Hacker News Reader

Comment by DanielStraight | Hacker News Reader

Can you explain what you mean by "knowing how to take the test"?

I ask because I got a very respectable SAT score and only took one practice test. All my other studying was just working problems of the type which are on the test. I found the only skill required was knowing how to solve the problems asked.

I have heard this said many times, that standardized tests are just testing your skill at taking tests. But it does not match with my perception of my experience. I am willing to be shown otherwise, which is why I ask.

View on HN

In high school my calculus teacher was part of an experiment where they gave teachers the SAT. They gave the teachers the regular version of the SAT as a baseline and then gave the teachers a special version that contained only the answers choices in the multiple choice without the questions. Teachers essentially had to use their intuition about the types of answers the SAT looks for to take the test. The teachers each scored in the same approximate percentile as when they all received both the questions and answers. That is to say, the teachers that knew how to analyze the test itself (not the questions) scored better than those who didn't.

Am I reading you right? Are you saying teachers scored the same whether they were able to read the questions before answering or not? If so, do you have a link to this study? I feel like this is an extraordinary claim that would require extraordinary evidence.

I think the claim was the same relative to other people under the same conditions, rather than the same relative to invariants like getting all questions correct. That's certainly much more believable.

Yes, correct. They scored in the same percentile, not the same nominal score.

Nailed it. At least in my day, tactics were the most important factor in standardized test (SAT, GRE) scores. You could draw some tables to solve the logic puzzles, and skim the "reading comprehension" BS looking for keywords based on the questions. The only thing that took serious cramming was vocabulary.

That said, SAT prep is a great way to separate rich, anxious parents from their money, given that in NY (where else...) tutoring companies charge up to $800/hr.

For example, experienced standardized test takers know how to identify correct answers without even reading the questions: http://satninja.com/sat-critical-reading/how-to-answer-sat-c.... These kinds of advantages become apparent the more you take the test. Sure, it's possible to do well by simply by knowing the concepts tested, but you can also gain a huge advantages with just exposure and experience taking practice tests.

I think I understand better now the claim being made.

It isn't so much that someone who knows the material won't do well unless they know the test, it's that someone who knows the material less well can do better simply by learning some tricks.

That, and competitive admissions mean that you can get outsized returns by investing in a bit of high-grade test prep. A 90th percentile student who takes test prep might wind up getting the same score (and the same Ivy League appeal!) as a 98th percentile student who didn't.

By this I mean being familiar with the types of problems the SAT asks, and being aware of gotchas / features of these problems. Familiarity with the test makes it easier to take the test effectively to save time for the few genuinely challenging questions in each section.

The material on the SAT is super easy. It's about knowing how to read and analyze simple text and being able to do basic high school math. Despite this, kids taking advanced (or college-level) courses in math and the humanities don't do terribly well on the SAT on the first try. SAT prep is about mastering the esoteric parts of the SAT, not its basic subject-matter.

EDIT: I was taking college-level courses before the SAT, and I got a 1700-1900 on the first few tries. After a summer taking a dozen tests, I got to a 2280. The only new genuine "knowledge" I picked up was the meaning of some arcane words. The rest was familiarity.

Maybe it's just been too long, but I don't remember any gotchas. Do you have any examples?

Obviously you want to know what types of problems will be included, but familiarizing yourself with the types of problems seems so basic that it would hardly take multiple practice tests.

Again, it's been a long time since I've taken the SAT, and I only took it once, so I'll be the first to admit I could be wrong. I'm just trying to understand a comment I've heard many times and never understood.

Multiple choice answers often follow a pattern, after all they are trying to get you to pick the wrong answer when you make a mistake along the way. This causes the answers to group around the right answer. Test makers understand this and try and avoid telegraphing like that, but there is still some level of it going on.

Otherwise story: some preparation boosted my score 200+. And I dare to say I am not alone.

Try something like the GMAT.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com