Posted on 08/30/2006 2:42:34 PM PDT by shrinkermd
Didn't they already dumb it down at least once?
http://www.naebunny.net/~mommylemur/archives/2005/02/sat_scores_of_t.html
No, what I wanted to talk about was the scores of some famous people. For instance, Jennifer Lopez supposedly replied "Nail Polish" when asked what she got on her SAT. John Kerry and Oprah Winfrey refuse to reveal their scores.
Anyhow, the top score was 1600 when these folks took it.
And last year's average score was 1026 by way of comparison.
George W. Bush: 1206
Al Gore: 1335
Stephen King: 1300's
Amy Tan: 1100's
Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy: 1420
Bill Gates: 1590
Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen: 1600
My son took the ACT test in the spring of his sophomore year. He got a 30.
The SAT's are not important in this part of the country for some reason. It seems to be a "coastal" college test. So, he'll be skipping that since he's going to go to Missouri State. Since he got a 30 then he already has a guaranteed $8000 scholarship.
George Bush beat me by 6 points.
Which still does not explain him signing McCain-Feingold.
Idiot.
SAT is an IQ correlate, and a part of the general "pedigree". In your field of law, if, say, you happened to interview a former clerk of, say, the late Chief Justice [the ultimate in post-graduate pedigree] - one could bet dollars against donuts that that person would have a stellar record, from SAT to law school and beyond, or he wouldn't have been there. And such people normally end in senior positions themselves.
Oh Jumpmaster ....
He probably filled in the wrong bubble with his #2 pencil.
I believe the state of Californistan threatened to stop using it unless it was changed to be less objective and racist. When Cali says jump, the College Board pulls out the trampoline.
What you are saying has some validity, but don't overstate it. A lot of what you are talking about has as much to do with networking among the top schools and its graduates, and legacies, as it has to academic pedigree.
My old firm wouldn't hire a former USSC Clerk based on clerking at the USC alone, or even largely. If they didn't fit our profile, for better or worse, we passed. That profile is fairly rigid for entry level, but a lot more fluid for laterals.
Doing well in schooling is circumstantial evidence of smarts, but not conclusive evidence of smarts. If all I knew about someone is that they scored in the top 1% of SAT scores, and all I knew about someone else is that they scored in the top 90% of SAT scores, I really can't draw a meaningful conclusion as to where they will each be a decade later, or two decades later. It just doesn't work that way.
Top 90% cold get you some real dumbaxes.
OOops, top 10%! Haha you are right!
ho can't spell.
OOPS! I guess that concentration is an important aspect of intelligence.
Nonetheless, genetics is also important.
Be picky. Find a woman of great intelligence and attractiveness (obviously not a Democrat).
Uh, maybe males should have handicapped scores because they have a distinct blood loss from primary to secondary head, not to recover until the age of about 50.
She graduated from high school with honors and 5 AP class credits toward college. She scored 1480 on her SAT and a perfect score on her ACT. She received offers from several universities both in and out of state but opted for Texas A&M and is today working as an architect in New Orleans where she lives with her husband who is completing his last year at Tulane Law.
All that being said, I hope that she will not put any future grandchildren in public schools. Even the best of them are far below what they were when she graduated 6 years ago.
If you love your children or grandchildren, do not send them to government run schools.
For starters, probably more students who cannot claim English as their first language are taking the test.
No you are wrong. As I stated prior to 1975 they were a good predictor of intelligence. They are not now because they have changed the test design. Read "The Bell Curve" and get a clue. The best science we have now is that intelligence does exist and about half of intelligence is heritable.
It's the single most important thing validating their view of themselves. Not good, not good at all.
I agree with that.
The problem with your response is that the graph doesn't show the results of just one person. When large numbers of people of the same ethnic/racial backgrounds produce a graph like the one shown, the results are more likely to produce reliable data.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.