<p>This is complete horseshat</p>
<p>“Bonus Note: I cannot help but laugh everytime I see the bad test taker excuse.”</p>
<p>Hold in your snickering. For many students, tests do not provide the best platform to demonstrate understanding. An obvious example is people with test anxiety–it is hard to determine whether the answer is b or c when you are more concerned about stifling the feeling that the ceiling is about to implode on you–but there are many more reasons that may cause an intelligent student to stumble on the SAT. I admit that I am a perfectionist. When I answer a question on the SAT, it is hard for me to just fill in the bubble and be done with it–the information sticks in my head and follows me to the next question. It can be difficult to solve a parabolic equation if you’re still obsessing over a reading excerpt back in the verbal section. I absolutely love writing, and I am use to meticulously editing and re-editing my work. The SAT essay poses a challenge, because I hold myself up to high standards. I am accustomed to having the luxury of five minutes to determine just the right word to describe the sheen of an apple. When I’m taking the SAT, and I’m forced to just slap down the first word that comes to my mind, my decision will haunt me through the remainder of my essay–did I choose the right word? Should I go back and change it? Whoops…time is up. </p>
<p>Many of the world’s discoveries and innovations were born out of an overly-analytical mind. But on the SAT, the obsessing that may have helped a student receive a first place in the science fair or an A+ on a term paper is to his detriment.</p>
<p>I agree with a lot, up until the “g” argument. The SAT tests intelligence very well in reading comprehension and mathematical/analytical skill. That’s not to slight the SAT- those two things are often necessary to succeed.</p>
<p>I personally agree with Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory. I think one can be bad at reading and math and still be extremely innovative in their thought, for example. Or creative. Or artistically gifted. And A LOT of people do extremely well on the SAT and severely lack all of those other things. The SAT is probably the most reliable indicator that colleges can use, but unfortunately they and no other test can tell the entire story. </p>
<p>Then again, SAT’s are a much better indicator than extracurriculars, which more and more measure how desperate a person is to go to a high-ranking college.</p>
<p>
According to the LACK of a study showing high correlation between the new SAT and IQ, and the fact that high IQ societies only used the old SAT for admission purposes, but not the new one. Let me know if you do find a study relating the two though.</p>
<p>@soulandromance- about ECs becoming more meaningless and more a measure of “how desperate a person is to go to a high-ranking college”, I think that colleges can see when an EC is just a resume builder versus something someone is truly dedicated to…Even if I weren’t trying to get into a “high ranking college” I would still be doing the same ECs that I am now because they really mean something to me, as opposed to a friend of mine who got first chair in some orchestra and then quit because that’s all she wanted to do. I think that ECs, if looked at closely, are actually better indicators than the SATs; they show a unique dedication to something a little more real world than multiple choice questions.</p>
<p>I was actually kidding, but I can see that the connotation came off as kinda bitter. I don’t refute or agree with the poster’s standpoint, I am done with the damn test. Make of others’ scores what you will, I am just glad I never have to take another one, intelligent or not.</p>
<p>Indeed. Mensa, which is, I believe the largest and oldest of the high-IQ societies, merely notes that PSATs after 5/93, and SATS after 1/94 are not acceptable. One presumes that they did this because they found a lack of correlation. I do recall that ages ago they made a point of emphasizing allowing SAT scores.</p>
<p>I would say that it is reasonable to presume a modest correlation between SAT 1 and IQ, but there are a great many reasons that this is not a strong correlation.<br>
- SAT 1 is strongly correlated to income
- SAT 1 makes limited allowances for processing issues including dyslexia, ADD, and slow processing speed.
- SAT 1 can be studied for. How much this matters is debatable, but there are certainly individuals here who have raised their scores far more than would make sense if the SAT 1 was perfectly correlated to IQ.
- SAT 1 is , essentially, a low ceiling test. There are no tremendously difficult questions on it.
- SAT 1 does not measure several important areas of intelligence (which are measured by standard IQ tests ).
- SAT 1 is heavily biased in language
- SAT 1 requires a certain amount of math which disadvantaged students may not always have access to.
- SAT 1 is biased against ‘slow/deep thinkers’. (THe sorts of people who will ponder a question for a long time find taking the SAT agony.)
- SAT 1 essay is very strongly biased against writers who cannot write quickly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t believe that I have ever read anyone claiming that such a correlation exists.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The ceiling is certainly lower than that for some IQ tests. Nonetheless, the combination of the rarity of perfect scores and the consistency with which people can achieve perfect scores indicates that the ceiling is still quite high.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The vast majority of students have the requisite math by their junior and senior years. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Preparing effectively is especially important for such people. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. Preparation, again, is important for such people.</p>
<p>^ agree, especially on point 9. Preparation can help people write significantly faster and achieve a much much much higher score. Case in point: me.</p>
<p>
I agree. Although they may have their own internal data, it is more likely they have just not been convinced as of yet.</p>
<p>I believe the Frey/Detterman study is based on the pre-2005 exam. The addition of a writing section was not the only change in the 2005 exam. The Collegeboard also eliminated analogies from the verbal section and quantitative comparisons from the math section. They also claim to have made the exam more difficult. Whether the post 2005 exam is easier or more difficult than the earlier exam is open to debate, but it certainly is structurally different. IMO, if you are going to use a regression formula to predict an IQ score from an admissions test, you should be using the same version of the exam that was used to generate the regression. </p>
<p>It is likely there is some correlation between intelligence and performance on the SAT. Heck, there is probably some correlation between IQ and performance on your written driving test. I’m sure the SAT is a stronger predictor of IQ. But it is also likely that the high IQ societies, have not yet seen a study that convinces them of that fact. Therefore they don’t accept the later exams.</p>
<p>@Silverturtle - BTW - Excellent SAT guide on the other thread.</p>
<p>^ Thank you.</p>
<p>I have yet to meet someone whose SAT score surprises me. I have met many whose GPA surprises me.</p>
<p>It is quite obvious that the SAT measures intelligence I would think, just as much as how well you play most video games measures intelligence roughly as effectively. </p>
<p>Though I don’t see the relevance of this. After all, intelligence only deals with how quickly a subject can process input information and output results, not how impressive or skillful those results are. </p>
<p>Even pure mathematical genius (and I say genius in the sense of wisdom and brightness, not intelligence) has nothing to do with how fast you can think or how quickly, it has to do with how creative and profound your ideas are.</p>
<p>Looks like fun. Bump!</p>
<p>The SAT is a combined measure of g and how hard you pushed yourself to study. The purpose of the SAT is to measure how successful you will be your fist year in college. your success in college is, guess what, determined by g and how hard you study. SAT is a rough test of iq, but the fact that it can be gamed makes it an even better test in my opinion.</p>
<p>This topic has been debated over and over again. The point of fact is this: people who score well on the SAT are inclined to believe that the SAT measures strict intelligence, thus making them biased towards that certain argument; on the other hand, those who score poorly on the SAT are inclined to believe that the SAT is biased towards affluent families, etc…</p>
<p>Of course, the same applies to the ACT, although I feel many here on CC fail to realize this. Yes, to those on CC, the ACT may seem easier than the SAT. But, one fact which many fail to notice is that the sum total of people who take the ACT and SAT and claim that the ACT is “easier” is comparatively low.</p>
<p>College aptitude/intelligence/readiness tests will always remain faulty, since they really don’t test anything. A high level of intelligence will not constitute a successful college freshman, nor will a low level constitute an unsuccessful one.</p>
<p>Just my two cents.</p>
<p>SAT obviously measures how smart you are because I scored high on it.</p>
<p>I almost wholeheartedly disagree. Although the SAT is obviously a measure of one’s intelligence to an extent, it is not fair to say that people who claim to be bad test takers are lying and that they are actually just stupid. I have a 1980 composite, from twice (and a 31 ACT from three times), but the reason my scores aren’t higher isn’t because I’m stupid. It’s because the time constraints stress me out. I try and pace myself to get all the questions correctly and run out of time. I’m not necessarily a a BAD test taker, since my scores are considered above average, but my test scores do not accurately reflect my ability to think critically and draw conclusions. </p>
<p>I know that I am intelligent, and I don’t need a test to tell me whether I am.</p>
<p>I didn’t know intelligence levels can be defined by how well you do on a test that makes you solve algebra problems and define random vocabulary words you will never see again. Of course, you would have to define intelligence, since there are many forms of it. Either way, you suck.</p>
<p>The Essay is flawed
Random grammar rules have no bearing on innate vocabulary.</p>
<p>Honestly the only sections that have any resemblance of an IQ test are the reading comp questions and the math section (which is albeit, too easy)</p>