<p>A few years ago, there was a thread here on CC about IQ. One poster declared:</p>
<p>“LOTS of people could [do well]…on the SATI, if they would turn off the TV, put away the video games, read challenging books, practice challenging math problems, and practice writing SAT-style essays.”</p>
<p>Do you agree (either fully or partially) with that poster’s comment?</p>
<p>The SAT doesn’t measure IQ.
But you generally do improve at something if you practice.</p>
<p>Yes. Will many be willing to do this? No.</p>
<p>I speak of able bodied persons, of course.</p>
<p>It depends on how many is “lots”. But the short answer is absolutely not. The SAT (and parts of the ACT), test reasoning skills, which is not generally taught in school. Many are born with the ability to “get it” faster than others, but some can work for hundreds of hours and not get it. Those folks need tutors/teachers.</p>
<p>Think about the classic SAT problem: a train leaves Cleveland heading west towards Chicago, while at the same time a train leaves Chicago heading east…</p>
<p>One could spend a half an hour on that problem and finally solve it. But that still won’t help on the SAT, which has limited time. With some coaching (and the xiggi method) and tutoring, however, one could learn solve it in 2 minutes. The point being is that such learning is not that intuitive for many.</p>
<p>It depends. Leading an intellectual lifestyle should help, especially if you are intelligent to begin with. </p>
<p>People generally improve their strength by lifting weights. Not everybody has the ability to bench 300 lbs. though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a classic problem, but it’s actually quite a bit harder than the vast majority of SAT problems. The SAT math problems are very, very simplistic, and typically can be done with less than 1 or 2 lines of calculation. Rarely will it be necessary to set up equations in two variables like this problem.</p>
<p>Not that this has anything to do with IQ, of course.</p>
<p>Some prep. is needed to do well on SAT / ACT. But these tests are very low level, and this needs to be understood. As an example, some adbanced math kids neglect the fact that math on these tests is primarily middle school. Being advanced, they neglect to prep. for it and get punished with lower score than anticipated because material simply needed to be re-freshed. Math is so easy to be improved by prep., many do not take advantage of this fact. No need of some fancy expansive classes. Just take practice math sections, preferrably timed and go over every single incorrect answer. High math score is quaranteed. Other secitons are not that possible to prep. aside from getting familiar with format and taking few priactice tests. Not much anybody can do about their personal way of reading and writing. All of that has been done in English class, not much more you can do. I do not know much about IQ, I know for the fact that k - 12 is so low level that anybody who work hard enough and turn their complete homework on time is pretty much quaranteed straight A’s, no brilliance is required for that, we are NOT dealing with the rocket science here. The same pretty much goes for most of UG programs. There are few that are more challenging, primarily engineering. If we are talking about real challenges, then we need to discuss Grad. schools (again, not all MBA programs, as one example, would be that challenging).</p>
<p>There is a difference between doing well. and doing very well. I would agree that many would do better, and possibly well, if they followed all the suggestions. Part of that would come from simple intellectual growth - the more they read, the better the vocabulary; the more they experience certain problems, the more familiar they are with the solutions. Practice over the long term can result in solid improvement. Just consider those who take the SAT at 7th or 8th graders - their scores naturally improve as they are exposed to more of the material covered on the test.</p>
<p>A couple of things I don’t agree with:</p>
<p>1 - I don’t think these simple steps would result in very top scores. Some who already do well may be able to improve some, but even most of them are not going to get that elusive 2400.</p>
<p>2 - I don’t think that those who only start taking these steps in 10th grade can overcome really low scores. This is like dieting: change the diet short term, and you see weight loss, but don’t necessarily keep it off. Change the lifestyle, including the diet, over time, and even if the weight loss is slower, it is more permanent. If parents and kids get the message early enough, and take these steps, they can do well. But they won’t necessarily have anything to measure against.</p>
<p>^Doing very well, I mean 2400 / 36 would probably require so much that not many would have this type of time to prep. I do not believe that 2400 / 36 is possible without any prep. We were asked for opinion, here is mine. Doing in a range of 2150 / 33 would require prep., but not that much, about 1 hr / day for a week would be sufficient. 2150 / 33 would be enough for many very selective programs. There is always a balance. Normally, HS juniors/seniors are a busy bunch. It is not worth it to spend excessive amount on prep. to SAT / ACT as there are many great UG programs that will admit a kid with lower score than 2400 / 36. To chase 2400 / 36 is basically being obsessed. But again, this is my opinion, others will disagree.</p>
<p>Of course that’s probably true. </p>
<p>However I don’t think prep is necessary to do well. I got prefect scores on SAT math, math 2, and near perfect on ACT math without prep. And my overall scores were in Miami’s range. But I legitimately test well. Sorry, I don’t remember what I got on the rest of my subjects.</p>
<p>And these tests have zero to do with IQ so I don’t understand your original question.</p>
<p>^Congrats, but you are an exception.<br>
I heard from several top caliber students that they did not do as well on math as they anticipated simply because material was from several years ago. Another point is that if someone predicts low score in Reading (which is close to impossible to improve), then math is their ticket to compensate. Anyway, very few IMO will do very well without any prep. Most can do very well with some customized to their specific needs prep. And, it is very true that there is a group that simply tests very well which has nothing to do with having superior intelligence. I read somebody’s comments that they did very well on practice MCAT without prep. (and this is no walk in a park, most prepare for it for several hours every day for many weeks)</p>
<p>After reviewing more than 40 years of research, Benjamin Bloom (Developing Talent in Young People, 1985) concluded, “what any person in the world can learn, almost all persons can learn if provided with appropriate prior and current conditions of learning.”
I believe this is true.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just not true. My older one got the proverbial 2400/36 and five 800s on subjects. And believe me, he is not a kid who preps. When he went to Presidential Scholars in DC he met kids with the same ridiculous scores. These were very, very engaged kids with a ton of activities. Son tutored for a national company for a few years while in college and he worked with a lot of kids who were prepping very, very hard just to achieve qualifying scores for mid-tier schools. My sense is that the prepping that goes on is mostly in that swatch of kids – really motivated and determined to get into their reach. Kids with the potential for the perfect scores know they are going to score high enough for whatever their reach is. The perfect score is just an artifact.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hmmm . . . well then what would you call it? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, now, we really don’t have a true definition of IQ to begin with so a statement like that seems kind of meaningless to me. What we can do is get a crude read on a kid’s mathematical and verbal reasoning skill at a moment in time. Call that whatever you want. I like g-factor.</p>
<p>Actually, the SAT is mostly a reasoning test and comes pretty close to measuring reasoning ability, at least compared to a more content driven test like the ACT. You don’t need a lot of higher math background to do really well on the SAT. You don’t need to have read all of Tolstoy. You just need to reason your way through math and read comprehendingly through passages and remember some basic grammar.</p>
<p>I think many distrust the SAT because they do well in classes but not so well on the SAT. That’s because it measures reasoning and not so much skills within the classroom (taking notes, doing homework, turning stuff in on time).</p>
<p>I can testify that some people are able to do very, very well on the SAT without much specific prep. However, I think most of those people have had other prep, such as reading and taking challenging classes in school.</p>
<p>As for the question of how much practice can help, this reminds me of one of my favorite CC threads: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/753128-michael-jordan-vs-my-roommate.html?highlight=michael+jordan+roommate[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/753128-michael-jordan-vs-my-roommate.html?highlight=michael+jordan+roommate</a></p>
<p>
The Analogies section of the SAT (dropped in 2005) corresponded the closest to an IQ test (Similarities subtest). The Similarities subtest of the Wechsler intelligence tests has been described to me as the subtest most indicative of “brainpower.”</p>
<p>I agree that if students read more and practiced math problems they’d do better on SAT tests. But SAT tests are in no way IQ tests. Back in the old analogy days they bore a bit more of a relationship to one, but not anymore.</p>
<p>I don’t really think either the SAT or ACT measure “reasoning skills”, I think they measure more than anything else family wealth, how good your schools are, and the extent to which your culture values doing well on tests.</p>
<p>The classic SAT math problem is: You have two sizes of tiles to cover a floor with. If 2/3 are covered with the 2 sq ft tiles and 1/3 is covered with the 1 sq ft tiles and the floor is 90 sq ft total. How many tiles will you need? My brilliant math kid managed to get this one wrong - though a 4th grader ought to be able to figure it out.</p>
<p>SAT is not that far from ACT. If you do not remember certain math formula, your IQ will not help you. If you did not have sufficient amount of practice in solving math problems in your classes (primarily in middle school), your IQ will not help either. Again, if you cannot read English very well (might be whole range of reasons, including English as a second language), then IQ will not help either. And last but not least, D’s comment about English section was “it is just a common sense, I do not need to prep.” (result - ACT=35 in this section), well, if one does not know English very well, would that be the case and would that indicated the mental inability of any sort? I do not think so. I have looked very closely at both and actually did many math. Well, because of my background, math was nothing for me while D. realised that she needs to refresh it.<br>
I can see that prep. is smart if it is customized. I can see that some, very few though, will do very well without prep. I just do not see despite all of the studies what it has to do with IQ. Who were included in this studies? Did they include very brilliant people who did not have sufficient background in English?</p>
<p>I think the SAT does measure some kind of reasoning, or maybe pattern recognition, because some people seem to simply have a knack for it. It doesn’t necessarily translate into other abilities, though.</p>
<p>^ Respectfully disagree, Mathmom. My guess is your brilliant math student was a little careless on that problem because of his math prowess. So carelessness will play a role somewhat, of course, and carelessness could obscure the great intellect being tested. Certainly. But how would you devise an exam to preclude mistakes from carelessness vs ineptitude ?</p>
<p>I don’t think the SAT is a measure of family wealth. The wealthiest families I know are business people who put little to no emphasis on the SAT, or prestige of college. I do think the SAT can be an indicator of family culture. A family that does not make reading material available or stimulate kids intellectually (and I don’t mean by taking them to the museum) is going to have a lot of trouble producing a kid who will do well on the SAT or in the classroom or at life, for that matter.</p>
<p>I do think some kids are hardwired to be voraciously hungry to learn and think. They have no cognitive off switch. They are not going to need to prep to score high. Their brains are just hungry and very fast at thinking because they have been thinking really hard all their lives . . . because they think it’s fun. </p>
<p>Whether this is IQ or not seems kind of meaningless to me. I’ve never understood why people care so much about IQ and trying to measure whatever it is. There’s people who are very good at solving complex mental problems. Usually they enjoy doing so and thus are good at it. For me, that means academic smarts. No question they might be horrible at social skills or music or athletics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But ONLY if your brain is wired that way to visualize the two-step process beforehand. Many do not have that reasoning ability. (Think of those that get Geometry quickly and those that struggle with the proofs, even tho both aced Algebra.)</p>