lines before and the 4 lines after the quote. You will almost always be asked to find the tone of the passage in some way or another, so just do so while you read. Oftentimes, knowing the tone of the passage will answer several other questions indirectly.
c) Math errors usually are the result of tricky wording or deficient/incorrect application of principles (combined with good ol' human error), and are usually pretty straightforward. You get em or ya messed up somehow.
d) Multiple choice on the writing is exclusively grammar, and is simple to study for--learn all of the stodgy old grammar rules by heart. Imagine a proper Englishman speaking the sentence in front of you, and imagine to yourself: Are his cricket buddies going to laugh at him for using the plural form of a verb in conjunction with the subject noun 'Everyone'? Why/Why not?
e) The essay requires organization of structure and content. The secret? The rubric DOES NOT CARE ABOUT TRUTH. Don't know any real examples explaining why power should remain in the hands of the people? Make something up about Greece! My old fallback was always the 'ancient African fable' which involved a hog doing something and getting his just reward/punishment, conveniently providing a lesson about the question at hand. You can say the most absurd things in your essay-as long as it is organized and related to the topic, then it can only help you.
5) RELAX for a little bit (no more than a day)
6) Take another single large test and repeat.

This basically has you concentrate wholly on one section--to GET that one part and expect the questions, format, etc. beforehand. You aren't doing 5 hour test blocks, you're doing maybe an hour or two at a time of just one section. You should get comfortable with it and start performing better. Eventually, that section will become a strength, and you can start improving on another section.

I hope this long, long, long post helps parents/students in the whole SAT business. I don't trust most prep courses past their books. Taking the test yourself is the best way to really practice, along with content drills for math and rule memorization for writing, etc.
I know that I don't have a perfect score, so I don't pretend that I can tell people what to do on the SAT. But I am sane today because of the methods I used. Practicing for these tests is like mentally running for 5 hours, and a tired brain is an inefficient one. Focus on one section, and just pound that section into submission before moving onto the next one. That's all I can say without asking for money (it's a very lucrative business, after all...)

Narcissa

i seriously doubt a "natural talent/luck/intelligence" will get you far in the field of SATs. perhaps math competitions, but SATs are just so...uncreative...that nobody has an advantage. of course a lot of ppl study less and get better scores, but that's just cuz they're all-round more prepared. like you can say "i got a 2300 w/o studying!" and some other guy got , like, a 1900 with studying. it's not that you're smarter than that guy, but you've done a lot of math and reading outside that don't exactly count as studying but is nevertheless preparation for the SATs

blubberxyz

Test prep is controversial, but YES, I believe in them. but wait! hear me about before you jump to conclusions; I'll try to keep this as short as possible as well...

Although it's undeniable that lower-income students generally have lower scores, this cannot be attributed to test prep alone. many libraries offer free classes and prep companies offer free testings. It doesn't mean that a lower-income student is forever bound by the "not SAT whiz" label.

Secondly, prep courses provide a structure, but without internal motivation there's no way you can improve, whether it's a $2000 class or a $50 one. Think of it like public school: certain students do better, but just because they're at the top of their class, it doesn't necessarily mean that all of them have a wealthy, upper-class background.

Third, eliminating prep classes altogether is unfair, as either way, people from upper-class backgrounds have an advantage, anyway. Prep actually serves to give those who aren't absolutely rich a competitive edge. $2000 might be a lot for some families, but there are many who could afford it (look at all those SUV's and Iphones and computers and plasmas and ...).

Narcissa

lol rich, unmotivated kids can have advantage over poor, unmotivated kids .

froghorn

Frankly, I'm not convinced that excessive study does much. As it is designed to do, the SAT relegates one to his or her score bracket. I think familiarity definitely helps, but the whole regression to the mean phenomenon basically ensures that a student who scores around 600 in math will stay around there, and makes it virtually impossible to will a 700. Clearly some manage to do this, but statistically it is very hard. While a 3k Chyten class probably offers some benefit, the innate design of the test offsets the potential gain with such a price tag.