Hacker News Reader

Comment by ouid | Hacker News Reader

when I took the SAT, I first took a practice test and scored quite poorly on it, but when I realized that all of the things I had missed were tiny details, or very literal interpretations of questions, I scored very well on the actual test. The same was true of the math test, as well. The SAT is basically testing how easy it is to fool you with a trick question.

However, in defense of the SAT, I'd wager that this is pretty strongly correlated with critical reasoning and ability to succeed in college and beyond.

View on HN

I have read that the SAT is basically an IQ test in disguise. If that's true, there's no need for it to correspond to real-world skills. That's not what it's meant to test, and the only reason it deals with vocabulary and mathematics is to dodge the controversy surrounding IQ tests.

This is by no means the only perspective on the SAT, but it's a reasonable one.

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/04/why-should-...

I'd say that's fairly accurate—in general, it doesn't really test for skills you would learn above 8th Grade, and mainly just tries to see what you're capable of.

An IQ test (there are multiple types) tests crystallized intelligence and fluid intelligence. The way I have heard them described is basically crystallized intelligence is a test of accumulated knowledge/previously seen patterns versus fluid intelligence being the ability to see a pattern in a novel situation and figure out how to solve the novel situation (on-the-spot problem solving). They are linked. I have also read from different sources that high fluid reasoning can lead to an increase in knowledge acquired. For the SAT to be a genuine determinant of the difference in ability we would have to have all people taking the exam to have the same preparation(school/sub-culture/country/teachers and pre-test work). One could compare it to an IQ test in the sense that it is testing learned information with novel problems? IIRC the test correlates with college/university success because it can showcase the combination of inherent skill and preparation necessary to succeed in a college environment (I would assume this is heavily debated).

Here is the Wikipedia article on the difference if you want to look up sources or dive into this topic more: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intel...

If you want to research the different types of IQ tests: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient

Prior to 1994, the SAT could serve as an IQ test. Scores could be used for admission into high-IQ clubs.

The 1994 changes slightly broke that, particularly at the high end. Subsequent changes, for example the removal of analogies, have moved to test away from measuring IQ. Today it really isn't an IQ test at all. It's an achievement test.

> It's an achievement test.

what's that?

Personally, I heavily prefer the SAT over the ACT—it's a very no-nonsense, clean way to see the capabilities of a person, and isn't relying too heavily on questions related to a specific subset of a topic.

It's definitely a better indicator of performance and capability than a GPA, in my opinion.

I am extremely familiar with both tests. What version of the SAT are you referring? The current version (re-designed a few years ago) is nearly identical to the ACT with the exception of integrating graph-reading questions into the reading and writing sections rather than having their own section.

Current. I took both roughly two years ago for Duke TIP.

Which did you take first?

I took them within a month of eachother, but I can't recall which I took first. I got my results back first on the SAT, so possibly it?

(On a sidenote, it's annoying that the SAT site didn't allow me to use things on it related to my test scores because of the age I got them at. Suppose it's legally mandated though.)

I have known people that didn’t budge on their scores and people that shifted by 200 points on the old 1600 point scale. Not sure how much it has changed over the years. I would wager that test taking in general is at least somewhat of a skill. The more multiple choice tests I took the better I became at them. There seems to be an underlying pattern most teachers use.

Yes, it’s really more about eliminating the wrong answers, than getting the correct one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com