Without a doubt the only thing I have ever wanted to volunteer for, or ever will. Has anyone heard of it?

(Edited by Amanda at 1:04 am on Oct. 20, 2004)

I got a 28 on mine. that includes a 34 on the english part, which tells you how lousy I am at doing math without a calculator.

Maybe I should have explained myself a little better. ACT is an organization that is working on getting people to register to vote. The goal is to have a democratic victory and get bush out of office. I guess it is also a test or something but that isn't what I meant, sorry for the confusion.

I think I saw an adult film with that title one time, but I don't think that has anything to do with this organization.

Welcome back, Amanda.

Dammit Foldsfan... you stole my joke! Oh well... for the record... 32.

Well, then I guess it should have been named DACT, or maybe LACT, shouldn't it?

I think I got a 28... in 8th grade.

Obviously this board is populated by super-geniuses... so when's our next "take over the world from our secret lair" meeting?

I got a 29...and I always enjoyed the mouthwash (red flavor).

i take mine next month!

Ah, I only got a 24...but a full ride to college, so thats all the matters lol

Mm...I think it was a 33? 2 numbers that were the same & def. not 22, so that must be it. I don't remember the breakdown.

Don't fret, Amanda- foldsfan was confused because he bats for the wrong team. I'm volunteering with MoveOn, essentially the same mission.

I'm with Music Row Democrats. Door-to-door this Saturday if anyone is interested in helping roll out the red carpet for Kerry as he ascends to the White House.

J

23. It was good enough. And that's all I strive for.

At one point I was going to take it again, but I never got around to it....

We don't need to bring sexuality into this.

I never took the ACTs.

ACT: 30
SAT: 1290

Doing well on those tests seemed so important at the time. But for what? Now look at me. I'm a courier.

Moral of the story: size doesn't matter as much as how you use it.

(Edited by jamiecarroll at 8:18 pm on Oct. 20, 2004)

The highest I ever got was 24. I took it in 8th grade too but I only made a 16.

Man, standardized tests are a bitch and a half. I had to get at least a 32 on the ACT to get the scholarship I needed in order to afford my overpriced education. I had to take that damn test 4 times. On try number four, I finally jumped from a 30 to a 33. I have no idea why, but I don't care. It was a wonderful feeling.

I never could master the SAT. I think my highest was 1280 or 1290.

I am going to have to begin studying for the GRE soon. I have a feeling I will do very, very badly unless I study tons. I feel very far removed from the world of academia, which is sad given my profession.

Anyone here taken it? Is it difficult? I know I'm screwed on math and science. I haven't had any since the 12th grade.

Hmmm... I forgot about the 8th grade ACT. Not a clue what I got.

Never took the SAT. Took the PSAT, though.

i also never took the ACT... 1330.

standardized tests never seemed to bother me, for some reason.

I took the GRE a couple of months ago. It's basically set up just like the SAT - with quantitative and verbal components, plus a writing section that is not factored into your numerical score. It's scored just like the SAT, with 1600 being a perfect score (800 math, 800 verbal).

What really sucks about it is that you have to take it on a computer (no, not your own computer). And it is timed. When taking standardized tests (or any tests, for that matter) I always go through and do the easy questions first - the ones that I know I can do right. Only after that do I go back through and wrestle with the ones I'm not sure about. Well, with the GRE, that's not possible. You do the questions one at a time, and once you've answered a question, there's no going back to it. Also, the writing section is on the computer, too, which I thought would be a bad thing, but was actually kind of nice.

The verbal stuff was really easy for me - vocabulary, reading comprehension, etc. - so I'm sure an English teacher like you will have no problem with it. The math was kind of a struggle. It wouldn't have been so hard if I'd had unlimited time, but that was not the case.

To study for it, I just went to the bookstore and bought a Kaplan GRE study book. It was a real life-saver for the math part, because it gives an overview of all of the different types of math problems that you might encounter, and served as a brief refresher for alot of the algebra/geometry stuff I'd forgotten how to do. All in all, I didn't do so hot. I got 640 on verbal and 560 on math, for a total of 1200. But then again, I only spent a couple of days studying.

If you really want to do well, you might want to take a GRE study class. They offer them at Nashville Tech, I believe. I hear that those really get you ready for the test, but they would also require a larger investment of time and money.

I'm on a standardized test-taking binge. I took the LSAT earlier this year (BY FAR the hardest standardized test I've ever seen) and I'm taking the GMAT in a couple of weeks.

blech

(Edited by Amanda at 5:42 am on Oct. 22, 2004)

this spring they are taking out analogies from the SAT and replacing it with an essay. which is really really great.

The math portion of the GRE is enough to make me break out into a cold sweat. I will definately be getting on of those books and taking some sort of class. I have about a year left before I have to take it. Good luck, Token!

the analogies are the bloodlife of the meaningless standardized test. what are they trying to do, make it relevant or something?

though I guess it will ease the cultural bias so yay.

I don't see how writing subjectively judged essays can replace a right or wrong answer. Boo to the SAT. The analogies ARE the SATs. Cultural bias my ass. Go read a freaking book.

I don't want to go into a Dennis Miller-ian rant here, but this is the dumbest thing I've heard. You know what? There are smart people and dumb people. And there are different levels of motivation throughout the spectrum. If you want to go to a good college, get off your ass and study for the damn entrance tests. There are standardized tests so a college can look at a student and compare them side by side and say this student is better prepared for our academic institution. To get rid of a right or wrong answer opens a pandora's box. How is cultural bias not going to be entered into an essay? Absolutely stupid.

The ACT did the same thing in 1991. They "culturally sensitized" the test. You know what colleges did? They figured that the new test was on average 2 points easier than the previous, and then adjusted their requirements accordingly. This whole "everybody deserves college" attitude is getting to be absolutely ridiculous. So what's the goal? Making a college degree the equivalent of a HS diploma? That's what its coming to. As Judge Smails said in Caddyshack, "The world needs ditch diggers, too, Danny"

Bahhhhh now I'm all wound up.

And just to clarify any misconceptions here, this is not meant as a racist rant, and its not directed towards you either Rach. My point is there's a couple of tests that help colleges determine who's cut out for their school. People know what's on the test, go learn it, and shut up about being unfair to all cultures. Everybody doesn't deserve to go to Harvard. Hell, everybody doesn't even deserve to go MTSU.

Like I said, I scored a 29...I think the minimum you had to get to attend MTSU was a 20.

I still feel stupid for going to this school.

I think it pretty much already is. 30 years ago, a college degree was a real accomplishment, and held real value in the eyes of employers. Today? Not so much. It doesn't mean what it used to. I had always thought that if I graduated from college, getting a good job with a good salary would be relatively easy. Boy was I wrong. EVERYBODY has a college degree these days, so it means little when talking to employers. What you need today is a Master's Degree. But in another 30 years, people will probably be saying the same things about master's degrees, and the thing to have will be a Doctorate. If you go far enough back, it was a big deal to graduate from high school, so I guess that's the way it goes.

By the way, I've always thought the analogies were easy. I'd much rather do those than an essay.

Amen, brother. Those tests require preparation. It's all about learning to take the test. Yes, I'm sure there are people who can go in and nail it just based on their intelligence or what not, but I think overall people need to study the types of information that is typically assessed.

JC, I bought a GRE study book last week and, as soon as I get done with our school play, I will begin studying for it. Not sure if I will go as far as a Nashville Tech class, though. Too expensive.

Also, I heard that you can take the GRE by computer or on paper, but that the paper ones are only offered like 2 or 3 times a year. Perhaps I'm wrong there, though.

nice.

I think I'm at a pretty good college and I never had to get off my ass, really. I'm sure that's true for a lot of people. So it must be more complicated than that.

Call me naive but I went to college to learn really cool stuff and about myself and the world, and I have succeeded. It's priceless even if I don't get a dream job. And who's to say no one chooses to be a ditch digger?

you're right, I think it's more elitist.

I think the point is that other cultures have shown that the tests are rubbish and do not accurately guage intelligence and/or worthiness. Overall I'd rather have them constantly trying to improve it than to keep it the same. Cultural bias is only one problem in a long list. And despite the fact that you can't imagine it, cultural bias exists yet and still.

I don't really see a problem with this, as long as they don't start making college ridiculously easy like high school. All it is doing is raising educational standards and encouraging people to stay in school longer. An education is good for everyone, even the ditch diggers.

Jamie-So they took the logic section off the GRE? I'm such a dork, I loved that part. The whole thing just seemed like the SAT all over again otherwise. I found it most helpful to just do a lot of practice questions.

I'm someone with a special skill for taking standardized tests, which was a blessing for college admissions. But like chrisanthemum said, I think those tests measure a very narrow segment of someone's aptitude/ intelligence. They're probably a necessary evil, because you have to have a basis of comparison for all the applicants. But I don't think that my having high scores necessarily translates into my being a better student, or someone you'd want more at your college. I think that it has more to do with your interest in learning & your openness to new ideas. Those aren't very measurable, though.

I agree with PF that removing analogies is bullshit, but probably because I like analogies. I do think there's some merit to the accusation of the tests being culturally biased. But if the whole educational system wasn't so biased i.e. poorer educations for poorer students, it wouldn't matter so much what the test was on.

I took the GRE last summer. The whole computer track-as-you-go approach really sucks. My understanding is that the logic section was removed and replaced with essays (which are graded for the most part by computer?) My essay question was: "In your opinion, do people work better individually or in groups?"

Yeah, you're right, I'm a total elitist asshole as everyone on this board can attest to.

I'm not even going to go into a point by point argument with you. I've got better things to do. I'm glad you went to school and found yourself, and studied really cool stuff. I'm sure your parents are proud.

And for the record, the point I was making (which it looks like others got) was that standardized tests are necessary evils to help schools. Everytime the SAT or ACT changes the schools adjust to get the students they want anyway.

I didn't say you were an elitist asshole, but you acknowledge it and it's good that you know that. If I cared what every board member attested to I wouldn't have posted at all. Sure, everyone looks fair-minded on a board full of elitists.

I'm glad you've opted to not get into an argument with me because that would be exhausting. I have no clue what the sarcasm was for.

I did get your point and proceeded to disagree with it, which I still do. For some odd reason I thought a different opinion would be enlightening. But your "Lemme explain it to you this way so you can see that I'm right" response has proven otherwise.

I can respect opposite opinions, and I'll acknowledge when someone has enlightened my thinking, but labeling me elitist has nothing to do with my argument (which was technically more of a rant, I hardly think the issue is THAT cut and dried.)

It's pretty hard to label me an elitist considering I grew up in rural Iowa. I've worked my ass off for everything I've earned in my life, nothing was handed to me. Oh sure I could have said "I'm just a dumb farmer boy and I'll never learn or understand what these tests are talking about." But I didn't. We are all culturally biased in one way or another. That's why its BS to dumb down a measuring tool. You have your opinion I have mine.

I'm just a bit more sensitive to it because my alma mater over the last decade has lowered their admission standards almost 10 ACT points over the last 15 years. I can't help to think that that cheapens my degree to some extent.

I'm not trying to attack you, I know it was a rant. I essentially just quoted you and then said the opposite. I suppose I have differing beliefs in the purpose of education, particularly the college degree. The "dumbing down" of tests has nothing to do with cultural bias. And I don't think elitism correlates with the amount of work that you do. I'm sure Paris Hilton would too say she "worked her ass off" at some point.

Hey, don't pick on Paris. I bet the scenes in those sex tapes required a hell of a lot of effort!

You obviously haven't seen the tapes. He did all the work and provided all the direction. She does, however, seem to have a natural aptitude for... um... well... nevermind.

Speaking of aptitude, I took the general GRE 5 years ago (on coputer) and honestly, having been a science major, I thought the math section was a joke. The verbal was much tougher because I didn't really have a solid background in words that no normal person uses on a daily basis. I got a 560 on that against my 790 in math.

As much as I enjoyed taking the logic section (on which I scored an 800), I think it's good they replaced it with an essay. That seemed like a test to see if your brain operates a certain way or not-- not if you're smart.

I took the Biochemistry/Cell Biolgoy/Molecular Biology test when applying for a grant and it kicked my ass. It probably didn't help that I had stayed up drinking the night before. If given the option, don't take the general and subject test on the same day.

No, I haven't seen the tapes.

And I actually despise Paris, especially in those Guess ads she's doing.