brcane1
Sophomore
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 3,838
Yeah, some douchey guy on their board was saying it was more like 250 points, but still.
AND they were using Gaytor Mathz. So, westlake gaytor was yapping about a score increase from a 600 to a 900 being a "50% increase". But the reality is that the low end of the SAT scale is a 400. That means that the original test score of a 600 is only 200 points above the minimum, and thus a 300 point increase would be a 150% increase in the test score.
So, yeah, they don't really know what they are talking about. As I mentioned several pages back, it is statistically more unrealistic to go from a 600 to a 900 than it is to go from a 1200 to a 1500. Just being honest.
I wouldn't put those 2 WRs on the active roster quite yet. Clearinghouse will still have their say, and as I mentioned before, in the post-Aunt-Becky world, going from a 600 to a 900 on your VERY LAST ATTEMPT without some solid evidence of prep course work is just...ridiculous.
Go back and read that Gaytor thread, one guy is adamant that nobody can invalidate SAT scores without proof of cheating. Sadly, ETS does it ALL THE TIME, just because they believe a score increase is too high and/or unrealistic. When I worked for Princeton Review, that was one of our "bragging" points, that we had numerous students that ETS flagged for SAT score improvements (this was back in the 80s and 90s when ETS didn't have very good monitoring systems, so they just assumed everyone was cheating). Now, ETS makes up a bunch of nonsense that they DON'T invalidate scores based on score improvements, but that is a lie, as it is usually the primary evidence that they cite when people sue them.
Here's just one example of a score being invalidated FROM THE PAST YEAR:
College Board invalidates student’s SAT after she retakes test and improves scores
The College Board invalidated a Florida high school student’s SAT results after she retook the exam to improve her score by 330 points.{mosads}Kamilah Campbell of Miami Gardens, Fla., originally go…thehill.com
Getting a kid who basically christmas tree'd (600 = 1st percentile) up to a 900 (23rd percentile) where you basically just need to try and be able to get middle school level questions right is much easier than getting a 74th percentile kid up to the 99th percentile which is just past most kids ceilings.
The rest of your point is valid though.
