<p>This is a rather unfortunate discussion and a faulty comparison. </p>
<p>First of all, the series of posts that has been called the Xiggi method is not a guide. It is simply a compilation of the suggestions I had been making for years on the forums. To further appreciate the differences, you’d have to place my contribution in its original context and time. This was a time when most of the discussions on this forum were about if PR courses were better than Kaplan’s, if PR books were better than Barron’s or Gruber’s, or which list of words was better! I offered a different approach and a different focus. It’s also important to know that the series of posts only addressed how to approach the SAT, as this was and still is the heart of this forum. </p>
<p>For what is worth, I am very happy to see additional contributions by CC members, and I am ecstatic that some might view it as superior to what I posted half a decade ago. I’d say that it is 'bout time! This only means that the CC members have more and better resources.</p>
<p>However, there is one similarity: the price charged for both is extremely fair. Hard to complain about something that is shared freely and generously.</p>
<p>Does anyone know if there is in general a benefit to taking more than the required number of subject tests? Most schools seem to ask for 2 or 3 but we’re wondering if there is an added benefit to taking 4 or 5 if the scores are at least 750?</p>
<p>That would depend on the nature of your difficulties. Are you having trouble solving the toughest questions (and if so, in what subjects?), or do you think that the issue is more in how you are taking the test?</p>
Although S2 hasn’t taken the SAT (PSAT = 231), he did a couple practice tests and in general doesn’t come across questions he doesn’t know. On PSAT the 2 math questions he missed were an easy and a medium (dumb mistakes). He will have to educate himself on how to do well on the essay and he does occasionally come across a reading passage question where he isn’t quite sure what they’re going for. Some practice could benefit him on the reading. I also wonder if some math questions could arise that cover something that he is unfamiliar with. He is a rising junior so maybe he should sit once in the fall if he is hoping for a shot at 2400. That way he could have time for a couple more tries. Overall his biggest weakness is dumb mistakes - he’ll read the question he got wrong and know what it should have been without explanations.</p>
<p>Any advice on choosing which subject tests to take? S2 took Math 2 (800) and Latin (770). He will definitely take Physics at end of junior year. But if he could take a couple of others and do well he might as well do so. He has a particularly weak GPA for the top tier schools he dreams of (UW is just below 3.5) and is hoping that some good test scores might help some schools forgive that a bit. Of course a very strong junior year GPA is very important at this point.</p>
<p>A better question might be how does one go about choosing which subject tests to take. Assuming a student has taken courses in several subjects and done well in them, do some exams play to certain strengths? Literature seems to be testing a particular ability (interpreting literature) as opposed to having a set of facts memorized (presumably the history tests would be more memorizing facts). Are some exams more difficult in the breadth of material covered? Do some subjects have more practice tests readily available that are good at preparing a student for the exam? We did have trouble finding Latin practice tests (only could find one). Perhaps a good approach is to try a practice exam in several different subjects and use that to assess how much effort it would take to be prepared.</p>
<p>Yes, that is a good idea. You can try the official tests from the College Board’s study guide for that; they are all compiled in one book. If he has completed an AP class in a given subject, taking the corresponding Subject Test (if there is one) is usually a good idea. In my guide, christiansoldier (who received 800 on seven tests) offered his thoughts on many of the Subject Tests, so that may be helpful. Jersey13 could also probably assist, as he has received five 800’s already and may be looking for more. :)</p>
<p>^ Yes, UPenn adopts an especially strict form of score reporting in that they require all scores from every test that you have taken (even from different testing agencies). These policies make little sense to me: if the schools consider only the highest scores, why do they demand to see all scores?</p>
<p>^I read an article that quoted Yale ad. officers a while back - I believe they were less than thrilled about the introduction of Score Choice, mainly because it allowed students to hide what they didn’t want them to see. Another reason was because it gave an advantage to students with a better economic situation than others, enabling them to take the test more than once where others can’t do that, and then it’d look the same on the application. Personally, I find this ridiculous. It doesn’t give an advantage, if anything the student should only take it once after sufficient prep and at the end of a year where he/she feels sufficiently capable. And those who take it more than once are usually wasting money, if CB’s statistics are anything to go by (most get lower grades or similar grades) - CCers might be an exception to that rule. The “standardized” moniker given to the SAT isn’t exactly a joke - if you retake you’re going to get similar scores to the first time.</p>
<p>Overall there is a potential advantage to those willing/able to pay the fees and take the time to retake the exam several times. Perhaps the schools just want the larger picture/context of the scores. For example isn’t it a little more impressive to sit once and get a perfect score, vs. setting 5 times and getting an 800 on each section at some point? Some schools treat these the same and I would prefer that they all did, but I can understand why some schools might like to know all scores. I doubt one bad test day would be looked upon unfavorably by any of them.</p>
<p>It is more impressive to me. But if this is how schools evaluate the scores, then they are lying when they say that they only consider the highest score. I would have no problem with not allowing Score Choice and then openly considering the context of how a particular score was achieved. The problem comes in the contradiction of not allowing Score Choice and saying that you only consider the highest scores.</p>
<p>^In that case they’re just making sure you didn’t take the SAT like 3000 times to get a 2400 in one sitting. I think it also matters to a top school as a personality thing - as in if you’re obsessed and retook a 2320 3 times to get a 2400 for example, or something. Taking the SAT less times is an advantage to them. I don’t get why, but it is.</p>