<p>Contrary to popular opinion, I actually think standardized tests are a fairly accurate way to measure intelligence. If we don’t have widespread assessments, how else can we compare individual abilities? Whether one likes it or not, our society is obsessed with ranking. As a result, we are forced to satisfy this urge to unconsciously catagorize people. Its called human nature.</p>
<p>Take olympiad tests for example. On the most part, the higher you score, the more understanding you have about your subject area. I’m not only referring to regurgitating facts, but for those who have taken these tests, they will know that they are based very much on creativity and problem solving (I attest to this in mathematics). Sure you might have a bad day or two and screw up, but on the whole, if you truly understand the matieral then you will do well. If you dont, then you wont. It is as simple as that. Your score is a very objective means in terms of this measurement. What ****es people off, I am assuming, is not the actual tests themselves, but the way their scores are inerpreted. </p>
<p>In respect to the SAT, it shouldn’t define your life. Although it has its imperfections it is far superior to many other tests in measuring “intelligence,” whatever that may be. From my personal experience, the high scorerers are generally bright people who perform well in school. Of course, there are counterexamples, ie. people who do well in school but score low, etc. But we come to the original question: what does that mean? It meanst that they answered several basic reading, math, and writing questions incorrectly. Are they stupid? I have no idea. All I can say is they missed concepts that should have learned in middle/high school. Yet, if they do well in advanced classes, maybe they dont need them to succeed.</p>
<p>Interesting Kyzan. By no means do I disagree with you. Its just the whole culture that is built around these SAT numbers and everything, and I there has to be some way to rank us all, like you said we are obsessed with rankings. WIth so many applicants colleges have to use such a scale, but when ppl rely on it is when it bugs me. I’m just saying there is more to a person than some numbers but we just like to simplify things. Hmmmm</p>
<p>IDK what im saying its early. And I’m just salty. </p>
<p>I have never heard of the olympiad tests they sound interesting albeit THERE THE DEVIL!!! AHHH
jp jp :-P</p>
<hr>
<p>Lauren:
Tell-E-ride the e is like if you put more emphasis on the second E in telephone…</p>
<p>I disagree with the “SAT is an intelligence test” thing.</p>
<p>Here’s my personal experience:</p>
<p>On the SAT, I haven’t been able to crack 2200 yet. I’m stuck at 1260 on practice tests (although I got 800 on reading! yeesssss) and the actual test isn’t back yet. However, I’ve had IQ tests done twice, and both times I scored in the top 1%.</p>
<p>My SAT score doesn’t match this, does it? Everyone has stuff they’re good at. SAT, for me, not so much. Taking final exams, not so much. For that matter, doing math in a timely matter, not so much. Learning languages, NOT SO MUCH.</p>
<p>But I can read quickly. o_o;; Gotta count for something. And, apparently, I’m good at the stupid little games that comprise an IQ test. (“Here’s a picture. Make up a story to go along with this picture.” “I will read you a list of numbers. Repeat them back to me, but backwards.” “What is this image missing?”)</p>
<p>I think the IQ test is a major detriment to our society. I cannot convey my contempt towards it, and how it screws with public educational systems from elementary to high school. How can solving ****ing puzzles determine in any way shape or form how successful you will be in life or what your educational potential is? It seems more like a game than a test, and it is just as easy to study for as the SAT. </p>
<p>Personal Experience: I took the IQ test in elementary school when I first came to America and got somewhere around a 100 (I’m guessing cause of English problems). Then I took it again in 4th grade and got a 140. After that, I was pretty satisfied, but I wanted to test my “maximum potential” at the time, since I believed that the IQ test measured future intelligence. So I bought some puzzle books, IQ prep books (w/e you want to call), and I studied them for about three months. When I took the IQ test again, I got a 150. Afterwards, I seriously doubted the validity of that result. How can future intelligence improve by one standard deviation within three months? All I did was solve more puzzles in a faster time period. What the hell does that have to do with anything?</p>
<p>In relation to the SAT, the IQ test is far worst. The SAT at least goes for stuff associated with basic reading and math skills which are either learned in high or middle school. The IQ test tries to abstractly predict abilities by giving supposedly “creative puzzles.” The only difference is, preparing for the SAT actually helps you in life. Preparing for the IQ test is worst than wasting time on this forum. ( jk, i love you guys)</p>
<p>Please give me your opinions as I would love to hear the stories and viewpoints of others. After all, what makes me more right than you?</p>
<p>I agree with you that standardized tests are not wholly indicative of ones degree of intelligence. The SAT in particularly is especially subject to massive variations in scores within a short period of time simply because the questions are so easy but numerous. This gives it a substantial degree of error, particularly at the high ends because it standardized. Despite this, there can be no doubt that SATs and IQ tests have a strong correlation to intelligence. Although it by no means an end-all, the range of someones SATs reflects how intelligent they are. I would even go so far as to claim that one’s percentile score is generally within 5% of their overall intelligence percentile.
That being said I know several intelligent people with low SATs (relatively speaking) and even more unintelligent people with high SATs. A composite SAT score obviosly does not account for the aptitude in a specific area.
Several examples of this:
In my AP Chemistry class I am consistently beaten on Tests by someone whose percentile ranking is almost 10% off from mine. This kid is definitely intelligent and apparently better at chemistry than me. If he majors in chemistry or engineering (another field in which he excels) I have no doubt that he will be highly successful to a degree that I could not imitate.</p>
<p>Another kid I know scored an 1800 on the SATs, but an 800 on the math section. I will readily admit that he is better at mathematical thinking than I am. His composite score does not reflect his level of intelligence.</p>
<p>To summarize this monster of a reply I just wrote, SATs are too subjective and general to adequately predict someone’s potential or intelligence in and of themselves.</p>
<p>To summarize this monster of a reply I just wrote, SATs are too subjective and general to adequately predict someone’s potential or intelligence in and of themselves.</p>
<p>^^^ The Bottom Line. I like how I write these long diatribes when others can summarize in 3 lines. Hmmm :-/</p>
<p>Varsity tennis in the spring, I hope! I did JV last year and we had a bunch of seniors, so hopefully I’ll take a Varsity place.</p>
<p>Also on a more random note, I do a helluva lot better on the ACT than the SAT, which is weird. I’m guessing College Board just hates me, seeing how I sucked on my AP chem test as well.</p>
jk, i love you guys)</p>