I took it in order to get into summer school at Berkeley. I wanted to take Latin *really*badly* and my parents wanted me to take Algebra. I ended up with Algebra, and it was likely a very good decision, but I still wish I could have managed to squeeze the Latin in there somewhere.
The night before taking the SAT my mom and I sat down and reviewed the sample problems and answers. I learned for the first time what a square-root sign was, and what it meant to have a little number up in the air next to a big number. The night before the test. I did well enough figuring out answers on the test that it does seem to have been (for me) more of a test of intelligence than a test of what I had been taught in the past at that point.
For 7th graders, who have not been formally taught many of the things tested on the exam, it does seem to function much as an IQ test. While a high-school junior may have had to memorize in english class that "ambiguous" means "unclear", a younger student may have been able to figure it out from context through movies or reading, a sign of higher intelligence. Yes, for some extremely well-backgrounded kids, doing well on the test may come more from their background than their raw intelligence, it still tests their intelligence -- to cite Jon's students again, they have an amazing background, but they still would not have scored as well as a high-IQ poor kid who figures out what the little 2 hanging in the air means by asking a high school kid during the break.
It isn't a perfect substitute for an IQ test, but for 7th graders, it's the cheapest available alternative. We use this inexpensive proxy to do the initial science to figure out what we really need to test, and maybe some year later we can test with that. ... Responding to Stu's question/comment about demographics in your comment so you both get to see it, my guess is that their population is homogenous enough that they want to answer the question, "among people with a similar background who were put forward as gifted and took this test for whom we have data, are there any genetic markers that allow us to tell the difference between a top 10% individual, a top 1% individual, and a top 0.001% individual?" I would not be surprised if they ask people who give a sample to take an IQ test now to see how it correlates with genes and 7th grade scores.
The people who took the test are already fairly homogeneous, but I would bet money that Stu's and Jon's scores were higher than mine and I also came from a decent background. I'm also willing to bet money that my brother's would have been significantly worse, even though we grew up in the same household. In fact, he didn't even take the test because he wasn't interested.
...
And recalling all these memories of that test reminds me of the night before and that morning -- I was actually significantly more worried about what the High School students would do to me (would they beat me up?) than how I would do on the test. I had nightmares about it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
The night before taking the SAT my mom and I sat down and reviewed the sample problems and answers. I learned for the first time what a square-root sign was, and what it meant to have a little number up in the air next to a big number. The night before the test. I did well enough figuring out answers on the test that it does seem to have been (for me) more of a test of intelligence than a test of what I had been taught in the past at that point.
For 7th graders, who have not been formally taught many of the things tested on the exam, it does seem to function much as an IQ test. While a high-school junior may have had to memorize in english class that "ambiguous" means "unclear", a younger student may have been able to figure it out from context through movies or reading, a sign of higher intelligence. Yes, for some extremely well-backgrounded kids, doing well on the test may come more from their background than their raw intelligence, it still tests their intelligence -- to cite Jon's students again, they have an amazing background, but they still would not have scored as well as a high-IQ poor kid who figures out what the little 2 hanging in the air means by asking a high school kid during the break.
It isn't a perfect substitute for an IQ test, but for 7th graders, it's the cheapest available alternative. We use this inexpensive proxy to do the initial science to figure out what we really need to test, and maybe some year later we can test with that.
...
Responding to Stu's question/comment about demographics in your comment so you both get to see it, my guess is that their population is homogenous enough that they want to answer the question, "among people with a similar background who were put forward as gifted and took this test for whom we have data, are there any genetic markers that allow us to tell the difference between a top 10% individual, a top 1% individual, and a top 0.001% individual?" I would not be surprised if they ask people who give a sample to take an IQ test now to see how it correlates with genes and 7th grade scores.
The people who took the test are already fairly homogeneous, but I would bet money that Stu's and Jon's scores were higher than mine and I also came from a decent background. I'm also willing to bet money that my brother's would have been significantly worse, even though we grew up in the same household. In fact, he didn't even take the test because he wasn't interested.
...
And recalling all these memories of that test reminds me of the night before and that morning -- I was actually significantly more worried about what the High School students would do to me (would they beat me up?) than how I would do on the test. I had nightmares about it.
--Beth