If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Atlanta Journal Constitution)   The SAT is such a horrible burden on our precious little snowflakes. Solution? Let's get rid of the whole damn thing   (ajc.com) divider line 320
    More: Asinine, SAT scores, disposable income, learning, AJC, exams, college degrees, Danica Patrick, curriculum  
•       •       •

10140 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Sep 2009 at 1:40 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



320 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-09-01 03:19:46 PM  
archeochick: Gothnet: UK System...

US System...These students will have higher GPAs when applying to colleges.


Its weird expecting someones overall score on all subjects to actually represent how they will actually do when studying a specific subject at 18+. Normally in the UK system you have already studied the subject in relative detail at A Level before expanding on it at University.

Then at least my abysmal score in CDT (working with Wood etc) at school doesn't affect the subjects I actually like and intend to carry on with.Considering I have 11 A-C GCSE's and 1 E in CDT that would have annoyed me.

Also they have changed the system in the last few years: 16-17 year olds take 4-5 AS Levels during the first year of college and then at 17-18 specialise that by (usually) dropping 1 or 2 of those to take 3 A Level exams at the end of year two of college.

I haven't actually met anyone who has done that new system yet so I don't know if it actually changes employers/universitys attitudes if you have both an AS and a A Level in, say, Applied Mathematics. I actually think it was brought into stop people who only do one year from going away with nothing.
 
2009-09-01 03:24:59 PM  
russsssman: Kids need to be challenged and tested yes, however ask any teacher that cares whatsoever and they will tell you the same thing. ANY teacher will tell you SAT's are a waste and irrelevant.

Fair enough, if it isn't an accurate measure then replace it. My concern is that this seems to be part of a larger problem in society where if not everyone can succeed at 'it' then get rid of 'it'. Kids need to learn they can't be good at everything, and sometimes you need to be able to tell who is better at what.
 
2009-09-01 03:28:19 PM  
kxs401: I love standardized tests. The SATs, the GREs, and soon, the LSATs... I kick ass at them all, despite my mediocre grades.

High-5!
 
2009-09-01 03:30:03 PM  
rcherr: As a parent, I'm sure sick of the "precious little snowflake" and "crotchfruit" labels. All you creative types can't come up with something a little more fresh?

How about "rcherr's little dumbasses".
 
2009-09-01 03:31:58 PM  
To you retards who think SAT scores are meaningless:

high intelligence persons (>95%ile) w/ at least semi-regular upbringings do not score low. This doesn't mean that they will succeed in college, or in life for that matter. For example, very smart 6th and 7th graders can score respectably. On the other hand, I know many not-so-smart people who have attended (and succeeded at) the best MD, MBA and law programs around - I still wouldn't hire any of them. Apparently hard work can make up for a lot.

/I probably don't think you're stupid b/c you had crappy SAT scores
//I just know you're not a genius
 
2009-09-01 03:34:29 PM  
Witchydiva: . Latin, Greek, calculus, english literature, etc.

I took four years of Latin in high school. That wouldn't phase me at all.

Fish in a Barrel: That would make applying to non-local schools practically impossible for all but the rich

Wasn't the case in the past. If it had been, there's no way Norman Maclean would've been able to be admitted at Dartmouth while living in Montana. And we'd never have A River Runs Through It.
 
2009-09-01 03:35:00 PM  
If you don't think you'll be *tested* at work, you're in for a real surprise.

It has nothing to do with learning or knowledge, it's providing the answer to those who pay you for them.
 
2009-09-01 03:37:51 PM  
MooseMuffin: Red_Fox: Why can't they just go by what your grades were in high school?

That's what they do here in Canada.

Because a B in one school isn't equal to a B in another school. I had a teacher once who didn't really give tests and at the end of each semester called the students up one by one and asked you what grade you thought you deserved, and then gave you that.

Hence, 'standardized tests'.


Thats the other difference with the UK system. Our GCSES are only about 20% tested in school through coursework (it does differ a little by subject. The exams at the end of the year are around 80% of the score and are marked by an Exam Board who are independent and the school have no oppertunity to gripe if they don't like they overall results.

People still claim the grades are getting higher and the exams easier etc but at least Alan Smith from London and Zebedee Barnes from Wales are graded on exactly the same scale.
 
2009-09-01 03:39:33 PM  
boobsrgood: The US now ranks 33rd in the world in infant mortality rate. Guess where we rank much lower that.

And many countries do not count infants who die during or immediately after birth. We do.
 
2009-09-01 03:43:14 PM  
wpmulligan: Red_Fox: Why can't they just go by what your grades were in high school?

That's what they do here in Canada.

Our school district is just ending a 25-year experiment with a seven-point grading scale. 94-100, A; 87-93, B, etc. So all grades are not created equal.


that was the scale my high school used
 
2009-09-01 03:44:20 PM  
WhyteRaven74: Witchydiva: . Latin, Greek, calculus, english literature, etc.

I took four years of Latin in high school. That wouldn't phase faze me at all.

Fish in a Barrel: That would make applying to non-local schools practically impossible for all but the rich

Wasn't the case in the past. If it had been, there's no way Norman Maclean would've been able to be admitted at Dartmouth while living in Montana. And we'd never have A River Runs Through It.


FTFY

/3 years of Latin, 2.5 years of Japanese, .5 years of German
//bombed the crap out of the SAT
 
2009-09-01 03:44:31 PM  
nacho cheese sauce: To you retards who think SAT scores are meaningless:

high intelligence persons (>95%ile) w/ at least semi-regular upbringings do not score low. This doesn't mean that they will succeed in college, or in life for that matter. For example, very smart 6th and 7th graders can score respectably. On the other hand, I know many not-so-smart people who have attended (and succeeded at) the best MD, MBA and law programs around - I still wouldn't hire any of them. Apparently hard work can make up for a lot.

/I probably don't think you're stupid b/c you had crappy SAT scores
//I just know you're not a genius



Because, of course, there's never been a dyslexic genius before, huh? Google it and get back to us.
 
2009-09-01 03:45:26 PM  
PH Neutral: I have a family friend

I have an acquaintence.


I love anecdotal evidence, its so meaningless and fresh.
 
2009-09-01 03:46:07 PM  
you have pee hands:
The only thing on the SATs that's anything close to binging a large bank of information is the analogy section, and having an expansive vocabulary is useful in real life so you don't get confused having conversations with intelligent people.

If all your college education was was binging and purging lots of information, rather than learning how to think about and solve problems and how to communicate more concisely and precisely, you went to a shiatty school.


If you can't solve problems and communicate by the time you are in College, 4 years of rush-rush learning won't be helping you any.

All taking tests prepares you to do effectively is take tests. As a software developer I see this in great detail. Ding-a-lings who think they are gurus because they have learned the minutia of a language's syntax and every tedious, worthless factoid that you could find on Google in 2 seconds in the unlikely event you will ever need it. But they can't write a program to save their lives. The garbage they do write looks like an avalanche of regurgitated textbook examples put together in no coherent order. (most of these guys are failed engineers just FYI)

Colleges should be replaced with vocational training, that way you get the people who do the job well and don't get fooled by people who just do well on tests.
 
2009-09-01 03:47:28 PM  
jaerik: Let's assume as postulate that the SAT/ACT is a poor indication of students' actual intelligence or aptitude.

Devil's advocate here, but... would it not still have value in its sheer pointlessness? It's a monolithic standardized effort that everyone has to take. At the very least, isn't it a good measure of people's willingness to put up with such things and do well anyway?


The important thing is not that it measures anything at all; the important thing is that there are winners and losers. There are kids coming out of college these days, who've never been told they're losers. And we're not talking about marginal cases here. We're talking about kids who would have been left to die of exposure if they had been born with that much loser-ness in practically any time and place other than 20th century America.
These people would be much happier if they knew they were losers, instead of being left to envy the accomplishments of their betters. That's why we need the SATs.
 
2009-09-01 03:49:09 PM  
VideSupra: The supposed merit has to be balanced against the cost of stress, studying, etc that it forces upon the students.

I guess that's where I'm confused. Should we be trying to teach students that high achievement in both academics and later professional life should be possible without "stress?" Or wWithout having effort "forced" on you?

That seems like it would leave our kids even more woefully unprepared for the real world...
 
2009-09-01 03:50:30 PM  
I used to think this kind of thing was only damaging the kids because they'd get a harsh dose of reality once they got out of school.

Now I wonder if I'll end up paying to make sure they don't suffer the pain of unemployment. Or employment.
 
2009-09-01 03:53:36 PM  
jaerik: VideSupra: The supposed merit has to be balanced against the cost of stress, studying, etc that it forces upon the students.

I guess that's where I'm confused. Should we be trying to teach students that high achievement in both academics and later professional life should be possible without "stress?" Or wWithout having effort "forced" on you?

That seems like it would leave our kids even more woefully unprepared for the real world...


Wait till it comes down that instead of firing someone for incompetence you have to make them stand in "time out", firing is far to harsh a punishment and would make them feel inferior.

/The pussification of America is near completion
 
2009-09-01 03:58:27 PM  
WindBreaker: Is there anyone who actually thinks the No Child Gets Ahead law is doing anything worthwhile for the nation?

Honestly, I think that some of the core ideas behind NCLB (which, like you, I sometimes call NCGA) were basically good. But the implementations the law outlines are so incredibly farked-up that they end up being harmful, which is exacerbated by the fact that it isn't even fully-funded.

There does need to be some way to measure student performance, and to measure school performance. But NCLB was a failed experiment in doing this, and it needs to be discarded. Then again, given how many failed educational experiments of the last 30-40 years haven't yet been discarded, I doubt NCLB will be either.
 
2009-09-01 04:00:54 PM  
Funzo: But teachers have been teaching to this test since "No Child Left Behind" kicked in.

Getting rid of it is like getting rid of the finish line of a race you've trained 12 years for.

/SAT sucks. "No Child Left Behind" sucks even worse


You have no earthly idea of what you are talking about, you realize that?
 
2009-09-01 04:08:04 PM  
Standardized tests suck ass. Then again, they measure your ability to do certain amounts of reading, writing, and math work in a quiet, stressful, undisturbed working environment. It's not required to graduate high school, so we don't need to do anything to the system. Parents: If your kid gets under 500 under ANY section on the SAT, they're either handicapped, stupid, or lazy - because that is far below the required knowledge you need to graduate from high school.
 
2009-09-01 04:11:02 PM  
1520 motherfarkers.

/SAT is a retarded evaluation of intelligence.
 
2009-09-01 04:14:49 PM  
Sword and Shield: Pardon?

Leaving it blank is still getting it wrong. You lose 1/4 of a point either way. However, there's still a benefit to guessing- if you can guess right on one out of five, it's a wash. Any more right guesses tilt the balance to guessing being correct.

I remember when I took the SAT, you could always eliminate 2 of the 5 answers as wrong- just too extreme. That gives you a 1/3 chance to get the full point, or a 2/3 chance of getting a 1/4 taken off. The numbers favor guessing, particularly educated guessing.


Just to clarify:

If you answer correctly, you get 1 raw point.
If you leave the question blank, you don't lose any points but you don't gain any points either.
If you answer incorrectly you lose 1/4 of a raw point.

Your mathematical argument is correct though.
If you guess without being able to eliminate any choices you would expect a wash. (1/5)*(1) + (4/5)*(-1/4) = 0

Being able to remove a couple choices would in fact tilt the guessing in your favor. Though there are plenty of other tricks that I teach to "cheat" the test.

/taught SAT math prep courses before.
//pick and choose answers
///pick and choose numbers
////it's a stupid test, why not teach them how to cheat it?
 
2009-09-01 04:18:22 PM  
You know, perhaps it's not the tests that are discriminatory; perhaps it's the home environments that some children are subject to. After all, school curricula is supposed to be standardized. What is not standardized is the raising that each child gets.

Of course, that puts it in the arena of personal responsibility, and squarely upon the shoulders of the parents, something the Democratics are not going to stand for, because it means no amount of money being confiscated and thrown around to grease the wheels of the system will solve the problem.
 
2009-09-01 04:19:33 PM  
I got a 1540/1600 on the SAT and a 36 on the ACT, did no prep for either, and what does that show about me? That I'm good at standardized testing, that's all. These tests are a joke; they only show basic skills and show nothing about what kind of work ethic a person has. I had horrible grades in high school and college, mainly because I'm a lazy slacker. Now I'm out of college trying to find a job and I can't find anything.
 
2009-09-01 04:23:38 PM  
Comsamvimes: I got a 1540/1600 on the SAT and a 36 on the ACT, did no prep for either, and what does that show about me? That I'm good at standardized testing, that's all. These tests are a joke; they only show basic skills and show nothing about what kind of work ethic a person has. I had horrible grades in high school and college, mainly because I'm a lazy slacker. Now I'm out of college trying to find a job and I can't find anything.

sounds like they worked as intended: they measured your aptitude. I don't recall seeing where they were intended to measure "work ethic."
 
2009-09-01 04:24:30 PM  
Lance Uppercut:

Being able to remove a couple choices would in fact tilt the guessing in your favor. Though there are plenty of other tricks that I teach to "cheat" the test.

/taught SAT math prep courses before.
//pick and choose answers
///pick and choose numbers
////it's a stupid test, why not teach them how to cheat it?


I found my own methods of identifying correct answers without looking at the question. Of course doing so might take more time than actually solving say a math problem (it involves identifying similar components).

The SAT is a game. School (up until college) is a game. Smart students know to play along to benefit their future.

I think the SAT is fine, and preparing for it shouldn't be done on school time. Teaching your students to cheat the test further reinforces its futility. The resulting scores are skewed and a poor measure of whatever it's trying to measure.

In my years, everyone had to take the SAT II Writing before it was included in the SAT exam.

/Dropped LSD during the 7th section
//Scored 1470 (out of the old 1600)
 
2009-09-01 04:32:34 PM  
twidgetfitch: The SAT is a game. School (up until college) is a game. Smart students know to play along to benefit their future.

school up to college is baby sitting
college was learning things you wanted to learn, plus crap they forced you to take to be well rounded (read: so we have an excuse to employee history/english teachers)

I would love to see what colleges looked like if you only had to take core classes, no filler.

how many out of work english profs would there be??
 
2009-09-01 04:41:40 PM  
Standardized testing is a waste of time. It's unfortunate so many fools put so much faith in a method that can't accurately assess intelligence or aptitude.
 
2009-09-01 04:43:16 PM  
Took the ACT, not the SAT. Fark them both

/Got a 29 with a hangover
//Far higher than I needed to get into any school in the area.
 
2009-09-01 04:44:08 PM  
I assume the img1.fark.net is for the failmitter, who misuses the snowflake meme and evidently has no understanding of the issue?
 
2009-09-01 04:53:36 PM  
the sat/act supposedly grades your ability to succeed in college. However. it fails to take into consideration that a LOT of people are just really book smart and dont have to try. They do really good on the ACT/SAT, get into college, then take that same work ethic to school where they fail out. I went to college with 7 other high school classmates, all but 1 did better on the ACT than me, 3 failed out in the 1st semester, the 4th failed out at the end of the year. While i dont completely agree with doing away with the SAT or ACT, colleges should, for their own interest, stop weighing it so much
 
2009-09-01 05:02:37 PM  
So much for it's what you learn that counts.
 
2009-09-01 05:09:09 PM  
ne2d: thomps: hear hear, can we please get back to a more class-based college-entrance system?

Yes because a system that depends primarily on whether you can afford the prep classes, tutoring and materials to hone your test-taking skills is totally not class-based.


Hi I went to a public school and took all AP classes of which I paid nothing for except for the administration fees for the test (minimal cost). Some schools will pay for the administration fees for the tests even and if not you can do like our class did and hold a fundraiser. We worked out of all used AP books previous students had.

The SAT is a terrible benchmark. As a matter of fact, you have to take completely worthless SAT prep classes if you want to achieve a good score on the test, and let's be honest the SATs are not about learning but meeting the requirements to get into a college of your choosing. The AP classes are the best college prep you can have and serve as a MUCH better and broad assessment of a student's knowledge than a cheesy test that only recently even had a literary (written) component added to it.

I am glad they broached the subject of getting rid of the SATs as the universal standard of entrance exam into colleges. The majority of the curriculum on the SATs isn't even applicable to what you are going to experience in college. Analogies? Basic Geometry? Long Division and tricks you are taught in intermediate school? Worthless material for a worthless test. School has ceased to be about learning a while ago and everything is more so about teaching kids how to make a better score on certain tests in order to receive more funding.
 
2009-09-01 05:15:28 PM  
Testing in general at public schools need to be looked at. My kids come home it seems every week saying 'Hey dad, had another school test today.' In my mind I am thinking, why are they taking so many dang tests? When do they have time to learn anything. Tests such as the ACT and SAT are not a good or consistent judge of a persons knowledge nor is it a gauge on how well they will do in college. I have seen students with high scores drop and and people with low scores go on and succeed in grad school. Because so many people look at these as end all assessments, how students do can greatly impact local schools, especially in the way of funding.
 
2009-09-01 05:17:45 PM  
We've often heard that schools are not teaching knowledge or critical thinking, but instead are only teaching kids how to pass tests. This might explain why the majority of high school graduates cannot balance a checkbook.
 
2009-09-01 05:26:06 PM  
Primary admissions factors should be:

Course Load
Recommendations
Essays
Interview
GPA

In that order. Students who didn't attend schools where IB/AP/Honors classes were offered will be evaluated with that in mind.

/Attends a (very good) SAT optional school
//Never took it.
 
2009-09-01 05:27:29 PM  
sinner saved by grace: Testing in general at public schools need to be looked at. My kids come home it seems every week saying 'Hey dad, had another school test today.' In my mind I am thinking, why are they taking so many dang tests? When do they have time to learn anything. Tests such as the ACT and SAT are not a good or consistent judge of a persons knowledge nor is it a gauge on how well they will do in college. I have seen students with high scores drop and and people with low scores go on and succeed in grad school. Because so many people look at these as end all assessments, how students do can greatly impact local schools, especially in the way of funding.

Schools really should move away from tests in favor of quizzes. Quizzes can be immediately administered after a lecture or a week of covering material and then ample time is given to go over it, this helps solidify what is being taught so students can actually learn and see where and why mistakes were made. Tests just say "you are wrong" or "you are right" very seldom do teachers go over the answers after a test was graded (Advanced BC Calculus was the only class I had this happen in)

All tests are good for is covering how much the student remembers in most cases and not how much the student knows, unless the test is a critical analysis in written form where you can see thought process. By any case I think the whole education system including most colleges is a load of crap from the material they teach to the manner they do it in. This isn't a bashing on public schools, just schools as a whole. I actually had some pretty solid classes and teachers with the AP curriculum, however outside of that and in college was a completely different story. As I got closer and closer to being done with my Senior year back in high school, the less and less emphasis was placed on learning and more toward entrance exam testing, bumping your GPA and class ranking etc. The same held true with college was well surprisingly. Out of my college experience there was maybe 1 semester out of the entire time that was actually solid.
 
2009-09-01 05:31:21 PM  
OgreMagi: OgreMagi: boobsrgood: The US now ranks 33rd in the world in infant mortality rate. Guess where we rank much lower that.

And many countries do not count infants who die during or immediately after birth. We do.

most of the ones above us do...

/hint, all the westernized countries count the same way we do and your argument has been debunked a brazillion times
//on the list where they don't compensate for this we rank 181...
 
2009-09-01 05:32:33 PM  
SAvoodoo: OgreMagi: OgreMagi: boobsrgood: The US now ranks 33rd in the world in infant mortality rate. Guess where we rank much lower that.

And many countries do not count infants who die during or immediately after birth. We do.


most of the ones above us do...

/hint, all the westernized countries count the same way we do and your argument has been debunked a brazillion times
//on the list where they don't compensate for this we rank 181...
///sorry for the html vomit the first time around
 
2009-09-01 05:35:50 PM  
hitlersbrain: If you can't solve problems and communicate by the time you are in College, 4 years of rush-rush learning won't be helping you any.

All taking tests prepares you to do effectively is take tests. As a software developer I see this in great detail. Ding-a-lings who think they are gurus because they have learned the minutia of a language's syntax and every tedious, worthless factoid that you could find on Google in 2 seconds in the unlikely event you will ever need it. But they can't write a program to save their lives. The garbage they do write looks like an avalanche of regurgitated textbook examples put together in no coherent order. (most of these guys are failed engineers just FYI)

Colleges should be replaced with vocational training, that way you get the people who do the job well and don't get fooled by people who just do well on tests.


College isn't rush-rush learning, unless you're talking about cupcake university.

If you're a software developer, you probably work with some people with engineering degrees. Find one who went to a real school, and ask them if four years of engineering classes helped them learn to solve problems. Would more real life training benefit people? Sure. But your experience is totally different from mine. I have a degree in computer engineering, and I don't know anyone who memorized language syntax. There was no reason to do it. Psuedocode was acceptable on most of our tests. Many of the people I run into who had purely vo-tech training learned a tool or two and aren't particularly adept at learning tools and environments with which they're not familiar.
 
2009-09-01 05:46:23 PM  
The problem in Georgia isn't that our kids are more stupid than others (though we sure have some droolers), but that the State Board of Education insists on so many kids taking the SAT -- even though who don't have a chance at college. Obviously, this is going to hammer the averaged. I don't know why they don't get back to the system they had in place when I was in high school here 30 years ago: The bright kids, and the ones who really want it and try hard, are placed in a college prep curriculum. Others are shipped off to the local vocational-technical school to learn a trade and don't waste the teachers' time and efforts. We have to accept that only 15-18% oh high school graduates are qualified to attend college and that only about 50-60% of these will be able to complete a post-secondary course of study. These numbers haven't changed in decades, but the sense of entitlement sure has. College is supposed to be for our best and brightest. It isn't a right, but something that is earned. One either cuts the muster or doesn't and colleges should not be burdened with students who have no business being there. Those who qualify should not have to worry about how they are going to pay for it.
 
2009-09-01 06:03:03 PM  
Gig103: The fact that the first tip is "better to leave it blank than answer it wrong" tells you that it's a stupid test.

That's good advice in general, unless you're a politician of course.
 
2009-09-01 06:04:33 PM  
Mediocre grades in HS. 32 on ACT's w/o studying. 1120 on SAT. Graduated top 5 in my class in college. Which of these do you think I thought more accurately depicted my test taking ability and intelligence?
 
2009-09-01 06:05:36 PM  
you have pee hands: hitlersbrain: If you can't solve problems and communicate by the time you are in College, 4 years of rush-rush learning won't be helping you any.

All taking tests prepares you to do effectively is take tests. As a software developer I see this in great detail. Ding-a-lings who think they are gurus because they have learned the minutia of a language's syntax and every tedious, worthless factoid that you could find on Google in 2 seconds in the unlikely event you will ever need it. But they can't write a program to save their lives. The garbage they do write looks like an avalanche of regurgitated textbook examples put together in no coherent order. (most of these guys are failed engineers just FYI)

Colleges should be replaced with vocational training, that way you get the people who do the job well and don't get fooled by people who just do well on tests.

College isn't rush-rush learning, unless you're talking about cupcake university.

If you're a software developer, you probably work with some people with engineering degrees. Find one who went to a real school, and ask them if four years of engineering classes helped them learn to solve problems. Would more real life training benefit people? Sure. But your experience is totally different from mine. I have a degree in computer engineering, and I don't know anyone who memorized language syntax. There was no reason to do it. Psuedocode was acceptable on most of our tests. Many of the people I run into who had purely vo-tech training learned a tool or two and aren't particularly adept at learning tools and environments with which they're not familiar.


I tend to agree, from my experience in the gaming industry. People who attend vocational schools come out knowing one or two toolsets and specific direct applications very well. If you want a particle effects designer, and you hire a vocational-school trained guy who's really good at particle effects, you're fine.

But because they lack the generic knowledge that comes from a general college computer science curriculum, god help you if you ask them to learn anything else on the job. If your game needs some web integration on the back end, a 4-year university CS student will probably have at least a little bit of background and be able to muddle through. But your legion of highly specialized vocational folks will be entirely useless.

People who theoretically could wear many hats on the job, or have demonstrated through a degree that they are potentially capable of wearing many hats at once, are more valuable from a hiring perspective, especially in a small and agile company. (Although it's not just college degrees that do it -- demonstrating the same thing through resume experience is just as good. It's simply more rare, is all.)
 
2009-09-01 06:22:48 PM  
Thoguh: GOOD! The SATs are a complete waste of time. They don't test intelligence, they test your ability to test. I took one of those prep courses and it was full of tricks (or 'hacks', if you will) for answering quickly.

I don't see how this isn't a test of intelligence. If you are smart enough to know the rules of a test, you should be smart enough to know how to properly beat the test at its own game. There are plenty of cheap, easily readable books at the local Barnes and Noble that explain how the test works.

As far as tutoring and Kaplan, to be perfectly honest I don't know how much it helps. Always used the standard study books. I would qualify to teach Kaplan courses though, so I can't say how helpful it is to others. I'm sure teachers tend to inflate their numbers.

Schools in the U.S. are not all equal, some valedictorians from some schools wouldn't be in the top 50% at others. So it probably helps a little.

Frankly I think most parents can't come to terms with the fact that their kid isn't going to be the best in anything. Why do people have to raise children to think that the point in life is to be better than someone else's kid? Besides a good 4-yr private college is a f*cking waste of money, IMO.

/1340
//in 1993, before they dumbed it down
 
2009-09-01 06:25:06 PM  
Gig103: The fact that the first tip is "better to leave it blank than answer it wrong" tells you that it's a stupid test.

That would tell me that an unanswered question gets scored differently than an answered question. Which sounds like a good test. Knowing when to say "I don't know" is a very hard skill most people cannot pull off. They just keep running their whore mouths anyway.
 
2009-09-01 06:40:45 PM  
Just give them an XBox running GTA4, see how high their score is, and then dump them off in a sh*tty club with really loud, crappy music and see how long it takes them to get laid.

It's all they're gonna be doing, anyhoo.
 
2009-09-01 06:43:41 PM  
Shut_up_and_fark_me: There is nothing funnier than a writing section scored automatically by computer. Didn't finish either essay, got a 6.

Same (for the GRE). Had a good (albeit private) laugh at my friend who got a 4.5.

SAT: 1510 composite; could have done better had I bothered to study but I didn't give a sufficient shiat.
 
2009-09-01 06:44:16 PM  
I just did what Derrick Rose did: got someone else to take it for me.
 
Displayed 50 of 320 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report