Khan Academy SAT Prep
khanacademy.org
khanacademy.org
https://www.khanacademy.org/sat
I have been looking forward to being able to tell all my friends that they don't have to worry about test prep for the SAT anymore, as that is now free and online through Khan Academy. For people who are still inclined to worry about standardized tests, I will mention that this preparation course will undoubtedly provide useful cross-training for the ACT college admission test and for many other standardized tests. If you are still worried after all that, I have one more tip about standardized tests, a tip that has worked to make all such tests easy for me and for my children.
READ, READ
To learn how to score well on a standardized test reading section, the number one piece of advice is READ, READ, READ, and READ. Read about what you like to know more about. Read things that are fun for you. Find books and magazines about interesting topics and read them. Turn off the TV and read. Put away the video game controller and read. Read hard things, and read easy things. Read a lot.
For years, I wondered why it came so readily to mind to write "READ, READ, READ" in all capital letters like that when I give advice on this subject, as I have frequent occasion to do. Recently, I reread the section "Suggestions for Study" in the front matter of John DeFrancis's book Beginning Chinese Reader, Part I, which I first used to learn Chinese back in 1975. In that section of that book, I found this passage, "Fluency in reading can only be achieved by extensive practice on all the interrelated aspects of the reading process. To accomplish this we must READ, READ, READ" (capitalization as in original). Yes, that works for Chinese, and it works for English too. By practicing reading, you gain reading comprehension and reading speed, and speedy reading with good comprehension gives you time to complete standardized test sections with time to spare. That reduces the pressure and lets you relax and think while you take the test. Try it. You may like it, and anyway reading is fun.
Any friends that a worried about their math sections as they start to prep, I give them that same link and so far I'm battling a thousand on people who've gotten accepted
I cannot imagine how expensive it would be for an admission committee panel to meet with 10,000+ applicants (like a big state school gets every year)
AFTER EDIT: Important background information for this thread is that hundreds of colleges in the United States already have explicit policies of open admission, meaning that they admit all applicants, and the majority of colleges in the United States admit the majority of their applicants. Only a few hundred colleges (out of about three thousand in total) are selective by any meaningful definition of "selective."
It normally costs ~$50 to take the SAT once, plus ~$12 per college you want to apply to. Then there are the SAT subject tests, which cost less ($30?) but it's not uncommon for a student looking to get into a selective school to take >3 subject tests. Then, maybe the student needs to retake the SAT, which is pretty standard, so add another ~$50 dollars and now we're looking at several hundred dollars in exams. This isn't counting the $50-100 application fee per school. Having a professor interview applicants would still be impossibly expensive of course. Do you happen to know how well the alumni interviews work? I never had one, but if I understand correctly, they are a part of Ivy League tier applications where a graduate of the school deems if the applicant would be a good fit. I've heard there's not much weight placed on them, however.
I personally think the SATs are better indicators of socio-economic standing than scholastic aptitude, but agree that there's probably nothing better. I kind of wish that the application process was similar to that for graduate school, where there's more weight placed on the relevant subject test and letters of recommendation.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT#Raw_scores.2C_scaled_scores...
https://sat.collegeboard.org/scores/how-sat-is-scored
>In our statistical analysis, equating adjusts for slight differences in difficulty between test editions and ensures that a student's score of, say, 450 on one edition of a test reflects the same ability as a score of 450 on another edition of the test. Equating also ensures that a student's score does not depend on how well others did on the same edition of the test.
I don't quite understand what the discussion in the link is trying to say but I take it to mean that they normalize between different versions of the test in the same year in a way that doesn't depend on the ability of the cohort that took a specific version. That is still consistent with the fact that they do normalize across the entire test taking population.
The point may be to rank students, but they don't give lower scores if everyone does better. It's possible for everyone to get perfect, or for no one.
>I don't quite understand what the discussion in the link is trying to say but I take it to mean that they normalize between different versions of the test in the same year in a way that doesn't depend on the ability of the cohort that took a specific version. That is still consistent with the fact that they do normalize across the entire test taking population.
That's not what's happening.
There are different versions of the test. ETS (the org running it) wants a score to mean the same thing no matter which version or year you took it in (well, besides for when they make major changes, like 1995.)
So every test includes one section that doesn't count. You don't know which one it is. Let's say everyone who took Math non-counter-A gets an average of 540. The same people get an average of 520 on Math counts-B. So we know that 520 on B is just as good as 540 in whatever year A was given. So we scale, and anyone who got a 520 on on B is given 540 instead. This is extended for other scores, using math.
(Actually, this is probably done before converting away from raw scores.)
If everyone does poorly, that will make the average go down for the actual test, and also make the average go down for the non-counting section. Those factor out completely, meaning others' performances have zero effect on your score.
Hope that helps.
https://sat.collegeboard.org/scores/how-sat-is-scored
>Equating ensures that the different forms of the test or the level of ability of the students with whom you are tested do not affect your score.
Regardless, because the point of the SAT is ranking, your score is irrelevant. What matters is how you do with respect to your peers. If everyone does better the test has become "harder" because you need to do better to get a higher rank.
Be surprised. http://research.collegeboard.org/content/sat-data-tables http://research.collegeboard.org/programs/sat/data/archived/...
You can't compare percentile, which is why they're released anew each year. You can compare scores.
>Regardless, because the point of the SAT is ranking, your score is irrelevant.
That's a better point, perhaps. Your race also matters (minorities can get into Ivies with much lower scores than other people). Besides, if people get better, colleges might have more room.
(For people with perfect scores, it doesn't really matter.)
What does "compare" mean? Does it mean that two people with the same score but in 1996 and 2015 respectively would be expected to achieve that score in a 2005 test?
Your second question is yes.
khanacademy.org/sat
That's the new system.
https://www.khanacademy.org/sat
If you want to "get into the details" you'll need to be logged in and complete the onboarding, through this URL:
https://www.khanacademy.org/mission/sat
I mean, linking to the current URL is fine, but it's not what was actually released nor is it representative of the new content.
(Disclaimer: I work at Khan Academy)
(Sorry khirasaki; I get what you meant now.)