Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

My argument is NO, because you can improve your scores by prepping.

What do you guys think?

By Aim78 (Aim78) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 01:05 am: Edit

It measures one TYPE of intelligence. The intelligence to recognize that something as important as the SAT should be taken seriously. Surprisingly, many people don't have this intelligence - these are the morons.

By Davidrune (Davidrune) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 01:20 am: Edit

so it measures foresight?

By Megofou (Megofou) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 01:53 am: Edit

It also measures test taking ability. Some people preform wonderfully and get too nervous at test time to do as well as they should. Others prep like crazy and get better scores than their general intelligence would allow. It's not a great measure of anything...but it's the best they've got.

By Annieivy (Annieivy) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 02:08 am: Edit

I don't know the answer, but I do know that IQ test scores also go up with exposure to the specific test.

By Alexandre (Alexandre) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 05:17 am: Edit

I don't think it does. I go a 1540 on my SAT. My sisters got less than 1100. I consider them smarter than me. Some people test well, others do not. All the SAT measures is how well prepared a person is for the test, and how well they test.

By Idiias (Idiias) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 01:35 pm: Edit

according to princeton test prep, the SAT measures how well you take the SAT.

By Celebrian23 (Celebrian23) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 02:03 pm: Edit

i like that last one, it measures how well you take the sat- and nothing more, why do you think some people can have good gpa's and hard schools and still do poorly on the sat? they're bad standarized test takers, hence also why the low gpa student can get a high score

By Aim78 (Aim78) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 03:11 pm: Edit

Maybe a little something more. It's good at measuring verbal skills, I'll give it that. You need a good vocabulary to do well in Verbal. Math...eh, not so much. Doing well in SAT math doesn't mean you are good at higher math.

By Glowingamy (Glowingamy) on Monday, September 27, 2004 - 06:25 pm: Edit

I think it measures how well you reason and good reasoning is something that factors into "good test taking". You can be good at elementary math reasoning and still be horrible at "higher math", I am

By Robyrm (Robyrm) on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 11:49 am: Edit

they measure your ability to demonstrate a certain type of intelligence on a certain type of test on a certain day

nothing more, nothing less

By Aim78 (Aim78) on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 03:21 pm: Edit

That certain type of intelligence is important, though. You'll notice that people with lower scores are generally less confident in times of stress. They aren't able to think clearly and analytically under a time limit. I think the SAT is a good tool for measuring a student, but of course it's secondary to class rank and SAT II's (which actually do measure intelligence in a subject..except for writing).

By Socialpariah (Socialpariah) on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 04:11 am: Edit

what's all this "good test-taking" stuff
The only reasons y u'd get an answer wrong is:
1) u dont know the answer to the question
2) u made a stupid/silly error

if ur truly intelligent, u wont get a problem wrong for any of the reasons listed above.
and no amount of prep will increase ur score beyond a certain point.

By Megofou (Megofou) on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 09:34 am: Edit

Socialpariah...if you know the answer, but two answers a very similar and you're the sort of person who second guesses, things could go uber wrong. I did it on a quiz yesterday. Randomly changed 'B' to 'A' right before turning it in, knowing the minute it was out of my reach that it was wrong.

It's called thinking too much. I wasn't even stressed out.

Yes, the test is an important measure of how you act under pressure, but there are ways to beat it and IMO it's just not as important as colleges make it. They simply don't have much of a choice.

By Songman (Songman) on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 01:23 pm: Edit

I will say this much.......most of the really successful people that I know that are employed by corporations,or successful lawyers, doctors and chiefs scored well on the SAT's. Certainly there are execeptions, but as a generalization most went to top schools and scored well,otherwise how did they get into the top schools?

By Valpal (Valpal) on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 01:52 pm: Edit

I believe that high intelligence is often reflected in high SAT scores, but I also believe that Low or mediocre SAT scores are not necessarily a reflection of under-intelligence. Far too many variables, other than native intelligence, factor into acheiving a high score on the SAT. Conversely, just as many variables, aside from inherent intellect, often account for poor or mediocre scores. Used as a yardstick, SATs are most reliable as a measure of a person's pre-collegiate academic preparedness. Nothing more. Nothing less.

By Driver (Driver) on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 02:00 pm: Edit

It's funny in a creepy way, but there was an article (WSJ?) last year about how a growing number of employers ask for SAT scores on job applications. My jaw dropped.

By Fhmamii (Fhmamii) on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 06:44 pm: Edit

•••• the SAT's, they're worthless

By Fresca (Fresca) on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 08:02 pm: Edit

It's quite simple. SATs reflect intelligence if you got a high score. They don't if you did not. This according to an informal study among parents of students I counsel.

By Whowasthursday (Whowasthursday) on Thursday, September 30, 2004 - 05:40 pm: Edit

Ok, this is changing the subject slightly, which isn't so terrible because nobody has anything authoritative to say, but I've been wondering about something for a while:

Why is their such a score disparity between, say, New York and Arkansas? Or between a school in the suburbs and one in the inner city? The main factor that I can see is prosperity vs. poverty. Or is it education vs. lack of education? How and why are these two things related? If the SAT does in some capacity measure intelligence, then what do these things have to do with intelligence? Or is it the differences in culture that develop because of these other differences? Very complex...

By Jer728 (Jer728) on Thursday, September 30, 2004 - 06:10 pm: Edit

Socialpariah has it all figured out: If you get an answer wrong it means you don't know the answer to the question.
As the Guinness beer commercials say, "BRILLIANT!".

By Tongos (Tongos) on Thursday, September 30, 2004 - 06:52 pm: Edit

shores #1

By Aim78 (Aim78) on Thursday, September 30, 2004 - 08:47 pm: Edit

It's not even intelligence. It's what you know up until the point that you take the test. People who score low could still have the great minds, they just haven't accumulated all of the vocabulary and math shortcuts that others may have been taught on the first day of school.

But they're still stupid in the sense that they didn't push themselves to learn these things.

By Over30 (Over30) on Thursday, September 30, 2004 - 10:56 pm: Edit

FYI, MENSA used to accept SAT and ACT scores to qualify for membership, but they no longer use these scores if the test was taken after 1994.

This is from their site: "These tests no longer correlate with an IQ test. Note that the acceptance date applies to the date you took the test, not the date you join Mensa. You can still join Mensa by using older scores."

By Feuler (Feuler) on Friday, October 01, 2004 - 12:11 am: Edit

First of all, "intelligence" means a lot of very different things, so allow me to narrow its definition, for the sake of this post only, to one facet: "abstract problem solving ability."

SAT score is a correlate of intelligence. Many other factors, such as prepping, come into play, but ON THE WHOLE, no one can deny that there is a marked correlation. Note: correlation. Not a cause-effect relationship.

Smart people TEND, generally, to score high on the SAT, but being smart will not CAUSE you to score high on the SAT (and boosting your SAT score will certainly not cause you to be smart).

Using the SAT score of a single individual to measure their intelligence is highly sketchy. It is even more sketchy when you broaden the definition of intelligence to include the whole picture.

By Aim78 (Aim78) on Friday, October 01, 2004 - 01:26 am: Edit

We could discuss this to death, but there's really no point except to pad some of our egos and give others of us (like me) incentive to study.

By Wrathofgod64 (Wrathofgod64) on Friday, October 01, 2004 - 01:50 am: Edit

lol, this is HIGHLY off topic but i just had to say it cuz Feuler's post reminded me of it...

in my ap stats class today we JUST discussed that correlation does not equal causation. and my teacher pointed out the fact that during the 1920s or something teacher salaries increased, and so did liquor sales, although there's nothing meaningful u can discern from that except that the economy prospered during that time.

By Jl87d (Jl87d) on Friday, October 01, 2004 - 05:43 am: Edit

"Do the SATs measure intellience?"

No, but they can measure the INTELLIGENCE of people who spell check before posting.

By Appliedmath (Appliedmath) on Friday, October 01, 2004 - 04:07 pm: Edit

I can't beleive spent over a year on this stupid topic. The test is obviously meant to test your intelligence. Many of you may not remember, but your elementary schools conducted IQ tests around 4th-5th grade to determine the student body placement in advanced math programs for the gifted. These people aren't kidding when they mean "gifted," they are talking about an exclusive group of people with such abilities. Colleges aren't kidding when they refer themselves to "elite institutions."

Why does it really matter what it tests? What does it do for you?

By Bballerd7 (Bballerd7) on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 03:51 am: Edit

Intellegence comes in two forms I guess. Book smart and Street smart.

Generally, though, I think (and have heard sometimes) true intelligence lies in a person's mind/brain where he/she is in a situation in every day life and must make a critical decision in determining "what action" to take.

it's kind of hard to explain I guess. Can't really exemplify but it's like you're in a situation where you know you're best friends, only friends in the world are taking advantage of you, what's you're initiative? as basic stuff as that is sheer intelligence. it can go on and on but you get the picture now don't you. everything from drugs, responsibility, words-claims, expectations, compassion, dignity, value, courage, morals, strong beliefs, background, self-esteem, and most of all, maturity.

THAT's what I call "intelligence". Not some SAT score or test result.

By Riflesforwatie (Riflesforwatie) on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 12:27 pm: Edit

"It's quite simple. SATs reflect intelligence if you got a high score. They don't if you did not. This according to an informal study among parents of students I counsel. "

Very true, lol