ThisCouldBeHeavn

I'm not sure what your point is. Obviously nothing on the SAT is great literature, nor are the answer choices particularly nuanced or profound. When it comes to basic reading comprehension, there are cold, hard, indisputable facts about what's going on, and that's what the SAT tests. If when reading on your own you want to look for a deeper personal meaning, that's fine, but it's not a matter of reading comprehension.

One example.. The truth is there are an awful lot of people that work hard and get good grades then take the SAT, get an unfavorable result and question its usefulness. Likewise, there are fair number of slackers that will defend it vociferously. Most people's opinions on this issue seem to stem directly from their own experience.

dshinka

I believe that is the most objectively accurate statement on this thread. Kudos.

Unholy Sigma

Yes, but what does that mean? It's the same as saying "being a major league baseball player shows you are a major league baseball player". It's true, but in order to be a baseball player you must be a good hitter, a good fielder, and physically fit. Thus in the SAT, you need something to do well on the test. "How good you are at taking the SAT" is a pointless response, because we all know this. What we are debating here is what makes you good at taking the SAT, and my response is intelligence.

112358

Tautologies are always accurate.

Randwulf

I think it's probably about 85% intelligence.

And it's a misconception that you can't study for IQ tests, it's just that no one does. Studying for IQ tests and studying for the SAT involve the same thing: not expanding your knowledge but expanding your familiarity with the test questions.

Randwulf

I should say very rarely done, not never.

Avalanche Lily

Heavn, when I speak about literary analysis, I'm not talking about those questions that ask you to simply regurgitate plot points or explain cause and effect or vocabulary. Most SAT questions are of that nature, and that is a perfectly reasonable thing to test, but it is not critical analysis, which I think requires a great deal of intelligence to do well. There are, however, some analysis questions that I truly think could be ambiguous. Of course, I haven't spent as much time with the test as others, and that's only from personal experience of seeing some questions and having to forget what I think and focus on what the test-maker was thinking.

My point, then, is rather convoluted: those questions which do not test true literary analysis are not particularly good measures of intelligence. And those questions which do require analysis are often ambiguous and could punish intelligent people for a difference of subjective opinion.

And you're right - my opinion on the SAT is profoundly influenced by my experience, but more the experience of taking the test than comparing my score with my intelligence (though in that respect, also, I find the test lacking in measuring capability).

Unholy Sigma

Questions are not ambiguous. Answers are not subjective. All correct answers as chosen by the college board are the most logically correct answers from any perspective, be it yours or the test's creators. Only when an individual doesn't fully grasp the passage can a wrong answer seem like a right answer.

Avalanche Lily

Well, I would have to disagree, and that seems to be mostly a problem of experience and opinion. But for me that's not really that big of an issue - the overwhelming majority of the CR questions do not require enough thought to be ambiguous and of course math and the writing (grammar) questions are straight-forward. And I don't find these questions to measure much more than a subset (albeit an important one) of what I consider to be intelligence.

ThisCouldBeHeavn

And my point is that the questions are almost entirely of the former sort, which are perfectly good for testing intelligence up to the point the SAT is intended to test. Similarly the math, which doesn't really extend past the middle school level, tests up to a certain point, and the writing does too.

If you're trying to distinguish between someone that's good at math and someone that has truly rare ability, the Olympiad tests are probably a better way to go. Similarly, if you're testing true writing ability and true analytical ability, there are better things than the SAT. The problem is that's not what it's intended for.

Avalanche Lily

I understand that what I'm asking of the SAT is not what it intends to test. And my problem is that what's it's intended to test, in my opinion, does not reflect intelligence well enough to merit the importance bestowed upon these scores.

ThisCouldBeHeavn

And in my opinion it's more important to know the difference between the person with 2000 and the person with 2300 than the two people with 2300.

Unholy Sigma

Bump10char

Parliament

HAHAHAHAH no. I know people who basically are average but locked themselves in their rooms, studied, and got amazing scores. If you know how to take the SAT, you'll do well. There's definitely a wrong and a right way to take it.

Parliament

Also, the SAT is biased towards the wealthy (who can afford T-89 calculators) and people who speak English as a first language. There are plenty of intelligent native Spanish speakers, Chinese speakers, and other people who speak languages other than English. They just don't get as fair of a chance because they understand diction, syntax, even some definitions differently.