<p>You really can’t judge someone’s scores from decades ago and try to compare them to today, especially when you don’t know how motivated they were at the time to take the SAT. Someone who was trying really hard to get into a top school may have studied and learned as much as they could about it. Others might have taken it blind, purely because they were required to.</p>
<p>For example, I had to take the SAT purely because ROTC decided they were going to require people to do it before graduation. Already in college, had my scholarship. All I really needed to do was sign my name and show up, no minimum score. I knew nothing about the test, and partied with my friends all night, no sleep, lots of beer. Went straight from the party to the test. Slept for a couple of minutes during the break before each section, finished some sections early and took more naps. I might have been still drunk. God forbid anyone make a judgment upon my intelligence on that test 30 years ago!</p>
<p>consolation- if ou look at the recentering table I linked, there is no indication thatt the test provided scores other than ending in a zero. Perrhaps there was some experimental section thrown in and added to a score?</p>
<p>None of these scores surprise me. Clinton is a strong politician, not necessarily an intellect. Look at him vs. Gore (who scored higher). The scores make sense.</p>
<p>In 1973 I had a 630V, 760M. Now my kids won’t let me help them with math. I had a review book.</p>
<p>I was an indifferent student in junior high, and was kicked out of honors math and science. In HS I reviewed algebra over the summer, and asked my guidance counselor, if I could skip a year of math. They agreed without testing, which seems strange to me now.</p>
<p>In my HS we took the PSAT twice and the SAT twice. I went to one of the better high schools in PA.</p>
<p>I took the GREs years later and my verbal score went up and my math score went down.</p>
<p>In 1967/68 I scored a 698 in Math and a 539 in Verbal. I never forgot the scores as only 1% of my class got a 700 or higher score and I probably missed it by one correct answer. My guidance counselor was convinced that I had cheated on the Math SAT and was surprised when I was willing to take a second test to prove him wrong. I did well on the test and.earned his respect, but he never helped me get into a top school because my grades were not very good. I had only 3 or 4 hours of sleep before the SAT test. </p>
<p>Doncha love it when that’s the teacher’s first assumption?? :-?</p>
<p>I recently read Sonia Sotomayor’s autobiography. In HS, her geometry teacher was certain she had cheated on the Regents exam (a standardized New York State HS test) because she scored 100%, whereas in the geometry class she had usually scored in the 80s and low 90s. Sotomayor told the teacher it was because the Regents only asked for the answer, not how you got it. And Sotomayor got to the right answer, but not the way the teacher wanted her to, so the teacher would deduct points. After Sotomayor explained it to the teacher, the teacher regraded all of her homework and tests, and gave her an A. </p>
<p>I took the SAT ~5 years ago and I don’t remember what I got. I know it wasn’t too high- my ACT was much better. I hope no one is judging my intelligence based on a standardized test ~6 years of schooling ago </p>
<p>It always used to bug me that people talk about Clinton as some kind of genius because of the Rhodes Scholarship. The reality is that he is smart enough to get a 3.8+ GPA at Georgetown in poli sci., which is somewhat hard but not genius territory. That is the academic requirement to get the Rhodes. The more important part of his app was his political involvement, including his rec from an important senator and history at Boy’s State, as well as the fact that he was competing against other people from Arkansas. The Rhodes in particular favors people who aspire to politics. </p>
<p>Once he had the Rhodes, I think Yale Law would bend its academic standards in terms of the LSAT to admit him. I’m sure Clinton had a much higher score than would be predicted by his SAT and that he benefitted from the academic environment at Georgetown, but my guess is that his LSAT wasn’t in the same rarefied territory as his unhooked Yale classmates. </p>
<p>I was surprised at Clinton’s scores too - I’d have thought SFS at Georgetown was harder to get into even then. OTOH I do remember one of my best friends in high school - super smart got scores in the low 600s on the SAT. She desperately wanted to go to Yale which had only recently gone co-ed. They let her in off the waiting list. I was always surprised at her scores - maybe speaking French at home accounted for some of it, but she was an avid reader.</p>
<p>How about a standardized test taken ~48 years ago, plus a bunch of schooling that ended 33 years ago?? When I apply for a job, I am sometimes still asked.</p>
<p>I’m still trying to remember why I also took the ACT. for some reason I remember that at THAT time the UC’s required both? Could that be right??? </p>
<p>Looks like my ACT was better than my SAT, not that either was spectacular. lol</p>
<p>I think I also remember that the ACT didn’t go up to 36 at that point. Don’t remember what the max used to be? 34? maybe? anyone know?</p>
<p>It’s not unheard of for students with lackluster/mediocre SAT scores to do much better on the graduate exams like the LSAT, GRE, or GMAT. </p>
<p>In fact, this seems to have been somewhat common among the law school bound as the LSAT mainly tests critical reading, logical reading, and ability to solve complex puzzles. Those who excel in those areas tend to do much better percentile-wise on the LSAT than the SAT whereas the majority who don’t tend to do worse. </p>
<p>In Bill Clinton’s case, it seemed he did well enough at Yale Law to become eligible to becoming law school faculty. A job that’s usually only given to law school graduates who were the few percentage of topflight graduates from Top 5-6 law schools. </p>
<p>Then again, that may not mean much considering Bill Clinton embroiled himself in a stupid scandal and Amy Chua and her stereotype-laden books. </p>
<p>I feel like some random person just made these up.
But how awk would it be if Nicki Minaj or one of the Kardashians scored higher than Clinton? </p>
</p>