SAT score

[Bill_H_Pike]

What's the average SAT score of pre-meds here. I'm willing to bet 1500+

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[abraxas]

1500+ nope doesn't look that way...

looks more like 1300-1500 but i wonder how many ppl studied for the SAT.

 

[45408]

never took it - just the ACT here in the midwest, mostly

 

[nockamura]

I should've studied.

 

[byeh2004]

1180 SAT 3.95 college GPA
f*cking GPA/college sucess predictor my ass
I want to burn collegeboard or ransack it or something

sorry if i got too carried away, whenever someone mentions the SATs i get really pissed off

 

[willthatsall]

I made a 940 on the SATs. There was this one part where you had to read sentences and choose words that fit most correct. But really it could have been like any word and it would fit because they were mostly the same part of speech. I did really good on math section though, so whatever.

 

[tacrum43]

1500+ nope doesn't look that way...

looks more like 1300-1500 but i wonder how many ppl studied for the SAT.

Yeah, um, I didn't know you were supposed to. 😳

 

[Ambs]

I don't even remember what I got, but I do remember that I didn't study at all and went out the night before. It was worth it, .

 

[DrYo12]

Considering the fact that there is such a wide variety of people on here, the chances are good that we didn't even take the same exam. I took the SAT in the early 90s before the revamping of the exam and I'm pretty sure its not the same test that most of the younger members on this board took in the last 5-10 years.

 

[tigress]

When I was in high school I didn't even know people studied for standardized exams. I was completely and totally naive. I really had no clue. I didn't know anybody who studied for it, or at least nobody who talked about studying for it 😛. Although I went to a nerd high school, so probably people did...

 

[freeMDnow]

When I was in high school I didn't even know people studied for standardized exams. I was completely and totally naive. I really had no clue. I didn't know anybody who studied for it, or at least nobody who talked about studying for it 😛. Although I went to a nerd high school, so probably people did...

I think this is an interesting thread. The poll shows the balance of the scores to be quite high, but I wonder why the distribution is so even (i.e., 9 people in each category, esp. in the higher categories). Even if all of us were extremely smart, the distribution shouls still parallel a bell-shaped curve. Obviously, there is significant self-selection bias in this 'study'--meaning people who did well are more likely to poll rather than those who didn't.

Also, I took the old SAT (SAT 1--which I personally feel was harder than what you kids take). There is actually a conversion table from SAT 1 to 2 and a conversion table from your SAT score to your IQ!! You can find it by googling.

 

[DrHopeless]

I agree I have 3.96 college GPA and my SAT was around 1100-1200 also. It was so bad I forgot the number Ironically enough I did well on the MCAT 30Q.

1180 SAT 3.95 college GPA
f*cking GPA/college sucess predictor my ass
I want to burn collegeboard or ransack it or something

sorry if i got too carried away, whenever someone mentions the SATs i get really pissed off

 

[shoal]

I made a 940 on the SATs. There was this one part where you had to read sentences and choose words that fit most correct. But really it could have been like any word and it would fit because they were mostly the same part of speech. I did really good on math section though, so whatever.

you mean you did really well?

 

[dajimmers]

Didn't take the SAT (Midwest). 35 on the ACT, however (yay scholarship!).

 

[Centinel]

I agree I have 3.96 college GPA and my SAT was around 1100-1200 also. It was so bad I forgot the number Ironically enough I did well on the MCAT 30Q.

Based on the stats from this thread, the SAT seems to be a better predictor of MCAT score than GPA is.

 

[willthatsall]

you mean you did really well?

You probably did better on the word part than me. My math score was almost like twice as much as my word score.

 

[PTPoeny]

Was anyone else surprised that some schools asked for SAT scores on their applications?

Does anyone know why schools are interested in 5 year old test scores?

 

[knight12]

1450 SAT, 3.75 gpa, 30P.....I guess that's fairly balanced

 

[tigress]

Well I am surprised that some schools ask for SAT scores, because that was a long time ago. I seriously don't remember mine. I sort of remember the range, but I don't know what the score was. I think I blocked it from my memory 😛. Anyway, I can't answer those questions on the secondaries. I guess I'll leave it blank. Jefferson is the one I'm applying to that asks. If they have a problem with me leaving it blank, I guess they can reject me. Silly people.

 

[JustBreathe]

I got a 1570.

 

[jbrice1639]

but i wonder how many ppl studied for the SAT.

I was somewhere in the upper 1400s (don't remember exactly what it was since it was in 1998) but I'll bet your right about less people studying. i remember my parents trying to get me to do a kaplan class and i refused. i only remember a few people at my high school taking prep classes, and for the most part, they were the students who needed a prep class just to get a high enough score to get into college...the majority of A and B students at my school took the SAT cold...could be just my experience though

 

[Noway]

1340 for me

 

[LowlyPremed]

When I was in high school I didn't even know people studied for standardized exams. I was completely and totally naive. I really had no clue. I didn't know anybody who studied for it, or at least nobody who talked about studying for it 😛. Although I went to a nerd high school, so probably people did...

That's funny because it was exactly like this for me. I didn't even know what the SAT's were about. I didn't care because I only applied to one college and I knew that I had a good shot of getting in. I showed up to the test late, forgot my calculator and took extended breaks during the sections.
Now I really regret not studying for the SAT's. I think that it could have really helped my MCAT scores. I did well on the MCAT but the verbal section was really difficult for me.
I'm applying to Jefferson also, I'm not listing my SAT scores because I'm not the same immature slacker I was when I took the SAT. I don't think that my SAT scores reflect my abilities. Why do they need our SAT scores if we took the MCAT?

 

[wetlightning]

I'm applying to Jefferson also, I'm not listing my SAT scores because I'm not the same immature slacker I was when I took the SAT. I don't think that my SAT scores reflect my abilities. Why do they need our SAT scores if we took the MCAT?

i've heard that they like to see a trend w/ standardized testtaking...i.e. if you had a bad day with the mcat, if they see a good SAT/ACT score, they'll realize that maybe things just went awry for 9 hours 👍

 

[hopefulneuro]

There is actually a conversion table from SAT 1 to 2 and a conversion table from your SAT score to your IQ!! You can find it by googling.

Thanks for that post. I googled it and read some of those articles. It seems that there is indeed a high correlation between SAT scores and IQ. In my case the results are tightly related.
http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/002360.html

I particularly like standardized tests because they differentiate people who are naturally smart and those who are just very hard workers in the admissions process. There were a few people in my high school who were dumb as bricks (they'd be at every single review session and were always in our teachers' offices), and yet 2 of them got the valedictorian and salutatorian honors. Their SATs? 1220 and 1180. This makes it clear that their natural intelligence (ability to see connections and patterns) was less than those who earned lower grades but got higher SATs. And sure enough they were the ones whining for months about how the SAT is not a reliable measure of ability. BS! Grades are way less reliable.

I think the MCAT is the same way. I would hypothesize that it is possible to get at least a 30 from reasoning ability alone (assume 12 V, 10P,8BS- since these are in descending order as to how much can be answered without rote memorization).

Here's an extremely fascinating & detailed look at how different minorities compare in the IQ department. It discusses AA and URM status too!!
http://www.arthurhu.com/index/aintell.htm

 

[hopefulneuro]

"The anti-IQ crowd says there are no differences, which is wrong, but the pro-IQ crowd says IQ can't be changed, which I think is also wrong. I believe that IQ tests accurately measure a big difference in smarts between groups, but it has never been proven that they show unchangeable differences, only that it is very difficult to change. It is my belief that under ideal conditions (namely getting kids to master difficult material instead of ceding academic superiority to whites and Asians and relying on affirmative action, lowering standards and ethnocentrism) intelligence could be, and in some cases today is already equal.
Other interesting points

- Critics like Stephan Jay Gould say that races are inherently equal since evolutionarly and genetic, we're about the same. But even if that's so culture is enormously different, and IQ might be the result of culture even if our brains are wired exactly the same. Other critics say that race is abitrary, how can you talk about the IQ of hispanics when we can't even agree on what a Hispanic is? But if race didn't matter we wouldn't have affirmative action which often gives people points or puts people into competely different pools strictly on the basis of their surnames or the color of their skin. Ironically, its the people opposed to IQ who are most concious of race, and advocates of race as a selection factor, since most IQ advocates are in favor of color-blind selection."


from :http://www.arthurhu.com/index/aintell.htm

 

[KudosLaLa]

1500 here. Verbal = 700, Math = 800.
Now that the new SAT's are out of 2400, my children and grandchildren will probably think I am a ****** or something

 

[tigress]

I don't get it. Why would IQ be calculated mostly from the math section rather than the verbal? I took the SAT both before and after 1996. According to the before formula, my calculated IQ was only 11 points off the real thing. According to the after, it was over 30 points lower!! And my second score was higher. Yeah, I don't buy it. I don't know how I feel about IQ scores in general, though I think they must mean something. I feel the same way about standardized tests.

 

[hopefulneuro]

I don't get it. Why would IQ be calculated mostly from the math section rather than the verbal? I took the SAT both before and after 1996. According to the before formula, my calculated IQ was only 11 points off the real thing. According to the after, it was over 30 points lower!! And my second score was higher. Yeah, I don't buy it. I don't know how I feel about IQ scores in general, though I think they must mean something. I feel the same way about standardized tests.

Hey Tigress, ignore the first two formulas. If you read the passage the point is to discount them and to support the three graphs. There are a lot more articles but I happened to post the first one.

 

[byeh2004]

I agree I have 3.96 college GPA and my SAT was around 1100-1200 also. It was so bad I forgot the number Ironically enough I did well on the MCAT 30Q.

awesome! f*ck collegeboard!!!

 

[hopefulneuro]

1180 SAT 3.95 college GPA
f*cking GPA/college sucess predictor my ass
I want to burn collegeboard or ransack it or something

sorry if i got too carried away, whenever someone mentions the SATs i get really pissed off

LOL... This speaks for itself. My point stands.

 

[bbas]

I don't believe that there is any correlation between SAT scores and IQ. First of all, SAT scores can be significantly raised by studying and taking prep courses. In my case, I took the SAT two times. The first time I did not study at all, but the second time I took a prep course and studied vocab words for two months prior to the test. The result? an increase in 100 points on my total score. Now this alone shows that SAT scores are highly dependent on preparation, not necessarily a person's IQ. IQ tests, on the other hand, can not possibly be studied for, because there are so many different variations of questions that can be used.

 

[mdavid]

All these tests are crap and can be prepared for. Once its standardized (which they have to be to have any statistical value) then you can study for them. Case in point: I got 1280 (i think) with no studying but a 38 on the mcat with studying. Whats needed is a test that you cant prepare for but I dont see how this can reasonably be done. Maybe someone will eventually figure it out.

 

[freeMDnow]

Hey Tigress, ignore the first two formulas. If you read the passage the point is to discount them and to support the three graphs. There are a lot more articles but I happened to post the first one.

Hey you guys,

the following link I think provides the most useful estimate. This is the one I was originally referring to, and it's the easiest to use. You can convert your SAT (1 or 2) scores into each other and into IQ. If you took SAT before 1995 (like me), there is a table here for that (btw--these 'old' tests actually show the best correlation to IQ!--back in the day without calculators). I had no idea there was so much out there so thanks Neuro for posting the others too.

http://members.shaw.ca/delajara/GREIQ.html

 

[tigress]

Hey you guys,

the following link I think provides the most useful estimate. This is the one I was originally referring to, and it's the easiest to use. You can convert your SAT (1 or 2) scores into each other and into IQ. If you took SAT before 1995 (like me), there is a table here for that (btw--these 'old' tests actually show the best correlation to IQ!--back in the day without calculators). I had no idea there was so much out there so thanks Neuro for posting the others too.

http://members.shaw.ca/delajara/GREIQ.html

Interesting. That chart actually isn't too far off. I don't know my exact IQ score because my mother would never tell me, but I caught a glimpse of it at some point so I have an idea of what it is 😛 (it was long ago, and I don't remember exactly what number I saw).

I think maybe this chart is good for taking the SAT or GRE without studying, which I did for both. I'm not sure the MCAT is the same, though, because you really do have to know the science pretty well.

 

[zhaf86]

I don't get it. Why would IQ be calculated mostly from the math section rather than the verbal? I took the SAT both before and after 1996. According to the before formula, my calculated IQ was only 11 points off the real thing. According to the after, it was over 30 points lower!! And my second score was higher. Yeah, I don't buy it. I don't know how I feel about IQ scores in general, though I think they must mean something. I feel the same way about standardized tests.

two types of intelligence - fluid and crystallized.
fluid is more of a measure of physiological capability of the brain. perhaps how fast your neurons fire, how well they're connected, or how abundant supporting glial cells are in your brain (they nourish neurons. apparently einstein's brain was teeming with glial cells).
crystallized is more of something acquired, like for example for verbal, it is mostly memory work - memorization of vocabulary.
a task requiring fluid intelligence - testing reaction speed (something flashes on the screen and you press the spacebar asap).
a task requiring crystallized intelligence - tell me the capital of spain?
iq measurement accords fluid intelligence much greater importance.

 

[bbas]

All these tests are crap and can be prepared for. Once its standardized (which they have to be to have any statistical value) then you can study for them. Case in point: I got 1280 (i think) with no studying but a 38 on the mcat with studying. Whats needed is a test that you cant prepare for but I dont see how this can reasonably be done. Maybe someone will eventually figure it out.

I see what you're saying, but why do we need to have a test that you can't prepare for? Being successful at the college level or even as a doctor for that matter does not mean that you have to be a genius, but rather a hardworking individual. A person who studies hard and aces the test should have the same opportunities as a person who is naturally intelligent and does not need to study as hard to do well on a test. Just my two cents.

 

[veridisquo]

1180 SAT 3.95 college GPA
f*cking GPA/college sucess predictor my ass
I want to burn collegeboard or ransack it or something

sorry if i got too carried away, whenever someone mentions the SATs i get really pissed off

Same exact stats. My SAT score was 1180 after months of studying. My college GPA is a 3.95, 37 MCAT. I saw that terrible college performance comin', even way back in my high school days. 🙄

 

[byeh2004]

Same exact stats. My SAT score was 1180 after months of studying. My college GPA is a 3.95, 37 MCAT. I saw that terrible college performance comin', even way back in my high school days. 🙄

=D go us, the below 1200 club!!

 

[hopefulneuro]

I took the SAT two times. The first time I did not study at all, but the second time I took a prep course and studied vocab words for two months prior to the test. The result? an increase in 100 points on my total score. Now this alone shows that SAT scores are highly dependent on preparation, not necessarily a person's IQ.

While this is the sentiment of a large number of individuals, the reasoning is incorrect.

An increase in SAT scores does not mean that your scores cannot be correlated to IQ. There is a ceiling to the SAT. At a certain point an individual cannot progress any further no matter how much studying he/she does (granted if you spend 10 years on the SAT then you'll likely achieve a high score). But that is not what the scientists are suggesting. They are using single administrations as averages because not everyone studies for it, and those who do not are almost as linked by IQ as those who do.

IQ tests, on the other hand, can not possibly be studied for, because there are so many different variations of questions that can be used.

Using the same method of preparation (learning vocab words) you would most definitely improve your IQ score (on a test where verbal intelligence is measured). But as a previous poster accurately noted, the test would abstract a simple definition word problem into a scramble or some other puzzle which requires pattern recognition in addition to crystallized intelligence.

Although people may hate it that their low SAT scores correlate to less than desirable IQ scores, on average the links are highly accurate. (I got a 1410 & that correlates to a 138.87 IQ. My IQ is 139. While I wish I had a 152 IQ, I don't, so that's life.)

And "experts say" that above 125 success depends on other factors, so anyone who scored 1230 or above is ok. Those who scored less...well, good luck to you!

 

[zhaf86]

And "experts say" that above 125 success depends on other factors, so anyone who scored 1230 or above is ok. Those who scored less...well, good luck to you!

i hope i'm not the only one who figures neuro said all this in jest 🙄

perhaps disconnected, even rambling? but has anyone read or browsed the book 1600 perfect score? someone profiled many students who raped the sat - the vaunted 1600. he noted that perfect score students weren't necessarily einsteins, but instead were highly motivated individuals whose goal was not to ace the sat, but rather to ace life! these students tended to have highly significant accomplishments in a broad spectrum of areas - music, linguistics, activism, publishing, entrepreneurship, research; and many more. the author rarely found one-dimensional 1600 students.

i would dare say that even without brilliant test-scores, having lots of drive and more importantly following up on it very consistently is cardinal, the point the author was trying to drive home. which is why even brilliant mcats and gpas don't take away the need for the interview. chances are, a great mcat and gpa is the reflection of a highly driven and motivated individual, but you can't leave the future of healthcare to chance, and in comes the interview - they would rather see someone who ain't that bright a spark with a penchant for challenging themselves, then someone who is brilliant and has been in the comfort zone since kingdom come.

conclusion, don't assign things like the sat and mcat more importance/attention than necessary. work on the drive/motivation portion (chances are everything else including the scores tends to fall into place).
peace! 🙂

 

[TheMightyAngus]

Anyone else take the GRE in addition to the MCAT. My GRE Verbal score was like in the 95 percentile, but my MCAT VR was pretty average. Also my writing sample was an S for the MCAT, but my writing section on the GRE was like in the 40 percentile. WTF? So much for standardized testing, my scores are all over the place.

 

[bbas]

While this is the sentiment of a large number of individuals, the reasoning is incorrect.

An increase in SAT scores does not mean that your scores cannot be correlated to IQ. There is a ceiling to the SAT. At a certain point an individual cannot progress any further no matter how much studying he/she does (granted if you spend 10 years on the SAT then you'll likely achieve a high score). But that is not what the scientists are suggesting. They are using single administrations as averages because not everyone studies for it, and those who do not are almost as linked by IQ as those who do.

Using the same method of preparation (learning vocab words) you would most definitely improve your IQ score (on a test where verbal intelligence is measured). But as a previous poster accurately noted, the test would abstract a simple definition word problem into a scramble or some other puzzle which requires pattern recognition in addition to crystallized intelligence.

Although people may hate it that their low SAT scores correlate to less than desirable IQ scores, on average the links are highly accurate. (I got a 1410 & that correlates to a 138.87 IQ. My IQ is 139. While I wish I had a 152 IQ, I don't, so that's life.)

And "experts say" that above 125 success depends on other factors, so anyone who scored 1230 or above is ok. Those who scored less...well, good luck to you!

When comparing SAT scores and IQ, it is also important to remember that the two tests are not scored the same way. SAT scores are not dependant on your performance alone, but are curved to account for how other people perform. So even if you get the same raw score on two different test dates, the actual scaled score would be different. IQ scores are based on your performance only.

With regard to studying, my point was that the formart of the SAT is always known, meaning you can expect to find analogies, sentence completions, and reading comprehension sections. (I'm referring to the old SAT format, because
I have no idea how/if the new SAT has changed in structure) Therefore, you can specfically study these types of questions and learn "tricks" on how to figure them out. Anything is fair game on an IQ test, which makes it harder to study for. IQ tests are not designed to be studied for, because the purpose of it is to test natural ability. For that reason, IQ scores should remain relatively stable over time.

 

[hopefulneuro]

For that reason, IQ scores should remain relatively stable over time.

Agreed. Good point.

 

[Shredder]

Agreed. Good point.

iq is said to remain steady over the course of life. what a nice little bell curve we have. its the story of life.

anyone who gets 1600 is very intelligent. 15+ is also highly intelligent. you dont get that high by just motivation. ive tutored for the SAT and seen some real dunces who will be disappointed no matter how much they try. they pissed me off and thats why i eventually quit, waste of time dealing with them. it all boils down to the ATGC's coding for what makes a sharp person. as for SAT and other test tricks, those who are smart to begin with are the ones who are actually able to apply them properly come test time, whereas i have seen that less smart folk cannot remember them at all or do not recall them properly, leading to bungled answers

as for me personally i have absolutely seen a strong correlation between the wits i perceive in associates and their test scores, sat especially

 

[CTG]

Based on the stats from this thread, the SAT seems to be a better predictor of MCAT score than GPA is.

I disagree. I did not so great on the SAT (can't even remember my score) and awesome on the ACT (I'm from the midwest) and I got the same score on my MCAT. I didn't study for them either (except the MCAT of course.) My conclusion? Standardized admissions tests are stupid. They just make you stressed out. Anyone agree? Anyone?

 

[CTG]

All these tests are crap and can be prepared for. Once its standardized (which they have to be to have any statistical value) then you can study for them. Case in point: I got 1280 (i think) with no studying but a 38 on the mcat with studying. Whats needed is a test that you cant prepare for but I dont see how this can reasonably be done. Maybe someone will eventually figure it out.

Yeah I heard that back in the day people didn't study for MCATs, they just took em cold. Honestly, I'm glad I had a chance to study, even though I hated it. B/c in a lot of cases, just being smart isn't enough, you gotta work for it too.

 

[CTG]

Same exact stats. My SAT score was 1180 after months of studying. My college GPA is a 3.95, 37 MCAT. I saw that terrible college performance comin', even way back in my high school days. 🙄

Yes, now I remember...that's what I got on my SAT too. An 1180. However, my college GPA was only a 3.9. I guess that makes me even dumber than you... 🙄

 

[NiteOwl]

I didn't take the SAT, I took the ACT instead. I didn't study for it at all, no prep, no practice questions, nothing. I ended up with a 20 on it but I didn't care then and really don't care now. I don't think it predicts how well you will do in college or your IQ. I am doing quite well in college, much better that a 20 would predict. The only real IQ test I have taken was back in 1st grade, I have taken a few that I have found on the internet and in books but I don't know how accurate they are. So I can't exactly relate IQ and ACT/SAT scores.

 

[fuglydoc]

i took both the SAT and ACT, didn't study for neither. SAT - 970 ACT-21 i didn't care, thats all i need for the bright futures scholarship