<p>The different people or machines taking different times to do a job is a common problem type. There is also if working at the same if 10 people take 4 hours, how long does it take 12 people to do. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t go over which are prime numbers with a student getting 650. However, there is the length of a diagonal of a box, the ratios of area of an equilateral triangle inscribed in a circle, sums of arithmetic and geometric sequences,30-60-90 and 45-45-90 triangles, the number of degrees in each angle of a regular polygon, triangle inequalities, a^2 + b^2 < c^2 means an obtuse triangle, and so on. I don’t think most students know all that, and I think it is very useful in terms of time required to learn it.</p>
<p>I usually assign whole real SATs only for practice with timing and so on. I use real SATs a lot, but assign problems appropriate to the student’s level. I don’t think many tutors take the approach of only using whole real SATs.</p>
<p>I didn’t understand how everyone on this forum is all into this Xiggi system and have decided on certain things. Yes, I think if you have “new” people from outside they may have different approaches and views. I am sorry I have offended people here.</p>
<p>Not sure you realize this, but you made offensive generalizations about the people on this forum and then apologize for offending people within the space of 3 sentences.</p>
<p>Contrary to your suggestion, people haven’t decided on certain things and there are differences of opinion that are respectfully debated. Its amazing that you say otherwise right after @pckeller, one of the most respected posters on this forum, states that he agrees with your approach.</p>
<p>It seems fairly clear to me that you are either not really paying attention to what others are saying or purposely being contentious and disagreeable. If you really are a tutor (which seems likely from the content of your posts) and want to get something out of a dialogue with people that share your passion for learning about learning this test, you’ll do a lot better by focusing on presenting and defending your opinions and providing detailed and respectful rebuttals when you disagree with the approach of others. Who knows, we might all just learn something.</p>
<p>On my first SAT, I got a 630 in math. On my second, I got a 770. I took the first in May of my sophomore year and the second in November of my junior year. I honestly just did a hell of a lot of practice sections and went over them (with a tutor. yup, his technique was practice… and whaddya know, it worked :D).
I don’t there’s much to actually “learn”. I mean, it’s really just basic math. The thing is, SAT questions can be kind of tricky, and doing all that practice helps you understand how to approach them. I think for a lot of people, it’s not a matter of being unable to do the math, it’s a matter of speed and knowing how to attack the question. In regards to both of those, practice sections are the way to go, in my opinion.</p>
<p>Of course any tutor would have you do practice and go over problems.</p>
<p>I would recommend looking over the math summaries in the books I mentioned or others. Of course if you know all of that, and know the examples I listed above, then no need to study it.</p>
<p>@sattut - your attacks are baseless and maybe even intended to stir controversy. Are you jealous that others are getting more attention than you are? Either way, I just finished re-reading xiggi’s posts and let me tell you, I DO NOT agree with a lot of his teachings. I can say this because I regularly score 800 on SAT math and I am pretty confident when it comes to anything # related - got my NEVER-LOST-AN-A in math to prove it. BUT, (I saw your posts) why attack him that way? That’s just absurd… But then again, same goes for xiggi for replying to you. And him calling Dr Chung, Dr Junk, wow… instant classic… because that’s just downright juvenile. Then what does that make you @xiggi? Are you claiming to be better than him (or than people at Barron’s)? I used Dr Chung’s book (along with PWN and Barron’s) for my test and it was very helpful. Imo, PWN is the best for math. And no, I am not promoting PWN over yours xiggi… so don’t cry. :(</p>
<p>I didn’t attack Xiggi. I don’t know much about his method. He attacked me for suggesting approaches that are not consistent with his teachings.</p>
<p>I suggested Barrons and Chungs had good sections summarizing SAT math. He attacked the books and attacked my abilities as a tutor, all of which is irrelevant to my OP.</p>
<p>Yeah… calling Dr. Chung, Dr. Junk was very juvenile on his part. Maybe his excessive pride (the fact that many of us are mentioning him) has consumed his humility. How dare he criticize other while he himself cannot take a criticism? @sattut, I read your posts and I agree with you that there are plenty of good books out there and that NO ONE is entitled to attack others - especially here. We just want good guidance and information. Colliding egos is not good for anyone imo. </p>
<p>Posting on forums can be dangerous. It is very easy to misinterpret intentions, it can be hard to detect sarcasm, and jokes can be taken the wrong way. Most people who are on here have good intentions, and those who do not usually get blocked by the moderators pretty quickly. There have been a few occasions where I thought I was just being funny and someone took it as a personal attack. I guess the main problem is that I’m just not funny. So I try to stick to math here.</p>
<p>In any case, as far as books go, everyone should have the Blue Book. Aside from that it is pretty pointless to give book recommendations. There is just too much conflicting information in this forum, and I can imagine that for a newcomer it would be impossible to know who to trust. One piece of advice that I always try to give (although I think it’s usually ignored) is to realize that just because material is effective for one student, it does not mean it will be effective for everyone. When a student in the 700’s says a certain book is “the best” for SAT math, then this book could actually be “the worst” for a 400 student. For anyone reading this, I’m afraid you really have to do your own research when selecting a book. This could be as simple as finding someone you trust and then taking their advice, but you still have to make your own decision.</p>
<p>I’m going to repeat what pckeller said here. When a student is seeing a tutor, the book or material is less relevant. A tutor’s expertise should be able to separate the good from the bad for that particular student. </p>
<p>The point of my OP was studying and teaching the SAT math. I think it should be an important part of preparation. I was aware that a lot of people disagree, but I thought it would be interesting to discuss.</p>
<p>As for Barrons and Dr. Chung, I found those have the most comprehensive discussions of math SAT. I use them to refer to when tutoring. I generally teach the SAT math rather than have the student study it, because it is difficult to get high school students to study anything, as they have not been trained that way. However, it is easy to assign them problems to do. I was not in anyway recommending those books in general. </p>
<p>However, I do recommend that a student preparing on their own make sure they know the SAT math. As implied, a lot of students do not know how to study. Without guidance, it is easier for them to take whole tests over and over.</p>