|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SAT article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3|
|SAT is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.|
|Current status: Former featured article candidate|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|To-do list for SAT:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on June 23, 2013 and June 23, 2014.|
I added some more content. Stuff someone should add soon:
- links to more statistics
- sample questions
- comparision with PSAT, etc
Also, I feel there should be a rebuttal of some of the criticism (for example, IIRC, Asians score slightly higher than whites on the test) but I'm unsure how to do this in a NPOV style.
I keep switching the "five column grid" phrase in the SAT Reasoning Test section to "four column grid," because that's what actually is. I have proof: [[http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/sat/prep_one/spr/prac/prac01.html SAT Student-Produced Responses]] Whoever is switching it back should stop.
- Hm. Sorry, for some reason I kept thinking you were changing the one referring to the usual five-column grid. Hope you weren't discouraged or anything. Johnleemk | Talk 16:33, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
What are the SAT subject tests (SAT II) for?
What is a perfect score on the SAT I? \
Hi I'm new here... I have an idea though. Maybe the bit about the Asians scoring slightly higher than white should be taken off of here. That's ethnocentrism/prejudice. Thanks!
Oh and sorry I don't have any info on the SAT s but I will take them soon
OK, since the New SAT has officially been administered for the first time (I took it yesterday, yay!), I think it's time to update the information to reflect this as the primary area of information (currently, it pretty much sums up the old version and then briefly comments on the new one). Any objections?--User:naryathegreat(t) 20:45, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
- I support this move. We shouldn't remove info on the old version, though; just add more on the new one. Johnleemk | Talk 12:49, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
My mistake, there is some information on the disambiguation page. Still, maybe it should be more prominent?
I don't even see a disambiguation page? Can someone re-add this ASAP.
2006 SAT Scoring error
I added the news about the error under the history section, but it could probably be added to a different part, or maybe be made into a new section. I'm not sure if I put it in the best place. If anyone wants to do anything about it, here's a news article with some of the information:
- "The "old" SAT had an incredibly high ceiling. In any given year, only seven of the million test-takers scored above 1580. If one makes the reasonable assumption that all of the very brightest people in that U.S. age group, which numbers 3 million, took the test, then a score above 1580 has a rarity of about one in 400 thousand., equivalent to the 99.9997 percentile. "
The source that is cited here refers to the SAT before what is now know known as the "old" SAT...the one that was replaced in 1995. Furthermore, it doesn't seem to affirm about either the pre- or post-1995 test the claim that "a score above 1580 has a rarity of about one in 400 thousand." Deleted the section.
- I don't see how this claim (7 in a million to get 1580) could be possibly be correct. A friend took it in 1977 and got 1590. I met or heard of several people with similar or better. To me this speaks of 1 in 900 or 1 in 5000, not 1 in 100,000. Otherwise where did all the super smart people of these generations come from? It wasn't just some pathetic coterie of 7 people, but thousands and tens of thousands. (The friend is a professor of math at a top place, but as I said, there are thousands and tens of thousands.)
University of California's conversion chart
This conversion chart either has changed or is flawed. They do not use the composite for the ACT instead, "[T]he University multiplies the sum of your converted math, reading and science scores by two-thirds, then adds the converted English/writing score." the article is misleading. I would use the one by The Princeton Review found here . Zginder 2008-04-17T22:10Z (UTC)
This article is probably outdated. New SAT is already being administered and this article still holds information for Old SAT that was last administered January 2016 testing date. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 06:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Security in the SAT room must be more serious.Old ID cards from 5 years earlier.Cousins and look alikes taking the test.Scholarships are in play.The room moderators as I am one in Spain must check the IDs online.Not unheard of is the look alike a cousin ..Having a beard or dyed hair musnt be alllowed.Recent ID cards too.Toefl SAT even the british cambridge exams are not secure.In Spain weve seen sports players using doubles to get into anmerican universites.I sdont mean tennis doubles...I mean a pro test taker.So many study hard to escape poverty with SAT and it isnt fair that another pays for the score. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 16:58, 2 April 2017 (UTC)