<p>Because, generally, they don’t take the SAT more than once or twice; but if they took it, say, 5 times, they could get a 2400 as long as they had the right combination of luck/lack of careless errors. Again, if, however, someone always gets a 2400, then, chances are, they have impeccable fluid intelligence (higher in the speed category), and probably finish with more time to spare, and can check for stupid mistakes.</p>
<p>i agree with some of your points but the fact of the matter is intelligence is far more comprehensive then one standardized test. intelligence has many facets and just to pigeon hole it into math, critical reading, and writing is foolish. intelligence can manifest itself in many different forms in many different areas so i do not believe this test measures intelligence.</p>
<p>And by the way, I am unbiased as I have not taken the SAT yet; the only score I have so far is a 36 ACT. I will be taking the SAT this October; I do not plan on studying because I want to see what I can do. </p>
<p>@Silver – Did you prep for the SAT at all? (Don’t worry, I know you are highly intelligent, probably genius, and that you could have probably got a 2400 with no prep). My serious question is: is it possible to actually get a 2400 with literally no preparation?</p>
<p>@Ivysaur: I will PM you.</p>
<p>The SAT doesn’t measure intelligence period, it measures intelligence as it pertains to reading, writing, and math. While these skills are important, they are by no means the only skills important to success.</p>
<p>I am in agreement with silverturtle as well as various others who say that there is a strong correlation between SAT and intelligence. </p>
<p>As a personal example that I feel is somewhat averse to this idea is my most recent SAT exam. I scored a 2360 with a 760 in math section, just one question wrong. I know exactly which question I missed, too. The reason I missed it is because I misread the question and put in the number “1” instead of the number “2” into the question where it was supposed to be for calculation. Thus my answer was wrong, only because of that small mistake, and I lost my perfect score. I feel that the score difference due to these kinds of similar, silly errors does not correlate with intelligence, however. Same thing with someone who may have simply misbubbled. </p>
<p>Just my two cents.</p>
<p>Intelligence probably correlates with any kind of basic problem solving.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would argue that is the Scholastic Ambition Test. If the elite colleges tell you its important, no its very important. Check that its REALLY VERY IMPORTANT. And a student doesn’t prepare then it might say much more about their ambition then their aptitude.</p>
<p>If HYPSM colleges started asking for mile times, there would be a certain group of people on the track every day. And some could say that mile times have nothing to do with intelligence. But lower mile times have everything to do with working hard which in turn has something to do with what is required in college life.</p>
<p>I agree that SAT scores certainly correlate with one’s work ethic as well, though not as much as does GPA.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree. If the OP cites a study that SAT prep only gives a small bump of 10-30 points (each subject?) then why would just taking the test 5 times allow someone to get a perfect score? My daughter has already taken 5 practice tests and is not close to perfection. Why would taking 5 tests teach every idiom, learn every vocabulary word and master each math principle? I am not trying to be combative and obviously you are very bright, but I hold you and Silver Turtle in great respect for what you have done. And for your efforts to demystify the SAT and give a lot of other people hope that they might have similar results. But I think perfection is much more difficult than just taking 5 tests</p>
<p>Many of the studies I’ve seen online regarding SAT to IQ correlation were done before 2004 and call the SAT the Scholastic Assessment Test. I was just wondering then, if the strong correlation was only with the M+V part of the SAT, but not with writing. This is just speculation, but does anyone really know? I think it would make sense that the writing has little correlation, due to the subjective essay and etc. from that awful section.</p>
<p>There have been studies that show the writing section is the most indicative of all the sections of the SAT in terms of measuring success in college.</p>
<p>Yes, but I am discussing the SAT writing in relation to IQ, not success in college - or actually, college GPA.</p>
<p>I have a feeling this is not a politically correct post.</p>
<p>As I said, the OP sounds like a Eugenicist, however correct he may be.</p>
<p>writing an essay takes way more effort than bubbling multiple choice answers</p>
<p>The SAT does not measure intelligence. The SAT measures how much work you can do in a certain amount of time. I’m sure under other circumstances many people could get 2400’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not sure what circumstances you are referring to.</p>
<p>Here’s more proof that only the M+V old SAT have a high correlation to IQ. From the SAT wikipedia page,
It doesn’t seem like any of the high IQ societies use the new SAT with writing for admission, probably because it doesn’t have the same level of correlation with IQ as the old test did.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>According to what study? Speculatively, I would agree, but there is no data that I know that indicates this. There is, however, data for the other two sections, which I have linnked to many times on CC and can be found in a discussion in my newly posted guide.</p>