Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!husc6!panda!awr From: awr@panda.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.att,misc.kids Subject: Re: SAT Practice Software Recommendations? Message-ID: <2654@panda.UUCP> Date: Thu, 19-Mar-87 16:29:13 EST Article-I.D.: panda.2654 Posted: Thu Mar 19 16:29:13 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 21-Mar-87 06:37:16 EST References: <865@mtunb.UUCP> <343@houxa.UUCP> <2189@calmasd.GE.COM> Reply-To: awr@panda.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers) Distribution: na Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass. Lines: 81 Xref: mnetor comp.sys.apple:889 comp.sys.ibm.pc:2608 comp.sys.att:276 misc.kids:921 In article <2189@calmasd.GE.COM> jnp@calmasd.GE.COM (John Pantone) writes: >In article <343@houxa.UUCP>, mel1@houxa.UUCP (M.HAAS) writes: > >> ..... I went ahead and bought Barron's SAT >> for the PC ..... >> However, the kids won't touch it. I don't blame them! I can't think of anything more booooring than cramming for something as worthless as a standard test (except actually taking one, that is)! I took the GREs in the Fall of '85. I hadn't taken anything like that since my (gag) SATs in '67, so I thought it might be prudent to brush up on my test-taking skills first. I tend to do well on such tests, but nevertheless couldn't believe what drudgery preparing for them can be! I feel extremely sympathetic toward any high-school kid who has to go through it (especially if s/he isn't a natural-born test taker) - particularly when you consider the peer pressure on him/her (negligible on an adult taking the GREs mostly as a formality). >> ....... (she took the PSAT and didn't do too well considering her >> grades) > >Maybe I full of beans - but how can you effectively study for an >Aptitude test? Oh sure, you could become more comfortable with the >"style" and format of the test, but improving your aptitude ?? The myth that the SATs had anything to do with "aptitude" (and that any attempts at studying for them were therefore futile) was perpetuated on generations of gullible high school students. Nowadays kids (and parents) are too hip to swallow the ETS party line; they know damn well that the SATs can't hope to measure anything other than test-taking ability, and therefore invest considerable time (and money) improving that. (I suspect that that has a *lot* to do with the much-vaunted recent jump in SAT scores.) > >You have noticed a phenomenon which has bothered admissions counselors >for years (I have been on an admissions council) - Grades are almost >completely UNCORRELATED with the SAT! Plenty of good grade earners >are just that - and plenty of poor grade earners have lots of >(un-used) aptitude. There were studies *twenty years ago* which proved *exactly* what you pointed out above, and in fact found no meaningful correlation between SAT scores and anything other than 1) parental education and 2) parental income. So why do admissions councils use them? Well, they *do* give Prestige U. a ready- made rationalization for limiting the number of hoi polloi admitted to their hallowed halls: "Oh, we'd *looooove* to admit more applicants from {ethnic| working-class|non-college} backgrounds - we just cawn't find [piously intoned] *qualified* ones! Why, just *look* at their SATs!" >The SAT attempts to measure the applicants ability to reason, and >utilize existing knowledge - I would be very skeptical of anything >which claimed to be very effective in raising SAT scores - short of >a good long school career! Replace "attempts" with "pretends" in the above statement, and you'll be a lot closer to reality. The fact is that the SATs are a test just like any other, and can be prepared for in much the same manner: taking sample tests to acclimatize to the test format and identify problem areas for further practice, plus (in this case) attention to the mechanics of test-taking (allocation of time, avoiding traps set for the unwary, guessing more effectively by weeding out obvious wrong responses, etc.). That's basically what I did when preparing for the aforementioned GRE's, and I raised my scores from high-600s on the first practice test I took to 780V/790Q/780A on the real thing. The above is also what J. Richkid III's parents pay $200 to Stan Kaplan (group instruction) or $500 to Princeton Review (private cram course) for, and by all indications they're getting their money's worth. (As the SK/PR ads say, "Better SATs mean better colleges!") Of course, Joe Poorkid could probably do the same thing himself with a good $10 cram guide (to PR's credit, they do publish one), but chances are that *his* parents would balk at spending even that! AWR PS: I saw an ad in a New York Times college supplement a year or so ago: "Former Ivy League admissions councillor will review your son or daughter's college application." For about $1K, as I understand. What next - "ETS data entry clerk will review your son or daughter's answers to the SATs"???