LSAT vs your SAT/ACT Forum

[everton125]

Did people actually study for the SAT? How?

SAT prep is an enormous industry and one of the major sources of inequality between rich and regular students.

It seems like a stretch to state that so definitively.

I actually think that is a fairly accurate statement, though it obviously lacks nuance. More specifically, I would argue the advantages wealthy students are afforded throughout their entire youth, including potentially SAT prep courses, do contribute to their significantly higher SAT scores, thereby perpetuating inequality.

Anecdotally, almost no one at my public school studied for the SAT, myself included, but I get the impression from talking to college friends that most individuals who go to private schools put a considerable amount of time into studying for the SAT, with many private schools offering courses and practice tests.

[runinthefront]

Did people actually study for the SAT? How?

SAT prep is an enormous industry and one of the major sources of inequality between rich and regular students.

It seems like a stretch to state that so definitively.

I don't know. I literally don't know anyone who studied for the SAT.

It wasn't until my sophomore year of college, when my roommate told me he had an SAT tutor, that I found out people pay good money to study for the SAT. It makes sense though--it's a good investment.

My high school I guess paid for (I don't know if this is a normal thing?) the first administration of the SAT for the entire student body; I don't know how many kids would've actually taken it without that.

[Hikikomorist]

It's my impression that not many people of any socioeconomic group study for the SAT, and the studies done on the effectiveness of prep courses haven't been great for marketing. The general conclusion I've seen is that they typically have a minimal impact on scores.

[RZ5646]

As we all know, even a small amount of LSAT prep can radically change your percentile rank and admissions outcome... if the SAT is even half as learnable as the LSAT—and I'd bet that it is, especially the math part—then students who studied would be at a great advantage.

As someone else said above, nobody at my high school studied. It was just unheard of. Going to a prestigious college was also unheard of. Our big state university was the best conceivable outcome and it was generally expected that the top 10% of the class would go there.

Again echoing another user, it's more of a cultural issue than a strictly financial one. Whether or not a kid studied says more about the kid's parents and peer group than the kid himself. (Note that this doesn't hold for the LSAT though... if you don't study hard for the LSAT, that's an obvious mistake and your own damn fault.)

In general, kids reflect the expectations that others have for them. When I was a high schooler nobody really expected much of me; unsurprisingly, I didn't study and probably did not realize my full potential.

[sanibella]

EVERYONE I knew studied for the SATs. I attended a private high school.

[landshoes]

As we all know, even a small amount of LSAT prep can radically change your percentile rank and admissions outcome... if the SAT is even half as learnable as the LSAT—and I'd bet that it is, especially the math part—then students who studied would be at a great advantage.

As someone else said above, nobody at my high school studied. It was just unheard of. Going to a prestigious college was also unheard of. Our big state university was the best conceivable outcome and it was generally expected that the top 10% of the class would go there.

Again echoing another user, it's more of a cultural issue than a strictly financial one. Whether or not a kid studied says more about the kid's parents and peer group than the kid himself. (Note that this doesn't hold for the LSAT though... if you don't study hard for the LSAT, that's an obvious mistake and your own damn fault.)

In general, kids reflect the expectations that others have for them. When I was a high schooler nobody really expected much of me; unsurprisingly, I didn't study and probably did not realize my full potential.

[hill1334]

As we all know, even a small amount of LSAT prep can radically change your percentile rank and admissions outcome... if the SAT is even half as learnable as the LSAT—and I'd bet that it is, especially the math part—then students who studied would be at a great advantage.

As someone else said above, nobody at my high school studied. It was just unheard of. Going to a prestigious college was also unheard of. Our big state university was the best conceivable outcome and it was generally expected that the top 10% of the class would go there.

Again echoing another user, it's more of a cultural issue than a strictly financial one. Whether or not a kid studied says more about the kid's parents and peer group than the kid himself. (Note that this doesn't hold for the LSAT though... if you don't study hard for the LSAT, that's an obvious mistake and your own damn fault.)

In general, kids reflect the expectations that others have for them. When I was a high schooler nobody really expected much of me; unsurprisingly, I didn't study and probably did not realize my full potential.

I actually remember having the attitude that I was not supposed to study for the SAT. My parents mentioned to me recently that they tried to get me to study and get a tutor, but I refused. Maybe it was because no one at my high school openly talked about studying, but I guess I thought you really were not supposed to study for the SAT, as it was supposed to be a measure of your "natural abilities" and studying would distort the results. I was stupid and stubborn that way.

[Clemenceau]

EVERYONE I knew studied for the SATs. I attended a private high school.

Ya I went to private school too. Many of my classmates' parents spent thousands on tutoring. It's crazy. It definitely helped career B students get into good schools.

And I guess I'll bite on the humblebrag: 2130 no studying. 170 then 175 tons of studying.

[whacka]

I actually remember having the attitude that I was not supposed to study for the SAT. My parents mentioned to me recently that they tried to get me to study and get a tutor, but I refused. Maybe it was because no one at my high school openly talked about studying, but I guess I thought you really were not supposed to study for the SAT, as it was supposed to be a measure of your "natural abilities" and studying would distort the results. I was stupid and stubborn that way.

Yeah it was the same with me, except until today I had the mindset that you couldn't study for it rather than that you weren't supposed to. As I understood it, if you hadn't read enough up to that point to develop the proper grammatical grasp and vocabulary, you were just fucked, and there was nothing you could do about it. Not really sure where I picked that notion up.

[everton125]

It's my impression that not many people of any socioeconomic group study for the SAT, and the studies done on the effectiveness of prep courses haven't been great for marketing. The general conclusion I've seen is that they typically have a minimal impact on scores.

Yeah, I think you might have the wrong impression:

http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2013 ... r-the-sat/
http://www.westchestermagazine.com/West ... t-to-Prep/
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/new-e ... ys-to-prep
http://www.creativitypost.com/education ... at_benefit
http://prospect.org/article/wealthy-kids-are-all-right
http://www.businessinsider.com/wealthy- ... at-2014-10
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... -families/
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/07/us/th ... .html?_r=0

A lot of people who don't know a lot about the LSAT actually argue there is no point in retaking as very few people increase there scores -- they are wrong too, obviously.

[everton125]

I actually remember having the attitude that I was not supposed to study for the SAT. My parents mentioned to me recently that they tried to get me to study and get a tutor, but I refused. Maybe it was because no one at my high school openly talked about studying, but I guess I thought you really were not supposed to study for the SAT, as it was supposed to be a measure of your "natural abilities" and studying would distort the results. I was stupid and stubborn that way.

Yeah it was the same with me, except until today I had the mindset that you couldn't study for it rather than that you weren't supposed to. As I understood it, if you hadn't read enough up to that point to develop the proper grammatical grasp and vocabulary, you were just fucked, and there was nothing you could do about it. Not really sure where I picked that notion up.

I mean there is a little truth that the reading comp section, like on the LSAT too, is the hardest to improve on. But studying could definitely help on the math and writing sections for the SAT.

[KMart]

We had this joke of a class after school at my high school to study for the ACT. That's how most people I know studied and it was probably <10 hours total with one practice test. I don't know anyone with a private tutor, although it is a good investment.

I studied with an online class for the LSAT (don't) and then self studied thereafter. I worked a lot harder to study.

Scored within the same general percentile on both tests .

[texasellewoods]

.

[hearsay77]

I went to a public high school and almost everyone I knew was studying from before the PSAT, and most people took a prep class or had a tutor for the SAT. Sounds like that wasn't the typical public school.

[eb91]

2160 SAT (minimal studying) / 179 (lots of studying)

[ChillTomG]

??? LSAT (will fill in after June). Studied hard for five weeks.


I took the GRE, as well as ACT, PSAT, SAT, and SAT II (subject tests) all completely cold.

GRE: 170 Quant, 165 verbal, 6.0 writing
ACT: 34. 36 math, 35 science, 34 reading, 32 english (took without writing)
PSAT: 2250. 800 math, 800 reading, 650 writing (national merit semifinalist, finalist, and scholar)
SAT: 2290. 800 math, 800 reading, 690 writing
SAT II: 800 math level II, 790 physics

[unsweetened]

I went to a public high school in the DC area that offered the PSAT and some SAT prep. Learning the test was pretty helpful since my scores increased with repetition. Scored 1350/1600.
Partied hard the night before the ACT, didn't study at all. Got a 32.
Studied on my own for the LSAT, found out that I sucked horribly, took a prep class for several weeks, ended up with a 162. Looking back, I should definitely taken it again. I set up a game incorrectly and it definitely hurt my score.

[PrezRand]

My best score was a 2240. My high school had basically everyone in the top 15 percent scoring over 2000+ We had a few perfects, a bunch of 2400 superscores. My district is hella competitive

[nlee10]

My best score was a 2240. My high school had basically everyone in the top 15 percent scoring over 2000+ We had a few perfects, a bunch of 2400 superscores. My district is hella competitive

Bay Area?

[Yeezus]

My best score was a 2240. My high school had basically everyone in the top 15 percent scoring over 2000+ We had a few perfects, a bunch of 2400 superscores. My district is hella competitive

Cool story bro. There's a lot of districts like that in the US.

[RunnerRunner]

I went to a public high school and almost everyone I knew was studying from before the PSAT, and most people took a prep class or had a tutor for the SAT. Sounds like that wasn't the typical public school.

Also went to public school. Everyone there told me not to study because the ACT was more like an IQ test and studying wouldn't change your IQ, lol. Idk what the breakdown of public v. private is, really interesting hearing how differently these tests are marketed by different schools though.

[gnomgnomuch]

Did people actually study for the SAT? How?

SAT prep is an enormous industry and one of the major sources of inequality between rich and regular students.

It seems like a stretch to state that so definitively.

There is actually a lot of research pointing toward this. Very interesting reading if you're into that sort of stuff.

[PrezRand]

My best score was a 2240. My high school had basically everyone in the top 15 percent scoring over 2000+ We had a few perfects, a bunch of 2400 superscores. My district is hella competitive

Bay Area?

Nah. I'm from the greater Houston area

My best score was a 2240. My high school had basically everyone in the top 15 percent scoring over 2000+ We had a few perfects, a bunch of 2400 superscores. My district is hella competitive

Cool story bro. There's a lot of districts like that in the US.

Do you have a problem with me?

[Oskosh]

My best score was a 2240. My high school had basically everyone in the top 15 percent scoring over 2000+ We had a few perfects, a bunch of 2400 superscores. My district is hella competitive

Bay Area?

Nah. I'm from the greater Houston area

My best score was a 2240. My high school had basically everyone in the top 15 percent scoring over 2000+ We had a few perfects, a bunch of 2400 superscores. My district is hella competitive

Cool story bro. There's a lot of districts like that in the US.

Do you have a problem with me?

Bellaire? Lamar? Cinco ranch? Seven Lakes? Carnegie?

[rdawkins28]

I'm in the Dallas area. SAT prep is a huge industry. Many Asian kids (Indians and Chinese predominantly) take various types of ACT/SAT prep. There are classes that even start prepping for those tests at ninth grade. I'm personally against them, but then I'm damned if I don't put my kids into those classes.

My kid scored 1350/1600 with no prep. But some kids who didn't seem that smart got better scores having gone through a prep course (of course looks could be deceiving, those kids could be geniuses). So I guess in that sense, they're much smarter since they took advantage of what was available to them.

I had my son take a Kaplan (if I remember correctly) online class after his first test. He had already been accepted to his college of choice with decent scholarships but the scholarships might be bumped up if he got a higher score. He got 1460/1600 the second time. Got a nice bump in the primary scholarship. So at least for him, the prep course was definitely worth it.

And for comparative purposes, he got a 164 with no prep. And FWIW, I used TLS to beat any desire to go to LS out of him.