# SAT

Type Paper-based standardized test College Board, Educational Testin' Service Writin', critical readin', mathematics Admission to undergraduate programs of universities or colleges 1926; 95 years ago 3 hours (without the bleedin' essay) or 3 hours 50 minutes (with the bleedin' essay until June 2021) Test scored on scale of 200–800, (in 10-point increments), on each of two sections (total 400–1600).Essay scored on scale of 2–8, in 1-point increments, on each of three criteria 7 times annually[a] Worldwide English Over 2.19 million high school graduates in the oul' class of 2020[2] No official prerequisite. Intended for high school students. Arra' would ye listen to this shite? Fluency in English assumed. US\$55.00 to US\$108.00, dependin' on country.[3] Most universities and colleges offerin' undergraduate programs in the feckin' U.S. sat.collegeboard.org
2013 logo

The SAT (/ˌɛsˌˈt/ ess-ay-TEE) is a bleedin' standardized test widely used for college admissions in the feckin' United States. Since its debut in 1926, its name and scorin' have changed several times; originally called the Scholastic Aptitude Test, it was later called the feckin' Scholastic Assessment Test, then the bleedin' SAT I: Reasonin' Test, then the oul' SAT Reasonin' Test, then simply the bleedin' SAT.

The SAT is wholly owned, developed, and published by the oul' College Board, a bleedin' private, not-for-profit organization in the United States, what? It is administered on behalf of the feckin' College Board by the oul' Educational Testin' Service,[4] which until recently developed the oul' SAT as well.[5] The test is intended to assess students' readiness for college. The SAT was originally designed not to be aligned with high school curricula,[6] but several adjustments were made for the version of the bleedin' SAT introduced in 2016, and College Board president David Coleman has said that he also wanted to make the feckin' test reflect more closely what students learn in high school with the bleedin' new Common Core standards.[7]

The SAT takes three hours to finish and as of 2021 costs US\$55.00, excludin' late fees, with additional processin' fees if the feckin' SAT is taken outside the oul' United States.[8] Scores on the feckin' SAT range from 400 to 1600, combinin' test results from two 200-to-800-point sections: the feckin' Mathematics section and the bleedin' Evidence-Based Readin' and Writin' section. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. Although takin' the oul' SAT, or its competitor the oul' ACT, is required for freshman entry to many colleges and universities in the United States,[9] durin' the 2010s, many institutions made these entrance exams optional,[10][11][12] but this did not stop the feckin' students from attemptin' to achieve high scores[13] as they and their parents are skeptical of what "optional" means in this context.[14][15] In fact, the test-takin' population was increasin' steadily.[16] And while this may have resulted in a bleedin' long-term decline in scores,[16][17][18] experts cautioned against usin' this to gauge the scholastic levels of the feckin' entire U.S. population.[18]

Startin' with the 2015–16 school year, the College Board began workin' with Khan Academy to provide free SAT preparation.[19] On January 19, 2021, the feckin' College Board announced the discontinuation of the optional essay section, as well as its SAT Subject Tests, after June 2021.[20][21]

While a holy considerable amount of research has been done on the SAT, many questions and misconceptions remain.[22][23] Outside of college admissions, the oul' SAT is also used by researchers studyin' human intelligence in general and intellectual precociousness in particular,[24][25][26] and by some employers in the feckin' recruitment process.[27][28][29]

## Function

U.S, to be sure. states in blue had more seniors in the oul' class of 2006 who took the bleedin' SAT than the ACT while those in red had more seniors takin' the oul' ACT than the oul' SAT.
U.S, bedad. states in blue had more seniors in the bleedin' class of 2020 who took the oul' SAT than the ACT while those in red had more seniors takin' the bleedin' ACT than the oul' SAT.

The SAT is typically taken by high school juniors and seniors.[30] The College Board states that the oul' SAT is intended to measure literacy, numeracy and writin' skills that are needed for academic success in college, to be sure. They state that the bleedin' SAT assesses how well the bleedin' test-takers analyze and solve problems—skills they learned in school that they will need in college. However, the bleedin' test is administered under a bleedin' tight time limit (speeded) to help produce a range of scores.[31]

The College Board also states that use of the oul' SAT in combination with high school grade point average (GPA) provides a bleedin' better indicator of success in college than high school grades alone, as measured by college freshman GPA. Various studies conducted over the feckin' lifetime of the SAT show a statistically significant increase in correlation of high school grades and college freshman grades when the oul' SAT is factored in.[32] The predictive validity and powers of the oul' SAT are topics of active research in psychometrics.[22]

There are substantial differences in fundin', curricula, gradin', and difficulty among U.S. Right so. secondary schools due to U.S. federalism, local control, and the bleedin' prevalence of private, distance, and home schooled students, bedad. SAT (and ACT) scores are intended to supplement the feckin' secondary school record and help admission officers put local data—such as course work, grades, and class rank—in a feckin' national perspective.[33]

Historically, the feckin' SAT was more widely used by students livin' in coastal states and the bleedin' ACT was more widely used by students in the feckin' Midwest and South; in recent years, however, an increasin' number of students on the East and West coasts have been takin' the oul' ACT.[34][35] Since 2007, all four-year colleges and universities in the feckin' United States that require a bleedin' test as part of an application for admission will accept either the bleedin' SAT or ACT, and as of Fall 2022, over 1400 four-year colleges and universities do not require any standardized test scores at all for admission, though some of them are applyin' this policy only temporarily due to the feckin' coronavirus pandemic.[36][37]

## Structure

The SAT has two main sections, namely Evidence-Based Readin' and Writin' (EBRW, normally known as the oul' "English" portion of the feckin' test) and the bleedin' Math section. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. These are both further banjaxed down into four sections: Readin', Writin' and Language, Math (no calculator), and Math (calculator allowed). The test taker was also optionally able to write an essay which, in that case, is the feckin' fifth test section, be the hokey! The total time for the scored portion of the feckin' SAT is three hours (or three hours and fifty minutes if the feckin' optional essay section was taken). Here's a quare one for ye. Some test takers who are not takin' the feckin' essay may also have a fifth section, which is used, at least in part, for the feckin' pretestin' of questions that may appear on future administrations of the bleedin' SAT, to be sure. (These questions are not included in the computation of the feckin' SAT score.)

Two section scores result from takin' the bleedin' SAT: Evidence-Based Readin' and Writin', and Math, so it is. Section scores are reported on a feckin' scale of 200 to 800, and each section score is a feckin' multiple of ten. A total score for the bleedin' SAT is calculated by addin' the two section scores, resultin' in total scores that range from 400 to 1600. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. In addition to the two section scores, three "test" scores on a scale of 10 to 40 are reported, one for each of Readin', Writin' and Language, and Math, with increment of 1 for Readin' / Writin' and Language, and 0.5 for Math. There are also two cross-test scores that each range from 10 to 40 points: Analysis in History/Social Studies and Analysis in Science.[38] The essay, if taken, was scored separately from the feckin' two section scores.[39] Two people score each essay by each awardin' 1 to 4 points in each of three categories: Readin', Analysis, and Writin'.[40] These two scores from the different examiners are then combined to give a feckin' total score from 2 to 8 points per category. Though sometimes people quote their essay score out of 24, the oul' College Board themselves do not combine the oul' different categories to give one essay score, instead givin' a feckin' score for each category.

There is no penalty or negative markin' for guessin' on the oul' SAT: scores are based on the oul' number of questions answered correctly, for the craic. The optional essay will not be offered after the June 2021 administration.[20][21] College Board said it would discontinue the oul' essay section because "there are other ways for students to demonstrate their mastery of essay writin'," includin' the bleedin' test's readin' and writin' portion.[20][21] It also acknowledged that the oul' COVID-19 pandemic had played an oul' role in the bleedin' change, acceleratin' 'a process already underway'.[21]

The Readin' Test of the feckin' SAT contains one section of 52 questions and an oul' time limit of 65 minutes.[39] All questions are multiple-choice and based on readin' passages. Tables, graphs, and charts may accompany some passages, but no math is required to correctly answer the bleedin' correspondin' questions. There are five passages (up to two of which may be a pair of smaller passages) on the bleedin' Readin' Test and 10-11 questions per passage or passage pair. Sure this is it. SAT Readin' passages draw from three main fields: history, social studies, and science. Each SAT Readin' Test always includes: one passage from U.S. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. or world literature; one passage from either a U.S, Lord bless us and save us. foundin' document or a related text; one passage about economics, psychology, sociology, or another social science; and, two science passages, would ye swally that? Answers to all of the oul' questions are based only on the bleedin' content stated in or implied by the feckin' passage or passage pair.[41]

The Readin' Test contributes (with the bleedin' Writin' and Language Test) to two subscores, each rangin' from 1 to 15 points:[38]

• Command of Evidence
• Words in Context

### Writin' and Language Test

The Writin' and Language Test of the SAT is made up of one section with 44 multiple-choice questions and an oul' time limit of 35 minutes.[39] As with the bleedin' Readin' Test, all questions are based on readin' passages which may be accompanied by tables, graphs, and charts. The test taker will be asked to read the passages and suggest corrections or improvements for the oul' contents underlined. Readin' passages on this test range in content from topic arguments to nonfiction narratives in a feckin' variety of subjects, like. The skills bein' evaluated include: increasin' the clarity of argument; improvin' word choice; improvin' analysis of topics in social studies and science; changin' sentence or word structure to increase organizational quality and impact of writin'; and, fixin' or improvin' sentence structure, word usage, and punctuation.[42]

The Writin' and Language Test reports two subscores, each rangin' from 1 to 15 points:[38]

• Expression of Ideas
• Standard English Conventions

### Mathematics

An example of an SAT "grid-in" math question and the oul' correctly gridded answer.

The mathematics portion of the oul' SAT is divided into two sections: Math Test – No Calculator and Math Test – Calculator. Sure this is it. In total, the feckin' SAT math test is 80 minutes long and includes 58 questions: 45 multiple choice questions and 13 grid-in questions.[43] The multiple choice questions have four possible answers; the oul' grid-in questions are free response and require the feckin' test taker to provide an answer.

• The Math Test – No Calculator section has 20 questions (15 multiple choice and 5 grid-in) and lasts 25 minutes.
• The Math Test – Calculator section has 38 questions (30 multiple choice and 8 grid-in) and lasts 55 minutes.

Several scores are provided to the test taker for the math test, bedad. A subscore (on a scale of 1 to 15) is reported for each of three categories of math content:

• "Heart of Algebra" (linear equations, systems of linear equations, and linear functions)
• "Problem Solvin' and Data Analysis" (statistics, modelin', and problem-solvin' skills)
• "Passport to Advanced Math" (non-linear expressions, radicals, exponentials and other topics that form the basis of more advanced math).

A test score for the math test is reported on a scale of 10 to 40, with an increment of 0.5, and a feckin' section score (equal to the feckin' test score multiplied by 20) is reported on an oul' scale of 200 to 800.[44][45][46]

#### Calculator use

All scientific and most graphin' calculators, includin' Computer Algebra System (CAS) calculators, are permitted on the SAT Math – Calculator section only, that's fierce now what? All four-function calculators are allowed as well; however, these devices are not recommended. I hope yiz are all ears now. All mobile phone and smartphone calculators, calculators with typewriter-like (QWERTY) keyboards, laptops and other portable computers, and calculators capable of accessin' the feckin' Internet are not permitted.[47]

Research was conducted by the bleedin' College Board to study the feckin' effect of calculator use on SAT I: Reasonin' Test math scores. Here's another quare one. The study found that performance on the bleedin' math section was associated with the extent of calculator use: those usin' calculators on about one third to one half of the items averaged higher scores than those usin' calculators more or less frequently. However, the feckin' effect was "more likely to have been the result of able students usin' calculators differently than less able students rather than calculator use per se."[48] There is some evidence that the frequent use of a calculator in school outside of the feckin' testin' situation has an oul' positive effect on test performance compared to those who do not use calculators in school.[49]

### Style of questions

Most of the feckin' questions on the bleedin' SAT, except for the feckin' optional essay and the grid-in math responses, are multiple choice; all multiple-choice questions have four answer choices, one of which is correct. Chrisht Almighty. Thirteen of the oul' questions on the oul' math portion of the bleedin' SAT (about 22% of all the oul' math questions) are not multiple choice.[50] They instead require the test taker to bubble in an oul' number in an oul' four-column grid.

All questions on each section of the bleedin' SAT are weighted equally. For each correct answer, one raw point is added.[51] No points are deducted for incorrect answers. The final score is derived from the raw score; the oul' precise conversion chart varies between test administrations.

Section Average Score 2020 (200 - 800)[2] Time (Minutes) Content
Mathematics 523 25+55=80 Number and operations; algebra and functions; geometry; statistics, probability, and data analysis

## Logistics

### Frequency

The SAT is offered seven times a holy year in the feckin' United States: in August, October, November, December, March, May, and June. Whisht now. For international students SAT is offered four times a year: in October, December, March and May (2020 exception: To cover worldwide May cancelation, an additional September exam was introduced, and August was made available to international test-takers as well), grand so. The test is typically offered on the first Saturday of the oul' month for the bleedin' October, November, December, May, and June administrations.[52][53] The test was taken by 2,198,460 high school graduates in the class of 2020.[2]

Candidates wishin' to take the bleedin' test may register online at the College Board's website or by mail at least three weeks before the feckin' test date.

### Fees

The SAT costs US\$49.50 (£39.50, €43.50) (US\$64.50 with the feckin' optional essay), plus additional fees of over US\$45 if testin' outside the feckin' United States as of 2019.[8] The College Board makes fee waivers available for low income students. Additional fees apply for late registration, standby testin', registration changes, scores by telephone, and extra score reports (beyond the oul' four provided for free).

### Accommodation for candidates with disabilities

Students with verifiable disabilities, includin' physical and learnin' disabilities, are eligible to take the bleedin' SAT with accommodations. Whisht now. The standard time increase for students requirin' additional time due to learnin' disabilities or physical handicaps is time + 50%; time + 100% is also offered.

## Scaled scores and percentiles

Students receive their online score reports approximately two to three weeks after test administration (longer for mailed, paper scores).[54] Included in the oul' report is the bleedin' total score (the sum of the feckin' two section scores, with each section graded on a feckin' scale of 200–800) and three subscores (in readin', writin', and analysis, each on a scale of 2–8) for the optional essay.[55] Students may also receive, for an additional fee, various score verification services, includin' (for select test administrations) the bleedin' Question and Answer Service, which provides the bleedin' test questions, the student's answers, the oul' correct answers, and the bleedin' type and difficulty of each question.[56]

In addition, students receive two percentile scores, each of which is defined by the bleedin' College Board as the percentage of students in a comparison group with equal or lower test scores, grand so. One of the feckin' percentiles, called the feckin' "Nationally Representative Sample Percentile", uses as an oul' comparison group all 11th and 12th graders in the feckin' United States, regardless of whether or not they took the feckin' SAT. Here's another quare one. This percentile is theoretical and is derived usin' methods of statistical inference. The second percentile, called the feckin' "SAT User Percentile", uses actual scores from a feckin' comparison group of recent United States students that took the oul' SAT. For example, for the oul' school year 2019–2020, the oul' SAT User Percentile was based on the oul' test scores of students in the oul' graduatin' classes of 2018 and 2019 who took the oul' SAT (specifically, the 2016 revision) durin' high school, that's fierce now what? Students receive both types of percentiles for their total score as well as their section scores.[55]

### Percentiles for total scores (2019)

Percentiles for total scores (2019)[55]
Score, 400–1600 scale SAT User Nationally
representative sample
1600 99+ 99+
1550 99+ 99+
1500 98 99
1450 96 99
1400 94 97
1350 91 94
1300 86 91
1250 81 86
1200 74 81
1150 67 74
1100 58 67
1050 49 58
1000 40 48
950 31 38
900 23 29
850 16 21
800 10 14
750 5 8
700 2 4
650 1 1
640–400 <1 <1

### Percentiles for total scores (2006)

The followin' chart summarizes the original percentiles used for the bleedin' version of the bleedin' SAT administered in March 2005 through January 2016. These percentiles used students in the bleedin' graduatin' class of 2006 as the comparison group.[57][58]

Percentile Score 400–1600 scale,
(official, 2006)
Score, 600–2400 scale
(official, 2006)
99.93/99.98* 1600 2400
99.5 ≥1540 ≥2280
99 ≥1480 ≥2200
98 ≥1450 ≥2140
97 ≥1420 ≥2100
93 ≥1340 ≥1990
88 ≥1280 ≥1900
81 ≥1220 ≥1800
72 ≥1150 ≥1700
61 ≥1090 ≥1600
48 ≥1010 ≥1500
36 ≥950 ≥1400
24 ≥870 ≥1300
15 ≥810 ≥1200
8 ≥730 ≥1090
4 ≥650 ≥990
2 ≥590 ≥890
* The percentile of the oul' perfect score was 99.98
on the feckin' 2400 scale and 99.93 on the 1600 scale.

### Percentiles for total scores (1984)

Percentiles for total scores (1984)[59]
Score (1984) Percentile
1600 99.9995
1550 99.983
1500 99.89
1450 99.64
1400 99.10
1350 98.14
1300 96.55
1250 94.28
1200 91.05
1150 86.93
1100 81.62
1050 75.31
1000 67.81
950 59.64
900 50.88
850 41.98
800 33.34
750 25.35
700 18.26
650 12.37
600 7.58
550 3.97
500 1.53
450 0.29
400 0.002

The version of the feckin' SAT administered before April 1995 had a bleedin' very high ceilin'. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. In any given year, only seven of the feckin' million test-takers scored above 1580. A score above 1580 was equivalent to the feckin' 99.9995 percentile.[60]

In 2015 the oul' average score for the bleedin' Class of 2015 was 1490 out of a maximum 2400. That was down 7 points from the feckin' previous class's mark and was the feckin' lowest composite score of the past decade.[17]

## SAT–ACT score comparisons

The College Board and ACT, Inc., conducted a bleedin' joint study of students who took both the feckin' SAT and the feckin' ACT between September 2004 (for the feckin' ACT) or March 2005 (for the SAT) and June 2006. Tables were provided to concord scores for students takin' the feckin' SAT after January 2005 and before March 2016.[61][62] In May 2016, the oul' College Board released concordance tables to concord scores on the feckin' SAT used from March 2005 through January 2016 to the SAT used since March 2016, as well as tables to concord scores on the feckin' SAT used since March 2016 to the ACT.[63]

In 2018, the bleedin' College Board, in partnership with the bleedin' ACT, introduced a new concordance table to better compare how a feckin' student would fare one test to another.[64] This is now considered the feckin' official concordance to be used by college professionals and is replacin' the feckin' one from 2016. Here's a quare one for ye. The new concordance no longer features the old SAT (out of 2,400), just the new SAT (out of 1,600) and the ACT (out of 36).

## Elucidation

### Preparation

Pioneered by Stanley Kaplan in 1946 with a 64-hour course,[65] SAT preparation has become a highly lucrative field.[66] Many companies and organizations offer test preparation in the form of books, classes, online courses, and tutorin'.[67] The test preparation industry began almost simultaneously with the bleedin' introduction of university entrance exams in the U.S. and flourished from the bleedin' start.[68] Test-preparation scams are a holy genuine problem for parents and students.[69]

Nevertheless, the College Board maintains that the feckin' SAT is essentially uncoachable and research by the feckin' College Board and the bleedin' National Association of College Admission Counselin' suggests that tutorin' courses result in an average increase of about 20 points on the feckin' math section and 10 points on the bleedin' verbal section.[70] Like IQ scores, which are a bleedin' strong correlate, SAT scores tend to be stable over time, meanin' SAT preparation courses offer only an oul' limited advantage.[71] An early meta-analysis (from 1983) found similar results and noted "the size of the coachin' effect estimated from the oul' matched or randomized studies (10 points) seems too small to be practically important."[72] Statisticians Ben Domingue and Derek C. Briggs examined data from the oul' Education Longitudinal Survey of 2002 and found that the effects of coachin' were only statistically significant for mathematics; moreover, coachin' had a greater effect on certain students than others, especially those who have taken rigorous courses and those of high socioeconomic status.[73] A 2012 systematic literature review estimated a bleedin' coachin' effect of 23 and 32 points for the math and verbal tests, respectively.[68] A 2016 meta-analysis estimated the oul' effect size to be 0.09 and 0.16 for the oul' verbal and math sections respectively, although there was an oul' large degree of heterogeneity.[74] Public misunderstandin' of how to prepare for the bleedin' SAT continues to be exploited by the preparation industry.[22]

The College Board announced a partnership with the bleedin' non-profit organization Khan Academy to offer free test-preparation materials startin' in the bleedin' 2015–16 academic year to help level the bleedin' playin' field for students from low-income families.[19][17] Students may also bypass costly preparation programs usin' the oul' more affordable official guide from the oul' College Board and with solid studyin' habits.[75]

There is some evidence that takin' the feckin' PSAT at least once can help students do better on the SAT;[76] moreover, like the case for the SAT, top scorers on the feckin' PSAT could earn scholarships.[15] Accordin' to cognitive scientist Sian Beilock, 'chokin'', or substandard performance on important occasions, such as takin' the oul' SAT, can be prevented by doin' plenty of practice questions and proctored exams to improve procedural memory, makin' use of the oul' booklet to write down intermediate steps to avoid overloadin' workin' memory, and writin' a bleedin' diary entry about one's anxieties on the oul' day of the bleedin' exam to enhance self-empathy and positive self-image.[77]

### Predictive validity and powers

In 2009, education researchers Richard C, the hoor. Atkinson and Saul Geiser from the oul' University of California (UC) system argued that high school GPA is better than the oul' SAT at predictin' college grades regardless of high school type or quality.[78] It is the feckin' hope of some UC officials to increase the bleedin' number of African- and Latino-American students attendin' and they plan to do so by castin' doubt on the SAT and by decreasin' the oul' number of Asian-American students, who are heavily represented in the oul' UC student body (29.5%) relative to their share of the population of California (13.6%).[79] However, their assertions on the oul' predictive validity of the oul' SAT has been contested by the bleedin' UC academic senate.[79] In its 2020 report, the oul' UC academic senate found that the feckin' SAT was better than high school GPA at predictin' first year GPA, and just as good as high school GPA at predictin' undergraduate GPA, first year retention, and graduation. Jaykers! This predictive validity was found to hold across demographic groups.[80] A series of College Board reports point to similar predictive validity across demographic groups.[81][82]

The SAT is correlated with intelligence and as such estimates individual differences. It does not, however, have anythin' to say about "effective cognitive performance," or what intelligent people do.[22] Nor does it measure non-cognitive traits associated with academic success such positive attitudes or conscientiousness.[22][83] Psychometricians Thomas R. Whisht now and eist liom. Coyle and David R, the shitehawk. Pillow showed in 2008 that the oul' SAT predicts college GPA even after removin' the feckin' general factor of intelligence (g), with which it is highly correlated.[84] A 2009 study found that SAT or ACT scores and high-school GPAs are strong predictors of cumulative university GPAs, bedad. In particular, those with standardized test scores in the feckin' 50th percentile or better had a two-thirds chance of havin' an oul' cumulative university GPA in the top half.[85][23] A 2010 meta-analysis by researchers from the feckin' University of Minnesota offered evidence that standardized admissions tests such as the bleedin' SAT predicted not only freshman GPA but also overall collegiate GPA.[83][71] A 2012 study from the oul' same university usin' a multi-institutional data set revealed that even after controllin' for socioeconomic status and high-school GPA, SAT scores were still as capable of predictin' freshman GPA among university or college students.[86] A 2019 study with an oul' sample size of around a bleedin' quarter of a holy million students suggests that together, SAT scores and high-school GPA offer an excellent predictor of freshman collegiate GPA and second-year retention.[22] In 2018, psychologists Oren R. Story? Shewach, Kyle D. Jaysis. McNeal, Nathan R, the shitehawk. Kuncel, and Paul R. Arra' would ye listen to this shite? Sackett showed that both high-school GPA and SAT scores predict enrollment in advanced collegiate courses, even after controllin' for Advanced Placement credits.[87][22]

Education economist Jesse M. Listen up now to this fierce wan. Rothstein indicated in 2005 that high-school average SAT scores were better at predictin' freshman university GPAs compared to individual SAT scores. C'mere til I tell ya. In other words, a feckin' student's SAT scores were not as informative with regards to future academic success as his or her high school's average. C'mere til I tell ya. In contrast, individual high-school GPAs were a bleedin' better predictor of collegiate success than average high-school GPAs.[88][89] Furthermore, an admissions officer who failed to take average SAT scores into account would risk overestimatin' the future performance of an oul' student from a bleedin' low-scorin' school and underestimatin' that of a feckin' student from a feckin' high-scorin' school.[89]

Like other standardized tests like the oul' ACT or the GRE, the oul' SAT is a feckin' traditional method for assessin' the feckin' academic aptitude of students who have had vastly different educational experiences and as such is focused on the oul' common materials that the bleedin' students could reasonably be expected to have encountered throughout the feckin' course of study. Me head is hurtin' with all this raidin'. As such the feckin' mathematics section contains no materials above the precalculus level, for instance, the cute hoor. Psychologist Raymond Cattell referred to this as testin' for "historical" rather than "current" crystallized intelligence.[90] Psychologist Scott Barry Kaufman further noted that the SAT can only measure a feckin' snapshot of a bleedin' person's performance at a particular moment in time.[91] Educational psychologists Jonathan Wai, David Lubinski, and Camilla Benbow observed that one way to increase the bleedin' predictive validity of the bleedin' SAT is by assessin' the feckin' student's spatial reasonin' ability, as the bleedin' SAT at present does not contain any questions to that effect, grand so. Spatial reasonin' skills are important for success in STEM.[92] A 2006 study led by psychometrician Robert Sternberg found that the ability of SAT scores and high-school GPAs to predict collegiate performance could further be enhanced by additional assessments of analytical, creative, and practical thinkin'.[93][94]

Experimental psychologist Meredith Frey noted that while advances in education research and neuroscience can help improve the feckin' ability to predict scholastic achievement in the bleedin' future, the oul' SAT remains a valuable tool in the meantime.[22] In a holy 2014 op-ed for The New York Times, psychologist John D. Mayer called the predictive powers of the bleedin' SAT "an astonishin' achievement" and cautioned against makin' it and other standardized tests optional.[95][23] Research by psychometricians David Lubinsky, Camilla Benbow, and their colleagues has shown that the feckin' SAT could even predict life outcomes beyond university.[23]

### Difficulty and relative weight

The SAT rigorously assesses students' mental stamina, memory, speed, accuracy, and capacity for abstract and analytical reasonin'.[75] For American universities and colleges, standardized test scores are the most important factor in admissions, second only to high-school GPAs.[94] By international standards, however, the SAT is not that difficult.[96] For example, South Korea's College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) and Finland's Matriculation Examination are both longer, tougher, and count for more towards the admissibility of a holy student to university.[97] In many countries around the oul' world, exams, includin' university entrance exams, are the feckin' sole decidin' factor of admission; school grades are simply irrelevant.[96] In China and India, doin' well on the Gaokao or the feckin' IIT-JEE, respectively, enhances the oul' social status of the students and their families.[98]

In an article from 2012, educational psychologist Jonathan Wai argued that the oul' SAT was too easy to be useful to the bleedin' most competitive of colleges and universities, whose applicants typically had brilliant high-school GPAs and standardized test scores, like. Admissions officers therefore had the oul' burden of differentiatin' the top scorers from one another, not knowin' whether or not the feckin' students' perfect or near-perfect scores truly reflected their scholastic aptitudes, Lord bless us and save us. He suggested that the oul' College Board make the SAT more difficult, which would raise the bleedin' measurement ceilin' of the oul' test, allowin' the top schools to identify the best and brightest among the bleedin' applicants.[99] At that time, the College Board was already workin' on makin' the oul' SAT tougher.[99] The changes were announced in 2014 and implemented in 2016.[100]

After realizin' the feckin' June 2018 test was easier than usual, the College Board made adjustments resultin' in lower-than-expected scores, promptin' complaints from the bleedin' students, though some understood this was to ensure fairness.[101] In its analysis of the incident, the Princeton Review supported the bleedin' idea of curvin' grades, but pointed out that the test was incapable of distinguishin' students in the 86th percentile (650 points) or higher in mathematics. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. The Princeton Review also noted that this particular curve was unusual in that it offered no cushion against careless or last-minute mistakes for high-achievin' students.[102] The Review posted a holy similar blog post for the oul' SAT of August 2019, when an oul' similar incident happened and the College Board responded in the feckin' same manner, notin', "A student who misses two questions on an easier test should not get as good a score as a bleedin' student who misses two questions on a hard test. C'mere til I tell yiz. Equatin' takes care of that issue." It also cautioned students against retakin' the SAT immediately, for they might be disappointed again, and recommended that instead, they give themselves some "leeway" before tryin' again.[103]

### Association with general cognitive ability

In a feckin' 2000 study, psychometrician Ann M. Gallagher and her colleagues found that only the top students made use of intuitive reasonin' in solvin' problems encountered on the oul' mathematics section of the oul' SAT.[104] Cognitive psychologists Brenda Hannon and Mary McNaughton-Cassill discovered that havin' a good workin' memory, the bleedin' ability of knowledge integration, and low levels of test anxiety predicts high performance on the SAT.[105]

Frey and Detterman (2004) investigated associations of SAT scores with intelligence test scores. Usin' an estimate of general mental ability, or g, based on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, they found SAT scores to be highly correlated with g (r=.82 in their sample, .857 when adjusted for non-linearity) in their sample taken from a bleedin' 1979 national probability survey. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. Additionally, they investigated the feckin' correlation between SAT results, usin' the bleedin' revised and recentered form of the oul' test, and scores on the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices, a test of fluid intelligence (reasonin'), this time usin' an oul' non-random sample. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. They found that the feckin' correlation of SAT results with scores on the feckin' Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices was .483, they estimated that this correlation would have been about 0.72 were it not for the bleedin' restriction of ability range in the feckin' sample. They also noted that there appeared to be an oul' ceilin' effect on the oul' Raven's scores which may have suppressed the oul' correlation.[106] Beaujean and colleagues (2006) have reached similar conclusions to those reached by Frey and Detterman.[107] Because the bleedin' SAT is strongly correlated with general intelligence, it can be used as a proxy to measure intelligence, especially when the oul' time-consumin' traditional methods of assessment are unavailable.[22]

Psychometrician Linda Gottfredson noted that the oul' SAT is effective at identifyin' intellectually gifted college-bound students.[108]

For decades many critics have accused designers of the verbal SAT of cultural bias as an explanation for the feckin' disparity in scores between poorer and wealthier test-takers,[109] with the bleedin' biggest critics comin' from the oul' University of California system.[110][111] A famous example of this perceived bias in the SAT I was the bleedin' oarsmanregatta analogy question, which is no longer part of the feckin' exam. The object of the oul' question was to find the oul' pair of terms that had the feckin' relationship most similar to the bleedin' relationship between "runner" and "marathon". The correct answer was "oarsman" and "regatta". Would ye believe this shite?The choice of the correct answer was thought to have presupposed students' familiarity with rowin', a sport popular with the wealthy.[112] However, for psychometricians, analogy questions are a bleedin' useful tool to gauge the feckin' mental abilities of students, for, even if the feckin' meanin' of two words are unclear, a feckin' student with sufficiently strong analytical thinkin' skills should still be able to identify their relationships.[110] Analogy questions were removed in 2005.[113] In their place are questions that provide more contextual information should the feckin' students be ignorant of the feckin' relevant definition of a word, makin' it easier for them to guess the correct answer.[114]

### Association with college or university majors and rankings

In 2010, physicists Stephen Hsu and James Schombert of the oul' University of Oregon examined five years of student records at their school and discovered that the oul' academic standin' of students majorin' in mathematics or physics (but not biology, English, sociology, or history) was strongly dependent on SAT mathematics scores. Sufferin' Jaysus. Students with an SAT mathematics scores below 600 were highly unlikely to excel as a bleedin' mathematics or physics major, you know yerself. Nevertheless, they found no such patterns between the feckin' SAT verbal, or combined SAT verbal and mathematics and the bleedin' other aforementioned subjects.[115][116]

In 2015, educational psychologist Jonathan Wai of Duke University analyzed average test scores from the feckin' Army General Classification Test in 1946 (10,000 students), the oul' Selective Service College Qualification Test in 1952 (38,420), Project Talent in the oul' early 1970s (400,000), the Graduate Record Examination between 2002 and 2005 (over 1.2 million), and the bleedin' SAT Math and Verbal in 2014 (1.6 million). Wai identified one consistent pattern: those with the feckin' highest test scores tended to pick the oul' physical sciences and engineerin' as their majors while those with the lowest were more likely to choose education and agriculture. G'wan now and listen to this wan. (See figure below.)[116][117]

A 2020 paper by Laura H, fair play. Gunn and her colleagues examinin' data from 1389 institutions across the bleedin' United States unveiled strong positive correlations between the feckin' average SAT percentiles of incomin' students and the feckin' shares of graduates majorin' in STEM and the bleedin' social sciences. On the bleedin' other hand, they found negative correlations between the former and the shares of graduates in psychology, theology, law enforcement, recreation and fitness.[118]

Various researchers have established that average SAT or ACT scores and college rankin' in the bleedin' U.S. News & World Report are highly correlated, almost 0.9.[22][119][120][b] Between the 1980s and the 2010s, the oul' U.S. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. population grew while universities and colleges did not expand their capacities as substantially, bejaysus. As a result, admissions rates fell considerably, meanin' it has become more difficult to get admitted to a holy school whose alumni include one's parents. On top of that, high-scorin' students nowadays are much more likely to leave their hometowns in pursuit of higher education at prestigious institutions. Here's a quare one for ye. Consequently, standardized tests, such as the bleedin' SAT, are a bleedin' more reliable measure of selectivity than admissions rates, game ball! Still, when Michael J. Petrilli and Pedro Enamorado analyzed the feckin' SAT composite scores (math and verbal) of incomin' freshman classes of 1985 and 2016 of the feckin' top universities and liberal arts colleges in the bleedin' United States, they found that the median scores of new students increased by 93 points for their sample, from 1216 to 1309. In particular, fourteen institutions saw an increase of at least 150 points, includin' the feckin' University of Notre-Dame (from 1290 to 1440, or 150 points) and Elon College (from 952 to 1192, or 240 points).[121]

### Association with types of schoolin'

While there seems to be evidence that private schools tend to produce students who do better on standardized tests such as the feckin' ACT or the feckin' SAT, Keven Duncan and Jonathan Sandy showed, usin' data from the oul' National Longitudinal Surveys of Youth, that when student characteristics, such as age, race, and sex (7%), family background (45%), school quality (26%), and other factors were taken into account, the advantage of private schools diminished by 78%. The researchers concluded that students attendin' private schools already had the attributes associated with high scores on their own.[122]

### Association with educational and societal standings and outcomes

Research from the University of California system published in 2001 analyzin' data of their undergraduates between Fall 1996 through Fall 1999, inclusive, found that the SAT II[c] was the feckin' single best predictor of collegiate success in the sense of freshman GPA, followed by high-school GPA, and finally the feckin' SAT I. After controllin' for family income and parental education, the already low ability of the oul' SAT to measure aptitude and college readiness fell sharply while the bleedin' more substantial aptitude and college readiness measurin' abilities of high school GPA and the oul' SAT II each remained undiminished (and even shlightly increased). Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. The University of California system required both the feckin' SAT I and the bleedin' SAT II from applicants to the UC system durin' the four academic years of the bleedin' study.[123] This analysis is heavily publicized but is contradicted by many studies.[83]

There is evidence that the bleedin' SAT is correlated with societal and educational outcomes,[91] includin' finishin' a four-year university program.[124] A 2012 paper from psychologists at the bleedin' University of Minnesota analyzin' multi-institutional data sets suggested that the oul' SAT maintained its ability to predict collegiate performance even after controllin' for socioeconomic status (as measured by the feckin' combination of parental educational attainment and income) and high-school GPA. This means that SAT scores were not merely a feckin' proxy for measurin' socioeconomic status, the researchers concluded.[86][125] This findin' has been replicated and shown to hold across racial or ethnic groups and for both sexes.[22] Moreover, the feckin' Minnesota researchers found that the socioeconomic status distributions of the oul' student bodies of the feckin' schools examined reflected those of their respective applicant pools.[86] Because of what it measures, a holy person's SAT scores cannot be separated from his or her socioeconomic background.[91]

In 2007, Rebecca Zwick and Jennifer Greif Green observed that a typical analysis did not take into account that heterogeneity of the bleedin' high schools attended by the bleedin' students in terms of not just the socioeconomic statuses of the bleedin' student bodies but also the standards of gradin'. Listen up now to this fierce wan. Zwick and Greif Green proceeded to show that when these were accounted for, the oul' correlation between family socioeconomic status and classroom grades and rank increased whereas that between socioeconomic status and SAT scores fell, game ball! They concluded that school grades and SAT scores were similarly associated with family income.[88]

Accordin' to the feckin' College Board, in 2019, 56% of the bleedin' test takers had parents with a feckin' university degree, 27% parents with no more than a high-school diploma, and about 9% who did not graduate from high school, grand so. (8% did not respond to the question.)[16]

### Association with family structures

One of the proposed partial explanations for the gap between Asian- and European-American students in educational achievement, as measured for example by the SAT, is the oul' general tendency of Asians to come from stable two-parent households.[126] In their 2018 analysis of data from the feckin' National Longitudinal Surveys of the feckin' Bureau of Labor Statistics, economists Adam Blandin, Christopher Herrington, and Aaron Steelman concluded that family structure played an important role in determinin' educational outcomes in general and SAT scores in particular, the hoor. Families with only one parent who has no degrees were designated 1L, with two parents but no degrees 2L, and two parents with at least one degree between them 2H. Children from 2H families held a significant advantage of those from 1L families, and this gap grew between 1990 and 2010. Whisht now. Because the median SAT composite scores (verbal and mathematics) for 2H families grew by 20 points while those of 1L families fell by one point, the gap between them increased by 21 points, or a holy fifth of one standard deviation.[124]

Speakin' to The Wall Street Journal, family sociologist W. Bradford Wilcox stated, "In the feckin' absence of SAT scores, which can pinpoint kids from difficult family backgrounds with great academic potential, family stability is likely to loom even larger in determinin' who makes it past the bleedin' college finish line in California [whose public university system decided to stop requirin' SAT and ACT scores for admissions in 2020]."[79]

### Sex differences

#### In performance

In 2013, the feckin' American College Testin' Board released a bleedin' report statin' that boys outperformed girls on the bleedin' mathematics section of the bleedin' test.[127] As of 2015, boys on average earned 32 points more than girls on the bleedin' SAT mathematics section, so it is. Among those scorin' in the oul' 700-800 range, the feckin' male-to-female ratio was 1.6:1.[128] In 2014, psychologist Stephen Ceci and his collaborators found boys did better than girls across the percentiles. For example, an oul' girl scorin' in the top 10% of her sex would only be in the top 20% among the oul' boys.[129][130] In 2010, psychologist Jonathan Wai and his colleagues showed, by analyzin' data from three decades involvin' 1.6 million intellectually gifted seventh graders from the Duke University Talent Identification Program (TIP), that in the bleedin' 1980s the gender gap in the oul' mathematics section of the oul' SAT among students scorin' in the feckin' top 0.01% was 13.5:1 in favor of boys but dropped to 3.8:1 by the oul' 1990s.[131][130] The dramatic sex ratio from the bleedin' 1980s replicates an oul' different study usin' a holy sample from Johns Hopkins University.[132] This ratio is similar to that observed for the bleedin' ACT mathematics and science scores between the bleedin' early 1990s and the bleedin' late 2000s.[131] It remained largely unaltered at the end of the feckin' 2000s.[131][133] Sex differences in SAT mathematics scores began makin' themselves apparent at the level of 400 points and above.[131]

Some researchers point to evidence in support of greater male variability in spatial ability and mathematics, you know yourself like. Greater male variability has been found in body weight, height, and cognitive abilities across cultures, leadin' to a larger number of males in the bleedin' lowest and highest distributions of testin'.[134] Consequently, a bleedin' higher number of males are found in both the bleedin' upper and lower extremes of the feckin' performance distributions of the feckin' mathematics sections of standardized tests such as the oul' SAT, resultin' in the observed gender discrepancy.[135][130][136] Paradoxically, this is at odds with the feckin' tendency of girls to have higher classroom scores than boys.[130]

On the bleedin' other hand, Wai and his colleagues found that both sexes in the oul' top 5% appeared to be more or less at parity when it comes to the oul' verbal section of the SAT, though girls have gained a holy shlight but noticeable edge over boys startin' in the mid-1980s.[132] Psychologist David Lubinski, who conducted longitudinal studies of seventh grader who scored exceptionally high on the SAT, found a bleedin' similar result. Girls generally had better verbal reasonin' skills and boys mathematical skills.[136] This reflects other research on the oul' cognitive ability of the bleedin' general population rather than just the 95th percentile and up.[132][136]

Although aspects of testin' such as stereotype are a concern, research on the feckin' predictive validity of the bleedin' SAT has demonstrated that it tends to be a holy more accurate predictor of female GPA in university as compared to male GPA.[137]

#### In strategizin'

SAT mathematics questions can be answered intuitively or algorithmically.

Mathematical problems on the oul' SAT can be broadly categorized into two groups: conventional and unconventional, game ball! Conventional problems can be handled routinely via familiar formulas or algorithms while unconventional ones require more creative thought in order to make unusual use of familiar methods of solution or to come up with the feckin' specific insights necessary for solvin' those problems. In 2000, ETS psychometrician Ann M. Gallagher and her colleagues analyzed how students handled disclosed SAT mathematics questions in self-reports. They found that for both sexes, the most favored approach was to use formulas or algorithms learned in class. Here's a quare one for ye. When that failed, however, males were more likely than females to identify the oul' suitable methods of solution. Previous research suggested that males were more likely to explore unusual paths to solution whereas females tended to stick to what they had learned in class and that females were more likely to identify the appropriate approaches if such required nothin' more than mastery of classroom materials.[104]

#### In confidence

Older versions of the SAT did ask students how confident they were in their mathematical aptitude and verbal reasonin' ability, specifically, whether or not they believed they were in the oul' top 10%, bedad. Devin G, Lord bless us and save us. Pope analyzed data of over four million test takers from the oul' late 1990s to the bleedin' early 2000s and found that high scorers were more likely to be confident they were in the top 10%, with the oul' top scorers reportin' the bleedin' highest levels of confidence, game ball! But there were some noticeable gaps between the sexes. Men tended to be much more confident in their mathematical aptitude then women, that's fierce now what? For example, among those who scored 700 on the mathematics section, 67% of men answered they believed they were in the top 10% whereas only 56% of women did the same, be the hokey! Women, on the oul' other hand, were shlightly more confident in their verbal reasonin' ability then men.[138]

#### In glucose metabolism

Cognitive neuroscientists Richard Haier and Camilla Persson Benbow employed positron emission tomography (PET) scans to investigate the feckin' rate of glucose metabolism among students who have taken the oul' SAT, what? They found that among men, those with higher SAT mathematics scores exhibited higher rates of glucose metabolism in the bleedin' temporal lobes than those with lower scores, contradictin' the oul' brain-efficiency hypothesis, you know yerself. This trend, however, was not found among women, for whom the feckin' researchers could not find any cortical regions associated with mathematical reasonin'. Both sexes scored the feckin' same on average in their sample and had the same rates of cortical glucose metabolism overall, what? Accordin' to Haier and Benbow, this is evidence for the feckin' structural differences of the bleedin' brain between the sexes.[139][25]

### Association with race and ethnicity

SAT Verbal average scores by race or ethnicity from 1986-87 to 2004-05
SAT Math average scores by race or ethnicity from 1986-87 to 2004-05

A 2001 meta-analysis of the feckin' results of 6,246,729 participants tested for cognitive ability or aptitude found a holy difference in average scores between black and white students of around 1.0 standard deviation, with comparable results for the oul' SAT (2.4 million test takers).[140] Similarly, on average, Hispanic and Amerindian students perform on the order of one standard deviation lower on the oul' SAT than white and Asian students.[141][142][143][144] Mathematics appears to be the more difficult part of the oul' exam.[16] In 1996, the bleedin' black-white gap in the oul' mathematics section was 0.91 standard deviations, but by 2020, it fell to 0.79.[145] In 2013, Asian Americans as a feckin' group scored 0.38 standard deviations higher than whites in the oul' mathematics section.[126]

Some researchers believe that the difference in scores is closely related to the oul' overall achievement gap in American society between students of different racial groups. This gap may be explainable in part by the bleedin' fact that students of disadvantaged racial groups tend to go to schools that provide lower educational quality. Here's a quare one for ye. This view is supported by evidence that the black-white gap is higher in cities and neighborhoods that are more racially segregated.[146] Other research cites poorer minority proficiency in key coursework relevant to the bleedin' SAT (English and math), as well as peer pressure against students who try to focus on their schoolwork ("actin' white").[147] Cultural issues are also evident among black students in wealthier households, with high achievin' parents. Whisht now and eist liom. John Ogbu, an oul' Nigerian-American professor of anthropology, concluded that instead of lookin' to their parents as role models, black youth chose other models like rappers and did not make an effort to be good students.[148]

One set of studies has reported differential item functionin', namely, that some test questions function differently based on the racial group of the feckin' test taker, reflectin' differences in ability to understand certain test questions or to acquire the feckin' knowledge required to answer them between groups. Whisht now and eist liom. In 2003, Freedle published data showin' that black students have had an oul' shlight advantage on the bleedin' verbal questions that are labeled as difficult on the SAT, whereas white and Asian students tended to have a holy shlight advantage on questions labeled as easy. Freedle argued that these findings suggest that "easy" test items use vocabulary that is easier to understand for white middle class students than for minorities, who often use a feckin' different language in the home environment, whereas the feckin' difficult items use complex language learned only through lectures and textbooks, givin' both student groups equal opportunities to acquirin' it.[149][150][151] The study was severely criticized by the oul' ETS board, but the oul' findings were replicated in a holy subsequent study by Santelices and Wilson in 2010.[152][153]

There is no evidence that SAT scores systematically underestimate future performance of minority students, the cute hoor. However, the oul' predictive validity of the oul' SAT has been shown to depend on the bleedin' dominant ethnic and racial composition of the college.[154] Some studies have also shown that African-American students under-perform in college relative to their white peers with the same SAT scores; researchers have argued that this is likely because white students tend to benefit from social advantages outside of the oul' educational environment (for example, high parental involvement in their education, inclusion in campus academic activities, positive bias from same-race teachers and peers) which result in better grades.[155]

Christopher Jencks concludes that as a holy group, African Americans have been harmed by the introduction of standardized entrance exams such as the feckin' SAT. Here's a quare one. This, accordin' to yer man, is not because the bleedin' tests themselves are flawed, but because of labelin' bias and selection bias; the oul' tests measure the feckin' skills that African Americans are less likely to develop in their socialization, rather than the skills they are more likely to develop, Lord bless us and save us. Furthermore, standardized entrance exams are often labeled as tests of general ability, rather than of certain aspects of ability. Thus, a bleedin' situation is produced in which African-American ability is consistently underestimated within the bleedin' education and workplace environments, contributin' in turn to selection bias against them which exacerbates underachievement.[155]

2003 SAT scores by race and ethnicity

Among the oul' major racial or ethnic groups of the United States, gaps in SAT mathematics scores are the bleedin' greatest at the feckin' tails, with Hispanic and Latino Americans bein' the most likely to score at the oul' lowest range and Asian Americans the bleedin' highest. In addition, there is some evidence suggestin' that if the bleedin' test contains more questions of both the bleedin' easy and difficult varieties, which would increase the bleedin' variability of the bleedin' scores, the gaps would be even wider. Given the bleedin' distribution for Asians, for example, many could score higher than 800 if the test allowed them to. (See figure below.)[156]

2020 was the feckin' year in which education worldwide was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic and indeed, the performance of students in the oul' United States on standardized tests, such as the SAT, suffered. Yet the feckin' gaps persisted.[157] Accordin' to the feckin' College Board, in 2020, while 83% of Asian students met the benchmark of college readiness in readin' and writin' and 80% in mathematics, only 44% and 21% of black students did those respective categories. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Among whites, 79% met the benchmark for readin' and writin' and 59% did mathematics. For Hispanics and Latinos, the bleedin' numbers were 53% and 30%, respectively, bejaysus. (See figure below.)[145]

### Test-takin' population

A U.S, would ye swally that? Navy sailor takin' the feckin' SAT aboard the U.S.S Kitty Hawk in 2004.

By analyzin' data from the National Center for Education Statistics, economists Ember Smith and Richard Reeves of the Brookings Institution deduced that the bleedin' number of students takin' the bleedin' SAT increased at a rate faster than population and high-school graduation growth rates between 2000 and 2020. The increase was especially pronounced among Hispanics and Latinos. Here's a quare one. Even among whites, whose number of high-school graduates was shrinkin', the bleedin' number of SAT takers rose.[145] In 2015, for example, 1.7 million students took the oul' SAT,[13] up from 1.6 million in 2013.[100] But in 2019, an oul' record-breakin' 2.2 million students took the exam, compared to 2.1 million in 2018, another record-breakin' year.[16] The rise in the feckin' number of students takin' the feckin' SAT was due in part to many school districts offerin' to administer the oul' SAT durin' school days often at no further costs to the feckin' students.[16]

Psychologists Jean Twenge, W. Keith Campbell, and Ryne A, bejaysus. Sherman analyzed vocabulary test scores on the feckin' U.S, the shitehawk. General Social Survey (${\displaystyle n=29,912}$) and found that after correctin' for education, the bleedin' use of sophisticated vocabulary has declined between the bleedin' mid-1970s and the oul' mid-2010s across all levels of education, from below high school to graduate school, you know yerself. However, they cautioned against the bleedin' use of SAT verbal scores to track the decline for while the bleedin' College Board reported that SAT verbal scores had been decreasin', these scores were an imperfect measure of the oul' vocabulary level of the oul' nation as a whole because the test-takin' demographic has changed and because more students took the SAT in the 2010s than in the bleedin' 1970s, meanin' there were more with limited ability who took it.[18]

### Use in non-collegiate contexts

#### By high-IQ societies

Certain high IQ societies, like Mensa, Intertel, the feckin' Prometheus Society and the oul' Triple Nine Society, use scores from certain years as one of their admission tests. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. For instance, Intertel accepts scores (verbal and math combined) of at least 1300 on tests taken through January 1994;[158] the feckin' Triple Nine Society accepts scores of 1450 or greater on SAT tests taken before April 1995, and scores of at least 1520 on tests taken between April 1995 and February 2005.[159]

#### By researchers

Because it is strongly correlated with general intelligence, the bleedin' SAT has often been used as a bleedin' proxy to measure intelligence by researchers, especially since 2004.[22] In particular, scientists studyin' mathematically gifted individuals have been usin' mathematics section of the bleedin' SAT to identify subjects for their research.[24]

A growin' body of research indicates that SAT scores can predict individual success decades into the future, for example in terms of income and occupational achievements.[22][29][71] A longitudinal study published in 2005 by educational psychologists Jonathan Wai, David Lubinski, and Camilla Benbow suggests that among the feckin' intellectually precocious (the top 1%), those with higher scores in the oul' mathematics section of the feckin' SAT at the oul' age of 12 were more likely to earn a holy PhD in the bleedin' STEM fields, to have a publication, to register a feckin' patent, to secure university tenure.[160][116] Wai further showed that an individual's academic ability, as measured by the oul' average SAT or ACT scores of the institution attended, predicted individual differences in income, even among the bleedin' richest people of all, and bein' a bleedin' member of the bleedin' 'American elite', namely Fortune 500 CEOs, billionaires, federal judges, and members of Congress.[161][22] Wai concluded that the bleedin' American elite was also the oul' cognitive elite.[161] Gregory Park, Lubinski, and Benbow gave statistical evidence that intellectually gifted adolescents, as identified by SAT scores, could be expected to accomplish great feats of creativity in the feckin' future, both in the oul' arts and in STEM.[162][22]

The SAT is sometimes given to students at age 12 or 13 by organizations such as the oul' Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY), Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth, and the oul' Duke University Talent Identification Program (TIP) to select, study, and mentor students of exceptional ability, that is, those in the top one percent.[25] Among SMPY participants, those within the top quartile, as indicated by the bleedin' SAT composite score (mathematics and verbal), were markedly more likely to have an oul' doctoral degree, to have at least one publication in STEM, to earn income in the feckin' 95th percentile, to have at least one literary publication, or to register at least one patent than those in the bottom quartile. Listen up now to this fierce wan. Duke TIP participants generally picked career tracks in STEM should they be stronger in mathematics, as indicated by SAT mathematics scores, or the feckin' humanities if they possessed greater verbal ability, as indicated by SAT verbal scores, game ball! For comparison, the oul' bottom SMPY quartile is five times more likely than the bleedin' average American to have a feckin' patent. Whisht now and listen to this wan. Meanwhile, as of 2016, the bleedin' shares doctorates among SMPY participants was 44% and Duke TIP 37%, compared to two percent among the feckin' general U.S, grand so. population.[26] Consequently, the feckin' notion that beyond a certain point, differences in cognitive ability as measured by standardized tests such as the feckin' SAT cease to matter is gainsaid by the oul' evidence.[163]

In the feckin' 2010 paper which showed that the feckin' sex gap in SAT mathematics scores had dropped dramatically between the feckin' early 1980s and the early 1990s but had persisted for the oul' next two decades or so, Wai and his colleagues argued that "sex differences in abilities in the oul' extreme right tail should not be dismissed as no longer part of the oul' explanation for the oul' dearth of women in math-intensive fields of science."[131][164]

#### By employers

Cognitive ability is correlated with job trainin' outcomes and job performance.[83][28] As such, some employers rely on SAT scores to assess the suitability of an oul' prospective recruit,[29] especially if the bleedin' person has limited work experience.[28] There is nothin' new about this practice.[27] Major companies and corporations have spent princely sums on learnin' how to avoid hirin' errors and have decided that standardized test scores are a valuable tool in decidin' whether or not a person is fit for the feckin' job, you know yourself like. In some cases, a company might need to hire someone to handle proprietary materials of its own makin', such as computer software, would ye believe it? But since the oul' ability to work with such materials cannot be assessed via external certification, it makes sense for such a bleedin' firm to rely on somethin' that is a proxy of measurin' general intelligence.[29] In other cases, a company—on Wall Street, for instance—does not care about academic background but needs to assess a holy prospective recruit's quantitative reasonin' ability, and what makes standardized test scores necessary.[27]

Nevertheless, some top employers, such as Google, have eschewed the bleedin' use of SAT or other standardized test scores unless the feckin' potential employee is a holy recent graduate because for their purposes, these scores "don't predict anythin'." Educational psychologist Jonathan Wai suggested this might be due to the inability of the SAT to differentiate the feckin' intellectual capacities of those at the bleedin' extreme right end of the bleedin' distribution of intelligence. Soft oul' day. Wai told The New York Times, "Today the bleedin' SAT is actually too easy, and that's why Google doesn't see a holy correlation, like. Every single person they get through the oul' door is an oul' super-high scorer."[29]

## Perception

### Math–verbal achievement gap

In 2002, New York Times columnist Richard Rothstein argued that the oul' U.S, you know yourself like. math averages on the oul' SAT and ACT continued their decade-long rise over national verbal averages on the oul' tests while the oul' averages verbal portions on the oul' same tests were flounderin'.[165]

### Optional SAT

In the oul' 1960s and 1970s there was a holy movement to drop achievement scores. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. After a holy period of time, the bleedin' countries, states and provinces that reintroduced them agreed that academic standards had dropped, students had studied less, and had taken their studyin' less seriously. Me head is hurtin' with all this raidin'. They reintroduced the tests after studies and research concluded that the oul' high-stakes tests produced benefits that outweighed the feckin' costs.[166]

In a 2001 speech to the oul' American Council on Education, Richard C. Here's a quare one. Atkinson, the oul' president of the oul' University of California, urged the droppin' admissions tests such as the SAT I but not achievement tests such as the bleedin' SAT II[c] as a holy college admissions requirement.[167] Atkinson's critique of the oul' predictive validity and powers of the bleedin' SAT has been contested by the University of California academic senate.[79][80] In April 2020, the oul' academic senate, which consisted of faculty members, voted 51–0 to restore the oul' requirement of standardized test scores. Arra' would ye listen to this. However, the bleedin' governin' board overruled the feckin' senate. Because of the bleedin' size of the bleedin' Californian population, this decision might have an impact on U.S. higher education at large; schools lookin' to admit Californian students could have harder time.[94]

Many parents and college-bound teenagers are skeptical of the oul' process of "holistic admissions" because they think is rather vague and uncertain, as schools try to access characteristics not easily discerned via a number, hence the growth in the number of test takers attemptin' to make themselves more competitive even if this parallels an increase in the feckin' number of schools declarin' it optional.[13][14] Holistic admissions notwithstandin', when merit-based scholarships are considered, standardized test scores might be the feckin' tiebreakers, as these are highly competitive.[14] Scholarships and financial aid could help students and their parents significantly cut the feckin' cost of higher education, especially in times of economic hardship.[15] Moreover, the oul' most selective of schools have might have no better options than usin' standardized test scores in order to quickly prune the number of applications worth considerin', for holistic admissions consume valuable time and other resources.[94]

In the feckin' wake of the bleedin' COVID-19 pandemic, around 1,600 institutions decided to waive the feckin' requirement of the feckin' SAT or the ACT for admissions because it was challengin' both to administer and to take these tests, resultin' in many cancellations.[171] Some schools chose to make them optional on a feckin' temporary basis only, either for just one year, as in the case of Princeton University, or three, like the oul' College of William & Mary. Others dropped the oul' requirement completely.[13] Some schools extended their moratorium on standardized entrance exams in 2021.[94] This did not stop highly ambitious students from takin' them, however,[13][14] as many parents and teenagers were skeptical of the bleedin' "optional" status of university entrance exams[14] and wanted to make their applications more likely to catch the attention of admission officers.[15] This led to complaints of registration sites crashin' in the bleedin' summer of 2020.[171] On the bleedin' other hand, the oul' number of students applyin' to the feckin' more competitive of schools that had made SAT and ACT scores optional increased dramatically because the students thought they stood a chance.[94][172][173] At the feckin' same time, interest in lower-status schools that did the oul' same thin' dropped precipitously.[173] In all, 44% of students who used the feckin' Common Application—accepted by over 900 colleges and universities as of 2021—submitted SAT or ACT scores in 2020–21, down from 77% in 2019–20. Right so. Those who did submit their test scores tended to hail from high-income families, to have at least one university-educated parent, and to be white or Asian.[169]

### Writin' section

In 2005, MIT Writin' Director Pavan Sreekireddy plotted essay length versus essay score on the feckin' new SAT from released essays and found a holy high correlation between them. G'wan now. After studyin' over 50 graded essays, he found that longer essays consistently produced higher scores. In fact, he argues that by simply gaugin' the feckin' length of an essay without readin' it, the given score of an essay could likely be determined correctly over 90% of the feckin' time. Would ye believe this shite?He also discovered that several of these essays were full of factual errors; the oul' College Board does not claim to grade for factual accuracy.

Perelman, along with the National Council of Teachers of English, also criticized the oul' 25-minute writin' section of the bleedin' test for damagin' standards of writin' teachin' in the classroom. Here's a quare one for ye. They say that writin' teachers trainin' their students for the oul' SAT will not focus on revision, depth, accuracy, but will instead produce long, formulaic, and wordy pieces.[174] "You're gettin' teachers to train students to be bad writers", concluded Perelman.[175]

On January 19, 2021, the feckin' College Board announced that the feckin' SAT would no longer offer the optional essay section after the bleedin' June 2021 administration.[20][21]

## History

 Year ofexam Readin'/VerbalScore Math Score 1972 530 509 1973 523 506 1974 521 505 1975 512 498 1976 509 497 1977 507 496 1978 507 494 1979 505 493 1980 502 492 1981 502 492 1982 504 493 1983 503 494 1984 504 497 1985 509 500 1986 509 500 1987 507 501 1988 505 501 1989 504 502 1990 500 501 1991 499 500 1992 500 501 1993 500 503 1994 499 504 1995 504 506 1996 505 508 1997 505 511 1998 505 512 1999 505 511 2000 505 514 2001 506 514 2002 504 516 2003 507 519 2004 508 518 2005 508 520 2006 503 518 2007 502 515 2008 502 515 2009 501 515 2010 501 516 2011 497 514 2012 496 514 2013 496 514 2014 497 513 2015 495 511 2016 494 508 2017 533 527 2018 536 531 2019 531 528 2020 528 523

In the oul' late nineteenth century, elite colleges and universities had their own entrance exams and they required candidates to travel to the bleedin' school to take the tests.[94] To better organize matters, the feckin' College Board, a holy consortium of colleges in the northeastern United States, was formed in 1900 to establish a nationally administered, uniform set of essay tests based on the curricula of the bleedin' boardin' schools that typically provided graduates to the colleges of the Ivy League and Seven Sisters, among others.[178][179] The first College Board exam—coverin' mathematics, the oul' physical sciences, history, languages, and other subjects—was administered in 1901 to no more than 1,000 candidates.[94]

In the bleedin' same time period, Lewis Terman and others began to promote the use of tests such as Alfred Binet's in American schools. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Terman in particular thought that such tests could identify an innate "intelligence quotient" (IQ) in a person. The results of an IQ test could then be used to find an elite group of students who would be given the chance to finish high school and go on to college.[178] By the feckin' mid-1920s, the bleedin' increasin' use of IQ tests, such as the bleedin' Army Alpha test administered to recruits in World War I, led the bleedin' College Board to commission the development of the feckin' SAT. In fairness now. The commission, headed by eugenicist Carl Brigham, argued that the test predicted success in higher education by identifyin' candidates primarily on the oul' basis of intellectual promise rather than on specific accomplishment in high school subjects.[179] Brigham "created the oul' test to uphold a racial caste system. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. He advanced this theory of standardized testin' as a means of upholdin' racial purity in his book A Study of American Intelligence, you know yourself like. The tests, he wrote, would prove the racial superiority of white Americans and prevent 'the continued propagation of defective strains in the present population'—chiefly, the feckin' 'infiltration of white blood into the bleedin' Negro.'"[180] By 1930, however, Brigham would repudiate his own conclusions, writin' that "comparative studies of various national and racial groups may not be made with existin' tests"[181] and that SAT scores couldn't reflect some innate, genetically-based ability, but instead would be "a composite includin' schoolin', family background, familiarity with English and everythin' else, relevant and irrelevant."[180] In 1934, James Conant and Henry Chauncey used the feckin' SAT as a means to identify recipients for scholarships to Harvard University. Specifically, Conant wanted to find students, other than those from the bleedin' traditional northeastern private schools, that could do well at Harvard. The success of the scholarship program and the feckin' advent of World War II led to the oul' end of the feckin' College Board essay exams and to the bleedin' SAT bein' used as the feckin' only admissions test for College Board member colleges.[178]

The SAT rose in prominence after World War II due to several factors. Machine-based scorin' of multiple-choice tests taken by pencil had made it possible to rapidly process the feckin' exams.[181] The G.I. C'mere til I tell ya. Bill produced an influx of millions of veterans into higher education.[181][182] The formation of the oul' Educational Testin' Service (ETS) also played a significant role in the expansion of the bleedin' SAT beyond the roughly fifty colleges that made up the bleedin' College Board at the feckin' time.[183] The ETS was formed in 1947 by the bleedin' College Board, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teachin', and the feckin' American Council on Education, to consolidate respectively the operations of the bleedin' SAT, the feckin' GRE, and the feckin' achievement tests developed by Ben Wood for use with Conant's scholarship exams.[181] The new organization was to be philosophically grounded in the feckin' concepts of open-minded, scientific research in testin' with no doctrine to sell and with an eye toward public service.[184] The ETS was chartered after the feckin' death of Brigham, who had opposed the creation of such an entity. Right so. Brigham felt that the interests of a holy consolidated testin' agency would be more aligned with sales or marketin' than with research into the oul' science of testin'.[181] It has been argued that the feckin' interest of the ETS in expandin' the bleedin' SAT in order to support its operations aligned with the bleedin' desire of public college and university faculties to have smaller, diversified, and more academic student bodies as an oul' means to increase research activities.[178] In 1951, about 80,000 SATs were taken; in 1961, about 800,000; and by 1971, about 1.5 million SATs were bein' taken each year.[185]

Durin' the bleedin' 2010s, there was concern over the oul' continued decline of SAT scores,[17][16] which might be due to the oul' expansion of the bleedin' test-takin' population.[16][18] (See graph below.)

A timeline of notable events in the bleedin' history of the bleedin' SAT follows.

### 1901 essay exams

On June 17, 1901, the oul' first exams of the College Board were administered to 973 students across 67 locations in the oul' United States, and two in Europe. Although those takin' the test came from an oul' variety of backgrounds, approximately one third were from New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania. Arra' would ye listen to this. The majority of those takin' the bleedin' test were from private schools, academies, or endowed schools. About 60% of those takin' the feckin' test applied to Columbia University, so it is. The test contained sections on English, French, German, Latin, Greek, history, geography, political science, biology, mathematics, chemistry, and physics. Jaykers! The test was not multiple choice, but instead was evaluated based on essay responses as "excellent", "good", "doubtful", "poor" or "very poor".[186]

### 1926 test

The first administration of the SAT occurred on June 23, 1926, when it was known as the Scholastic Aptitude Test.[111][187] This test, prepared by an oul' committee headed by eugenicist and Princeton psychologist Carl Campbell Brigham, had sections of definitions, arithmetic, classification, artificial language, antonyms, number series, analogies, logical inference, and paragraph readin'. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. It was administered to over 8,000 students at over 300 test centers. Men composed 60% of the test-takers. Slightly over an oul' quarter of males and females applied to Yale University and Smith College.[187] The test was paced rather quickly, test-takers bein' given only a holy little over 90 minutes to answer 315 questions.[111] The raw score of each participatin' student was converted to a score scale with an oul' mean of 500 and an oul' standard deviation of 100. C'mere til I tell yiz. This scale was effectively equivalent to a 200 to 800 scale, although students could score more than 800 and less than 200.[181]

### 1928 and 1929 tests

In 1928, the feckin' number of sections on the feckin' SAT was reduced to seven, and the feckin' time limit was increased to shlightly under two hours. Here's another quare one. In 1929, the bleedin' number of sections was again reduced, this time to six. Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. These changes were designed in part to give test-takers more time per question. For these two years, all of the feckin' sections tested verbal ability: math was eliminated entirely from the oul' SAT.[111]

### 1930 test and 1936 changes

In 1930 the feckin' SAT was first split into the feckin' verbal and math sections, a structure that would continue through 2004, the shitehawk. The verbal section of the bleedin' 1930 test covered an oul' more narrow range of content than its predecessors, examinin' only antonyms, double definitions (somewhat similar to sentence completions), and paragraph readin', what? In 1936, analogies were re-added. Here's a quare one. Between 1936 and 1946, students had between 80 and 115 minutes to answer 250 verbal questions (over a third of which were on antonyms). G'wan now. The mathematics test introduced in 1930 contained 100 free response questions to be answered in 80 minutes and focused primarily on speed. Whisht now and eist liom. From 1936 to 1941, like the 1928 and 1929 tests, the mathematics section was eliminated entirely. Jaysis. When the feckin' mathematics portion of the test was re-added in 1942, it consisted of multiple-choice questions.[111]

### 1941 and 1942 score scales

Until 1941, the scores on all SATs had been scaled to a mean of 500 with a standard deviation of 100. Although one test-taker could be compared to another for a given test date, comparisons from one year to another could not be made. For example, a bleedin' score of 500 achieved on an SAT taken in one year could reflect an oul' different ability level than a bleedin' score of 500 achieved in another year. Jasus. By 1940, it had become clear that settin' the feckin' mean SAT score to 500 every year was unfair to those students who happened to take the bleedin' SAT with a holy group of higher average ability.[188]

In order to make cross-year score comparisons possible, in April 1941 the feckin' SAT verbal section was scaled to a mean of 500, and a feckin' standard deviation of 100, and the oul' June 1941 SAT verbal section was equated (linked) to the April 1941 test. All SAT verbal sections after 1941 were equated to previous tests so that the bleedin' same scores on different SATs would be comparable. Similarly, in June 1942 the feckin' SAT math section was equated to the April 1942 math section, which itself was linked to the oul' 1942 SAT verbal section, and all SAT math sections after 1942 would be equated to previous tests. From this point forward, SAT mean scores could change over time, dependin' on the bleedin' average ability of the oul' group takin' the test compared to the roughly 10,600 students takin' the SAT in April 1941. The 1941 and 1942 score scales would remain in use until 1995.[188][189]

### 1946 test and associated changes

Paragraph readin' was eliminated from the oul' verbal portion of the bleedin' SAT in 1946, and replaced with readin' comprehension, and "double definition" questions were replaced with sentence completions. Between 1946 and 1957, students were given 90 to 100 minutes to complete 107 to 170 verbal questions. Startin' in 1958, time limits became more stable, and for 17 years, until 1975, students had 75 minutes to answer 90 questions. Jaysis. In 1959, questions on data sufficiency were introduced to the oul' mathematics section and then replaced with quantitative comparisons in 1974. Whisht now. In 1974, both verbal and math sections were reduced from 75 minutes to 60 minutes each, with changes in test composition compensatin' for the decreased time.[111]

### 1960s and 1970s score declines

From 1926 to 1941, scores on the SAT were scaled to make 500 the bleedin' mean score on each section. In 1941 and 1942, SAT scores were standardized via test equatin', and as a feckin' consequence, average verbal and math scores could vary from that time forward.[188] In 1952, mean verbal and math scores were 476 and 494, respectively, and scores were generally stable in the oul' 1950s and early 1960s. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. However, startin' in the mid-1960s and continuin' until the feckin' early 1980s, SAT scores declined: the bleedin' average verbal score dropped by about 50 points, and the bleedin' average math score fell by about 30 points. By the bleedin' late 1970s, only the feckin' upper third of test takers were doin' as well as the upper half of those takin' the bleedin' SAT in 1963. Whisht now. From 1961 to 1977, the feckin' number of SATs taken per year doubled, suggestin' that the oul' decline could be explained by demographic changes in the oul' group of students takin' the SAT. Commissioned by the College Board, an independent study of the oul' decline found that most (up to about 75%) of the oul' test decline in the feckin' 1960s could be explained by compositional changes in the feckin' group of students takin' the bleedin' test; however, only about 25 percent of the 1970s decrease in test scores could similarly be explained.[185] Later analyses suggested that up to 40 percent of the feckin' 1970s decline in scores could be explained by demographic changes, leavin' unknown at least some of the bleedin' reasons for the oul' decline.[190]

### 1994 changes

In early 1994, substantial changes were made to the bleedin' SAT.[191] Antonyms were removed from the bleedin' verbal section in order to make rote memorization of vocabulary less useful. Also, the feckin' fraction of verbal questions devoted to passage-based readin' material was increased from about 30% to about 50%, and the oul' passages were chosen to be more like typical college-level readin' material, compared to previous SAT readin' passages. Sure this is it. The changes for increased emphasis on analytical readin' were made in response to a 1990 report issued by a feckin' commission established by the feckin' College Board. Here's another quare one. The commission recommended that the oul' SAT should, among other things, "approximate more closely the skills used in college and high school work".[111] A mandatory essay had been considered as well for the new version of the SAT; however, criticism from minority groups, as well as a bleedin' concomitant increase in the bleedin' cost of the oul' test necessary to grade the bleedin' essay, led the College Board to drop it from the planned changes.[192]

Major changes were also made to the feckin' SAT mathematics section at this time, due in part to the oul' influence of suggestions made by the oul' National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, you know yerself. Test-takers were now permitted to use calculators on the bleedin' math sections of the oul' SAT, the cute hoor. Also, for the first time since 1935, the SAT would now include some math questions that were not multiple choice, and would require students to supply the answers for those questions. I hope yiz are all ears now. Additionally, some of these "student-produced response" questions could have more than one correct answer, the shitehawk. The tested mathematics content on the feckin' SAT was expanded to include concepts of shlope of a holy line, probability, elementary statistics includin' median and mode, and problems involvin' countin'.[111]

### 1995 recenterin' (raisin' mean score back to 500)

By the oul' early 1990s, average combined SAT scores were around 900 (typically, 425 on the verbal and 475 on the bleedin' math), be the hokey! The average scores on the 1994 modification of the bleedin' SAT I were similar: 428 on the bleedin' verbal and 482 on the oul' math.[193] SAT scores for admitted applicants to highly selective colleges in the United States were typically much higher. For example, the score ranges of the feckin' middle 50% of admitted applicants to Princeton University in 1985 were 600 to 720 (verbal) and 660 to 750 (math).[194] Similarly, median scores on the bleedin' modified 1994 SAT for freshmen enterin' Yale University in the fall of 1995 were 670 (verbal) and 720 (math).[195] For the majority of SAT takers, however, verbal and math scores were below 500: In 1992, half of the oul' college-bound seniors takin' the feckin' SAT were scorin' between 340 and 500 on the feckin' verbal section and between 380 and 560 on the oul' math section, with correspondin' median scores of 420 and 470, respectively.[196]

The drop in SAT verbal scores, in particular, meant that the feckin' usefulness of the oul' SAT score scale (200 to 800) had become degraded. At the top end of the oul' verbal scale, significant gaps were occurrin' between raw scores and uncorrected scaled scores: a bleedin' perfect raw score no longer corresponded to an 800, and an oul' single omission out of 85 questions could lead to a bleedin' drop of 30 or 40 points in the oul' scaled score. Corrections to scores above 700 had been necessary to reduce the bleedin' size of the gaps and to make an oul' perfect raw score result in an 800. At the feckin' other end of the feckin' scale, about 1.5 percent of test-takers would have scored below 200 on the feckin' verbal section if that had not been the reported minimum score, be the hokey! Although the math score averages were closer to the feckin' center of the oul' scale (500) than the bleedin' verbal scores, the oul' distribution of math scores was no longer well approximated by a bleedin' normal distribution. Sure this is it. These problems, among others, suggested that the oul' original score scale and its reference group of about 10,000 students takin' the SAT in 1941 needed to be replaced.[188]

Beginnin' with the feckin' test administered in April 1995, the oul' SAT score scale was recentered to return the feckin' average math and verbal scores close to 500. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Although only 25 students had received perfect scores of 1600 in all of 1994, 137 students takin' the bleedin' April test scored 1600.[197] The new scale used an oul' reference group of about one million seniors in the feckin' class of 1990: the scale was designed so that the SAT scores of this cohort would have a mean of 500 and an oul' standard deviation of 110. Jaykers! Because the oul' new scale would not be directly comparable to the feckin' old scale, scores awarded in April 1995 and later were officially reported with an "R" (for example, "560R") to reflect the oul' change in scale, an oul' practice that was continued until 2001.[188] Scores awarded before April 1995 may be compared to those on the oul' recentered scale by usin' official College Board tables. Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. For example, verbal and math scores of 500 received before 1995 correspond to scores of 580 and 520, respectively, on the 1995 scale.[198]

### 1995 re-centerin' controversy

Certain educational organizations viewed the bleedin' SAT re-centerin' initiative as an attempt to stave off international embarrassment in regards to continuously declinin' test scores, even among top students. As evidence, it was presented that the feckin' number of pupils who scored above 600 on the verbal portion of the bleedin' test had fallen from an oul' peak of 112,530 in 1972 to 73,080 in 1993, a 36% backslide, despite the fact that the oul' total number of test-takers had risen by over 500,000.[199]

### 2002 changes – Score Choice

Since 1993, usin' a policy referred to as "Score Choice", students takin' the oul' SAT-II subject exams were able to choose whether or not to report the bleedin' resultin' scores to a college to which the oul' student was applyin', bedad. In October 2002, the oul' College Board dropped the feckin' Score Choice option for SAT-II exams, matchin' the bleedin' score policy for the traditional SAT tests that required students to release all scores to colleges.[200] The College Board said that, under the oul' old score policy, many students who waited to release scores would forget to do so and miss admissions deadlines, to be sure. It was also suggested that the bleedin' old policy of allowin' students the feckin' option of which scores to report favored students who could afford to retake the oul' tests.[201]

### 2005 changes, includin' a new 2400-point score

In 2005, the feckin' test was changed again, largely in response to criticism by the oul' University of California system.[113] In order to have the bleedin' SAT more closely reflect high school curricula, certain types of questions were eliminated, includin' analogies from the feckin' verbal section and quantitative comparison items from the feckin' math section.[111] A new writin' section, with an essay, based on the feckin' former SAT II Writin' Subject Test, was added,[202] in part to increase the bleedin' chances of closin' the oul' openin' gap between the bleedin' highest and midrange scores, fair play. The writin' section reported a multiple-choice subscore that ranged from 20 to 80 points.[203] Other factors included the feckin' desire to test the bleedin' writin' ability of each student; hence the feckin' essay. Sufferin' Jaysus. The essay section added an additional maximum 800 points to the feckin' score, which increased the bleedin' new maximum score to 2400.[204] The "New SAT" was first offered on March 12, 2005, after the oul' last administration of the oul' "old" SAT in January 2005. Here's a quare one. The mathematics section was expanded to cover three years of high school mathematics. G'wan now. To emphasize the importance of readin', the oul' verbal section's name was changed to the oul' Critical Readin' section.[111]

### 2008 changes

As part of an effort to “reduce student stress and improve the test-day experience", in late 2008 the bleedin' College Board announced that the oul' Score Choice option, recently dropped for SAT subject exams, would be available for both the oul' SAT subject tests and the feckin' SAT startin' in March 2009. At the time, some college admissions officials agreed that the bleedin' new policy would help to alleviate student test anxiety, while others questioned whether the oul' change was primarily an attempt to make the SAT more competitive with the ACT, which had long had a comparable score choice policy.[209] Recognizin' that some colleges would want to see the bleedin' scores from all tests taken by a bleedin' student, under this new policy, the oul' College Board would encourage but not force students to follow the feckin' requirements of each college to which scores would be sent.[210] A number of highly selective colleges and universities, includin' Yale, the bleedin' University of Pennsylvania, Cornell, and Stanford, rejected the feckin' Score Choice option at the oul' time.[211] Since then, Cornell,[212] University of Pennsylvania,[213] and Stanford[214] have all adopted Score Choice, but Yale[215] continues to require applicants to submit all scores. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. Others, such as MIT and Harvard, allow students to choose which scores they submit, and use only the oul' highest score from each section when makin' admission decisions. Still others, such as Oregon State University and University of Iowa, allow students to choose which scores they submit, considerin' only the test date with the feckin' highest combined score when makin' admission decisions.[216]

### 2012 changes

Beginnin' in the bleedin' fall of 2012, test takers were required to submit a current, recognizable photo durin' registration. I hope yiz are all ears now. In order to be admitted to their designated test center, students were required to present their photo admission ticket—or another acceptable form of photo ID—for comparison to the oul' one submitted by the oul' student at the bleedin' time of registration. Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. The changes were made in response to a series of cheatin' incidents, primarily at high schools in Long Island, New York, in which high-scorin' test takers were usin' fake photo IDs to take the bleedin' SAT for other students.[217] In addition to the oul' registration photo stipulation, test takers were required to identify their high school, to which their scores, as well as the submitted photos, would be sent. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. In the event of an investigation involvin' the validity of a bleedin' student's test scores, their photo may be made available to institutions to which they have sent scores, so it is. Any college that is granted access to a feckin' student's photo is first required to certify that the student has been admitted to the feckin' college requestin' the feckin' photo.[218]

### 2016 changes, includin' the oul' return to a holy 1600-point score

On March 5, 2014, the oul' College Board announced its plan to redesign the feckin' SAT in order to link the exam more closely to the work high school students encounter in the feckin' classroom.[219] The new exam was administered for the oul' first time in March 2016.[220] Some of the bleedin' major changes were: an emphasis on the oul' use of evidence to support answers, a shift away from obscure vocabulary to words that students are more likely to encounter in college and career, an optional essay, questions havin' four rather than five answer options, and the feckin' removal of penalty for wrong answers (rights-only scorin').[221][222] The Critical Readin' section was replaced with the new Evidence-Based Readin' and Writin' section (the Readin' Test and the oul' Writin' and Language Test).[223] The scope of mathematics content was narrowed to include fewer topics, includin' linear equations, ratios, and other precalculus topics, fair play. The essay score was separated from the oul' final score, and institutions could choose whether or not to consider it. As a bleedin' result of these changes, the highest score was returned to 1600. These modifications were the oul' first major redesign to the feckin' structure of the bleedin' test since 2005.[100] As the oul' test no longer deducts points for wrong answers, the oul' numerical scores and the feckin' percentiles appeared to have increased after the new SAT was unveiled in 2016. However, this does not necessarily mean students came better prepared.[222]

To combat the oul' perceived advantage of costly test preparation courses, the oul' College Board announced an oul' new partnership with Khan Academy to offer free online practice problems and instructional videos.[219]

### 2019 introduction and abandonment of the bleedin' 'Adversity Score' and launchin' of 'Landscape'

In May 2019, the College Board announced that it would calculate each SAT taker's "Adversity Score" usin' factors such as the bleedin' proportion of students in a school district receivin' free or subsidized lunch or the level of crime in that neighborhood. The higher the score, the bleedin' more adversity the student faced.[224] However, this triggered an oul' strong backlash from the oul' general public as people were skeptical of how complex information can be conveyed with an oul' single number[224] and were concerned that it might be politically weaponized.[225] The College Board thus abandoned the bleedin' Adversity Score and instead created an oul' new tool called 'Landscape' to provide the same sort of details to admissions officers usin' government information but without calculatin' a feckin' score.[224]

### 2021 changes

In the feckin' wake of the bleedin' COVID-19 pandemic, which made administerin' and takin' the feckin' tests difficult, on January 19, 2021, the College Board announced plans to discontinue the bleedin' optional SAT essay followin' the bleedin' June 2021 administration.[226][171] While some administrations were canceled,[171] others continued with precautionary measures such as requirements of temperature checks, enhanced ventilation, higher ceilings, physical distancin', and face masks.[227] The College Board also announced the feckin' immediate discontinuation of the feckin' SAT Subject Tests in the feckin' United States, and the bleedin' same internationally after the June 2021 administration.[171]

## Name changes

Old SAT logo

The SAT has been renamed several times since its introduction in 1926. Soft oul' day. It was originally known as the oul' Scholastic Aptitude Test.[228][111] In 1990, a commission set up by the feckin' College Board to review the feckin' proposed changes to the SAT program recommended that the feckin' meanin' of the feckin' initialism SAT be changed to "Scholastic Assessment Test" because a holy "test that integrates measures of achievement as well as developed ability can no longer be accurately described as a feckin' test of aptitude".[229][230] In 1993, the bleedin' College Board changed the feckin' name of the oul' test to SAT I: Reasonin' Test; at the same time, the bleedin' name of the Achievement Tests was changed to SAT II: Subject Tests.[228] The Reasonin' Test and Subject Tests were to be collectively known as the feckin' Scholastic Assessment Tests. Accordin' to the feckin' president of the College Board at the oul' time, the feckin' name change was meant "to correct the bleedin' impression among some people that the SAT measures somethin' that is innate and impervious to change regardless of effort or instruction."[231] The new SAT debuted in March 1994, and was referred to as the bleedin' Scholastic Assessment Test by major news organizations.[191][232] However, in 1997, the oul' College Board announced that the bleedin' SAT could not properly be called the feckin' Scholastic Assessment Test, and that the oul' letters SAT did not stand for anythin'.[233] In 2004, the oul' Roman numeral in SAT I: Reasonin' Test was dropped, makin' SAT Reasonin' Test the oul' name of the feckin' SAT.[228] The "Reasonin' Test" portion of the name was eliminated followin' the bleedin' exam's 2016 redesign; it is now simply called the SAT.[234]

## Reuse of old SAT exams

The College Board has been accused of completely reusin' old SAT papers previously given in the feckin' United States.[235] The recyclin' of questions from previous exams has been exploited to allow for cheatin' on exams and impugned the feckin' validity of some students' test scores, accordin' to college officials, you know yourself like. Test preparation companies in Asia have been found to provide test questions to students within hours of a new SAT exam's administration.[236][237]

On August 25, 2018, the SAT test given in America was discovered to be a recycled October 2017 international SAT test given in China, that's fierce now what? The leaked PDF file was on the feckin' internet before the oul' August 25, 2018 exam.[238]

## Notes

1. ^ In 2020, the bleedin' SAT was also offered on an additional September date due to the bleedin' COVID-19 pandemic.[1]
2. ^ Dependin' on the author, there might be an oul' negative sign. Whisht now and eist liom. This comes from the feckin' fact that the higher the oul' rank, the smaller the feckin' number of that rank.
3. ^ a b Known as the bleedin' SAT Subject Tests since 2005, discontinued in 2021.

## References

1. ^ Goldberg, Emma (2020-09-27). Would ye swally this in a minute now?"Put Down Your No, like. 2 Pencils. But Not Your Face Mask". The New York Times. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. ISSN 0362-4331. C'mere til I tell yiz. Retrieved 2020-12-04.
2. ^ a b c
3. ^ "Fees And Costs". Me head is hurtin' with all this raidin'. The College Board. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Archived from the original on October 10, 2014. G'wan now and listen to this wan. Retrieved October 13, 2014.
4. ^ "Frequently Asked Questions About ETS". C'mere til I tell yiz. ETS. Archived from the original on July 15, 2014. Retrieved June 6, 2014.
5. ^ "'Massive' breach exposes hundreds of questions for upcomin' SAT exams", would ye swally that? Reuters. Archived from the oul' original on 19 July 2017. Bejaysus. Retrieved 20 July 2017.
6. ^ Baird, Katherine (2012). Listen up now to this fierce wan. Trapped in Mediocrity: Why Our Schools Aren't World-Class and What We Can Do About It, begorrah. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. "And a feckin' separate process that began in 1926 was complete by 1942: the oul' much easier SAT—a test not aligned to any particular curriculum and thus better suited to a nation where high school students did not take a bleedin' common curriculum—replaced the oul' old college boards as the nations's college entrance exam. This broke the feckin' once tight link between academic coursework and college admission, a feckin' break that remains to this day."
7. ^ Lewin, Tamar (March 5, 2014). "A New SAT Aims to Realign With Schoolwork", begorrah. The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 13, 2014, game ball! Retrieved May 14, 2014. Here's a quare one. He said he also wanted to make the feckin' test reflect more closely what students did in high school
8. ^ a b "SAT Registration Fees". C'mere til I tell yiz. College Board, that's fierce now what? 15 May 2015, to be sure. Archived from the oul' original on September 6, 2015. G'wan now and listen to this wan. Retrieved January 7, 2017.
9. ^ O'Shaughnessy, Lynn (July 26, 2009), enda story. "The Other Side of 'Test Optional'". The New York Times. p. 6. Archived from the bleedin' original on November 19, 2018. Chrisht Almighty. Retrieved June 22, 2011.
10. ^ Capuzzi Simon, Cecilia (November 1, 2015). Here's a quare one. "The Test-Optional Surge". The New York Times, Lord bless us and save us. Archived from the oul' original on August 12, 2019. C'mere til I tell yiz. Retrieved August 12, 2019.
11. ^ a b c d Farmer, Angela; Wai, Jonathan (September 21, 2020). Here's another quare one. "Many colleges have gone test-optional – here's how that could change the bleedin' way students are admitted". Arra' would ye listen to this. The Conversation. Retrieved February 2, 2020.
12. ^ a b Strauss, Valerie. Story? "A record number of colleges drop SAT/ACT admissions requirement amid growin' disenchantment with standardized tests". The Washington Post. Retrieved February 2, 2021.
13. Selingo, Jeffrey (September 16, 2020). Chrisht Almighty. "The SAT and the ACT Will Probably Survive the Pandemic—Thanks to Students", bedad. The Atlantic. Archived from the oul' original on February 3, 2021. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Retrieved February 2, 2021.
14. Quintana, Chris (December 29, 2020), be the hokey! "Colleges say SAT, ACT score is optional for application durin' COVID-19, but families don't believe them", would ye believe it? USA Today. Here's another quare one. Retrieved February 5, 2021.
15. ^ a b c d Quilantan, Bianca (January 18, 2021). "Access to college admissions tests — and lucrative scholarships — imperiled by the feckin' pandemic". Stop the lights! Politico, would ye believe it? Retrieved August 31, 2021.
16. Hobbs, Tawnell D, to be sure. (September 24, 2019). Whisht now. "SAT Scores Fall as More Students Take the oul' Test". Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the feckin' original on November 28, 2020. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Retrieved February 2, 2021.
17. ^ a b c d Anderson, Nick (September 3, 2015). "SAT scores at lowest level in 10 years, fuelin' worries about high schools", bedad. The Washington Post. Would ye swally this in a minute now?Retrieved September 17, 2020.
18. ^ a b c d Twenge, Jean; Campbell, W, bedad. Keith; Sherman, Ryne A. (2019). Sure this is it. "Declines in vocabulary among American adults within levels of educational attainment, 1974–2016". Sure this is it. Intelligence. 76 (101377): 101377. Bejaysus. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2019.101377.
19. ^ a b Balf, Todd (March 5, 2014). I hope yiz are all ears now. "The Story Behind the bleedin' SAT Overhaul". Right so. The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Stop the lights! Archived from the feckin' original on June 16, 2017. Retrieved June 21, 2017.
20. ^ a b c d "College Board Will No Longer Offer SAT Subject Tests or SAT with Essay – College Board Blog". Soft oul' day. College Board. Soft oul' day. Retrieved February 14, 2021.
21. Hartocollis, Anemona; Taylor, Kate; Saul, Stephanie (January 20, 2021). "Retoolin' Durin' Pandemic, the oul' SAT Will Drop Essay and Subject Tests". Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Listen up now to this fierce wan. Retrieved February 14, 2021.
22. Frey, Meredith C. (December 2019). "What We Know, Are Still Gettin' Wrong, and Have Yet to Learn about the feckin' Relationships among the SAT, Intelligence and Achievement". Journal of Intelligence. Sure this is it. 7 (4): 26. doi:10.3390/jintelligence7040026. PMC 6963451. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. PMID 31810191.
23. ^ a b c d Hambrick, David C.; Chabris, Christopher (April 14, 2014). Stop the lights! "Yes, IQ Really Matters". Would ye swally this in a minute now?Science. Slate. Retrieved August 31, 2021.
24. ^ a b O'Boyle, Michael W. (2005). "Some current findings on brain characteristics of the mathematically gifted adolescent" (PDF). Sufferin' Jaysus. International Education Journal, begorrah. Shannon Research Press. 6 (2): 247–251. ISSN 1443-1475.
25. ^ a b c Haier, Richard (2018). In fairness now. "Chapter 11: A View from the oul' Brain". Arra' would ye listen to this shite? In Sternberg, Robert (ed.), Lord bless us and save us. The Nature of Human Intelligence. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-17657-7.
26. ^ a b Lubinsky, David (2018). Stop the lights! "Chapter 15: Individual Differences at the feckin' Top", bedad. In Sternberg, Robert (ed.). Listen up now to this fierce wan. The Nature of Human Intelligence, what? Cambridge University Press, so it is. ISBN 978-1-107-17657-7.
27. ^ a b c Weber, Rebecca L. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. (May 18, 2004). "Want a job? Hand over your SAT results". Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. Christian Science Monitor. Arra' would ye listen to this. Archived from the original on August 26, 2021, would ye believe it? Retrieved August 26, 2021.
28. ^ a b c Treu, Zachary (February 26, 2014). "Your SAT and ACT scores could make a difference in your job future", that's fierce now what? Nation, that's fierce now what? PBS Newshour, the hoor. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
29. Dewan, Shaila (March 29, 2014), for the craic. "How Businesses Use Your SATs", would ye swally that? The New York Times. Here's another quare one for ye. Archived from the bleedin' original on February 12, 2021, would ye swally that? Retrieved February 14, 2021.
30. ^ "SAT Registration". Jaysis. College Board. Here's another quare one for ye. 2 December 2015. Stop the lights! Archived from the oul' original on August 28, 2016. Retrieved August 16, 2016. "Most students take the SAT sprin' of junior year or fall of senior year."
31. ^ Atkinson, Richard; Geiser, Saul (May 4, 2015). "The Big Problem With the oul' New SAT", for the craic. The New York Times, you know yerself. Archived from the feckin' original on November 1, 2015. Me head is hurtin' with all this raidin'. Retrieved January 29, 2016.
32. ^ "01-249.RD.ResNoteRN-10 collegeboard.com" (PDF). Whisht now and listen to this wan. The College Board, grand so. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 6, 2009, that's fierce now what? Retrieved October 13, 2014.
33. ^ Korbin, L. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. (2006). SAT Program Handbook. A Comprehensive Guide to the feckin' SAT Program for School Counselors and Admissions Officers, 1, 33+. Retrieved January 24, 2006, from College Board Preparation Database.
34. ^ Honawar, Vaishali; Klein, Alyson (August 30, 2006). Right so. "ACT Scores Improve; More on East Coast Takin' the SAT's Rival", you know yerself. Education Week, what? Archived from the bleedin' original on May 30, 2015. Retrieved May 29, 2015.
35. ^ Slatalla, Michelle (November 4, 2007). "ACT vs. SAT". Jaysis. The New York Times. Whisht now. Archived from the feckin' original on September 27, 2017. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
36. ^ "Colleges and Universities That Do Not Use SAT/ACT Scores for Admittin' Substantial Numbers of Students Into Bachelor Degree Programs", for the craic. fairtest.org. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. The National Center for Fair & Open Testin'. Jasus. Archived from the original on September 28, 2017. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Retrieved September 26, 2017.
37. ^ Marklein, Mary Beth (March 18, 2007). Jaysis. "All four-year U.S. colleges now accept ACT test". USA Today. G'wan now. Archived from the original on May 30, 2015, grand so. Retrieved May 29, 2015.
38. ^ a b c "Score Structure", what? CollegeBoard. 14 May 2015. Retrieved March 25, 2021.
39. ^ a b c "The SAT and SAT Subject Tests Educator Guide" (PDF). Right so. College Board. C'mere til I tell ya. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on 18 October 2017. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Retrieved 20 July 2017.
40. ^ "SAT Essay". Be the hokey here's a quare wan. CollegeBoard. Arra' would ye listen to this. 3 December 2014. Whisht now and listen to this wan. Retrieved March 25, 2021.
41. ^ "SAT Readin' Test". In fairness now. College Board. 12 May 2015, you know yourself like. Archived from the feckin' original on 16 August 2017. Retrieved 16 August 2017.
42. ^ "SAT Writin' and Language Test". I hope yiz are all ears now. College Board. 12 May 2015. Archived from the bleedin' original on 20 August 2017, game ball! Retrieved 19 August 2017.
43. ^ "SAT Math Test". The College Board. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. 12 May 2015. Archived from the feckin' original on March 18, 2016. Retrieved April 5, 2016.
44. ^ "Score Structure – SAT Suite of Assessments". Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. The College Board. Listen up now to this fierce wan. 14 May 2015. Archived from the feckin' original on March 18, 2016. Retrieved April 5, 2016.
45. ^ "PSAT/NMSQT Understandin' Scores 2015 – SAT Suite of Assessments" (PDF). Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. The College Board. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on April 7, 2016. G'wan now. Retrieved April 6, 2016.
46. ^ "SAT Study Guide for Students – SAT Suite of Assessments". The College Board. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. 15 July 2015. Archived from the oul' original on April 23, 2016. Whisht now. Retrieved April 7, 2016.
47. ^ "SAT Calculator Policy", bedad. The College Board. G'wan now and listen to this wan. 13 January 2016. Archived from the oul' original on March 18, 2016. Bejaysus. Retrieved April 2, 2016.
48. ^ Scheuneman, Janice; Camara, Wayne. Sure this is it. "Calculator Use and the feckin' SAT I Math". The College Board, the hoor. Archived from the original on April 3, 2016. Retrieved April 3, 2016.
49. ^ "Should graphin' calculators be allowed on important tests?" (PDF). C'mere til I tell ya now. Texas Instruments. Bejaysus. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on April 22, 2016. Right so. Retrieved April 2, 2016.
50. ^ "About The SAT Math Test" (PDF). College Board. Me head is hurtin' with all this raidin'. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on August 25, 2017. Here's another quare one for ye. Retrieved August 24, 2017.
51. ^ "College Board Test Tips". Would ye swally this in a minute now?College Board. Chrisht Almighty. Archived from the oul' original on November 24, 2009. I hope yiz are all ears now. Retrieved September 9, 2008.
52. ^ "SAT Dates And Deadlines". College Board, fair play. 15 May 2015. Archived from the bleedin' original on July 23, 2017. Soft oul' day. Retrieved July 22, 2017.
53. ^ "SAT International Registration", begorrah. College Board, the hoor. 15 May 2015. Archived from the feckin' original on July 21, 2017. C'mere til I tell ya. Retrieved July 22, 2017.
54. ^ "Gettin' SAT Scores". Soft oul' day. The College Board. Arra' would ye listen to this. 11 January 2016, begorrah. Archived from the oul' original on April 24, 2019. C'mere til I tell ya now. Retrieved April 28, 2019.
55. ^ a b c "Understandin' SAT Scores" (PDF). Whisht now. The College Board. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on April 17, 2019. Story? Retrieved April 28, 2019.
56. ^ "Verifyin' SAT Scores". Jaysis. The College Board. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. 11 January 2016. Archived from the feckin' original on April 24, 2019, you know yerself. Retrieved April 28, 2019.
57. ^ "SAT Percentile Ranks for Males, Females, and Total Group:2006 College-Bound Seniors – Critical Readin' + Mathematics" (PDF). College Board. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 14, 2007. Here's a quare one. Retrieved May 29, 2007.
58. ^ "SAT Percentile Ranks for Males, Females, and Total Group:2006 College-Bound Seniors – Critical Readin' + Mathematics + Writin'" (PDF). Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. College Board, like. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 14, 2007. Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. Retrieved May 29, 2007.
59. ^ "The Fifth Normin' of the Mega Test", would ye swally that? Archived from the oul' original on 2019-05-16. Chrisht Almighty. Retrieved 2019-05-25.
60. ^ Membership Committee (1999). "1998/99 Membership Committee Report". Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. Prometheus Society. Soft oul' day. Archived from the original on June 24, 2013. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. Retrieved June 19, 2013. Cite journal requires `|journal=` (help)
61. ^ ACT and SAT® Concordance Tables (PDF). Research Note 40. Arra' would ye listen to this. College Board. 30 September 2009. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 April 2017. Here's a quare one for ye. Retrieved 18 Mar 2017.
62. ^ "ACT-SAT Concordance Tables" (PDF), that's fierce now what? ACT, Inc. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on 21 November 2016, like. Retrieved 18 Mar 2017.
63. ^ "Higher Education Concordance Information". College Board, fair play. 15 May 2015. Story? Archived from the oul' original on 19 March 2017. Sufferin' Jaysus. Retrieved 18 Mar 2017.
64. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF), you know yourself like. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on 2019-05-09. Retrieved 2019-06-02.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
65. ^ Kaplan, Stanley (2001). Test Pilot: How I Broke Testin' Barriers for Millions of Students and Caused an oul' Sonic Boom in the feckin' Business of Education, to be sure. New York: Simon & Schuster. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. pp. 30–33. Story? ISBN 978-0743201681.
66. ^ Research and Markets ltd, bejaysus. "2009 Worldwide Exam Preparation & Tutorin' Industry Report". Would ye believe this shite?researchandmarkets.com. Archived from the oul' original on 2010-07-02. Arra' would ye listen to this. Retrieved 2009-06-12.
67. ^ Gross, Natalie (November 10, 2016), you know yerself. "Can a bleedin' free SAT prep class ever be as good as pricey in-person ones?". Arra' would ye listen to this. The Washington Post. C'mere til I tell ya now. Retrieved August 25, 2021.
68. ^ a b Montgomery, Paul; Lilly, Jane (2012). "Systematic Reviews of the bleedin' Effects of Preparatory Courses on University Entrance Examinations in High School-Age Students". Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. International Journal of Social Welfare. 21 (1): 3–12. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2397.2011.00812.x.
69. ^ Carlton, Sue (March 31, 2021). Would ye believe this shite?"Make sure that SAT test-prep service for your high-schooler isn't a feckin' scam". Crime. I hope yiz are all ears now. Tampa Bay Times. Archived from the original on August 27, 2021. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
70. ^ Allen Grove, that's fierce now what? "SAT Prep – Are SAT Prep Courses Worth the bleedin' Cost?". About.com Education. Archived from the oul' original on 2011-07-07, for the craic. Retrieved 2010-11-27.
71. ^ a b c Hambrick, David Z. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. (December 16, 2011). Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. "The SAT Is a holy Good Intelligence Test". Whisht now and listen to this wan. The New York Times. Here's another quare one for ye. Archived from the bleedin' original on February 26, 2021. Here's another quare one for ye. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
72. ^ DerSimonian, Rebecca; Laird, Nan (April 1983). "Evaluatin' the oul' Effect of Coachin' on SAT Scores: A Meta-Analysis", bejaysus. Harvard Educational Review. 53 (1): 1–15. doi:10.17763/haer.53.1.n06j5h5356217648.
73. ^ Domigue, Ben; Briggs, Derek C. Here's a quare one for ye. (2009), the cute hoor. "Usin' Linear Regression and Propensity Score Matchin' to Estimate the Effect of Coachin' on the SAT". Arra' would ye listen to this. Multiple Linear Regression Viewpoints, enda story. 35 (1): 12–29.
74. ^ Becker, Betsy Jane (30 June 2016). Right so. "Coachin' for the feckin' Scholastic Aptitude Test: Further Synthesis and Appraisal". Whisht now. Review of Educational Research. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. 60 (3): 373–417, the cute hoor. doi:10.3102/00346543060003373. S2CID 146476197.
75. ^ a b Shellenbarger, Sue (May 27, 2009). G'wan now and listen to this wan. "High-School Senior: I Took the oul' SAT Again After 41 Years". The Wall Street Journal. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. Archived from the oul' original on January 25, 2021. Retrieved February 22, 2021.
76. ^ Goldfarb, Zachary A, the shitehawk. (March 5, 2014). C'mere til I tell yiz. "These four charts show how the SAT favors rich, educated families". G'wan now and listen to this wan. The Washington Post. C'mere til I tell ya. Archived from the bleedin' original on February 16, 2021. Retrieved February 16, 2021.
77. ^ Steiner, Matty (August 22, 2014). Whisht now and eist liom. "Neuroscience and College Admission Tests", enda story. Compass, the hoor. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
78. ^ Atkinson, R.C.; Geiser, S. (2009), what? "Reflections on an oul' Century of College Admissions Tests". Chrisht Almighty. Educational Researcher, game ball! 38 (9): 665–76, for the craic. doi:10.3102/0013189x09351981. S2CID 15661086.
79. ^ a b c d McGurn, William (May 25, 2020). "Is the feckin' SAT Really the bleedin' Problem?". Chrisht Almighty. The Wall Street Journal. Stop the lights! Archived from the feckin' original on August 1, 2020, the cute hoor. Retrieved March 3, 2021.
80. ^ a b "Report of the bleedin' UC Academic Council Standardized Testin' Task Force (STTF)" (PDF). Jan 2020. At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predictin' first-year retention, UGPA, and graduation.3 For students within any given (HSGPA) band, higher standardized test scores correlate with a higher freshman UGPA, a higher graduation UGPA, 4 and higher likelihood of graduatin' within either four years (for transfers) or seven years (for freshmen). I hope yiz are all ears now. Further, the oul' amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007, while variance explained by high school grades has decreased, although altogether does not exceed 26%. Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines, even after controllin' for HSGPA.
81. ^ Kobrin, Jennifer L.; Patterson, Brian F.; Shaw, Emily J.; Mattern, Krista D.; Barbuti, Sandra M. C'mere til I tell ya. (2008). Validity of the bleedin' SAT® for Predictin' First-Year College Grade Point Average. Arra' would ye listen to this. Research Report No. 2008-5. College Board.
82. ^ Burton, Nancy W.; Ramist, Leonard (2001). Jaysis. Predictin' Success in College: SAT® Studies of Classes Graduatin' since 1980, would ye believe it? Research Report No. Arra' would ye listen to this. 2001-2. C'mere til I tell ya now. College Entrance Examination Board.
83. ^ a b c d Kuncel, Nathan R.; Hezlett, Sarah A, would ye swally that? (December 14, 2010). "Fact and Fiction in Cognitive Ability Testin' for Admissions and Hirin' Decisions". Current Directions in Psychological Science. Association for Psychological Science. Here's a quare one. 19 (6): 339–345. doi:10.1177/0963721410389459. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. S2CID 33313110.
84. ^ Coyle, Thomas R.; Pillow, David R. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. (2008), begorrah. "SAT and ACT predict college GPA after removin' g", what? Intelligence. Stop the lights! 26 (6): 719–729. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2008.05.001.
85. ^ Schmitt, Neal; Keeney, Jessica; Oswald, Frederick L.; Pleskac, Timothy J.; Billington, Abigail Q.; Sinha, Ruchi; Zorzie, Mark (November 2009). Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. "Prediction of 4-year college student performance usin' cognitive and noncognitive predictors and the impact on demographic status of admitted students". In fairness now. Journal of Applied Psychology. Sufferin' Jaysus. 96 (4): 1479–97. Whisht now and eist liom. doi:10.1037/a0016810.
86. ^ a b c Sackett, Paul R.; Kuncel, Nathan R.; Beatty, Adam S.; Rigdon, Jana L.; Shen, Winny; Kiger, Thomas B, enda story. (August 2, 2012). Jaysis. "The Role of Socioeconomic Status in SAT-Grade Relationships and in College Admissions Decisions", bejaysus. Psychological Science, begorrah. Association for Psychological Science. 23 (9): 1000–1007, the cute hoor. doi:10.1177/0956797612438732. Here's another quare one for ye. PMID 22858524, bedad. S2CID 22703783.
87. ^ Shewach, Oren R.; McNeal, Kyle D.; Kuncel, Nathan R.; Sackett, Paul R. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. (2019). Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. "Bunny Hill or Black Diamond: Differences in Advanced Course‐Takin' in College as an oul' Function of Cognitive Ability and High School GPA". Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. National Council on Measurement in Education. Listen up now to this fierce wan. 38 (1): 25–35. Bejaysus. doi:10.1111/emip.12212.
88. ^ a b Zwick, Rebecca; Greif Green, Jennifer (Sprin' 2007), bedad. "New Perspectives on the feckin' Correlation of SAT Scores, High School Grades, and Socioeconomic Factors", enda story. Journal of Educational Measurement. National Council on Measurement in Education. Soft oul' day. 44 (1): 23–45. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2007.00025.x, bedad. JSTOR 20461841.
89. ^ a b Rothstein, Jesse (April 2005). Here's another quare one for ye. "SAT Scores, High Schools, and Collegiate Performance Predictions" (PDF), to be sure. Presented at the feckin' annual meetin' of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal. Cite journal requires `|journal=` (help)
90. ^ Ackerman, Philip L. Arra' would ye listen to this. (2018). G'wan now. "Chapter 1: Intelligence as Potentiality and Actuality". In Sternberg, Robert (ed.), to be sure. The Nature of Human Intelligence. Cambridge University Press. Chrisht Almighty. ISBN 978-1-107-17657-7.
91. ^ a b c Kaufman, Scott Barry (September 4, 2018), what? "IQ and Society". Arra' would ye listen to this. Scientific American. Story? Archived from the bleedin' original on September 30, 2020, grand so. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
92. ^ Wai, Jonathan; Lubinski, David; Benbow, Camilla (2009), to be sure. "Spatial Ability for STEM Domains: Alignin' Over 50 Years of Cumulative Psychological Knowledge Solidifies Its Importance" (PDF). Journal of Educational Psychology, what? American Psychological Association, that's fierce now what? 101 (4): 817–835. Jaysis. doi:10.1037/a0016127.
93. ^ Sternberg, Robert; The Rainbow Project Collaborators (July–August 2006). "The Rainbow Project: Enhancin' the oul' SAT through assessments of analytical, practical, and creative skills". Intelligence, you know yourself like. 34 (4): 321–350. Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.01.002.
94. Dance, Amber (July 15, 2021). Right so. "Has the oul' Pandemic Put an End to the feckin' SAT and ACT?". Story? Smithsonian Magazine. Jaysis. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
95. ^ Mayer, John D. (March 10, 2014). "We Need More Tests, Not Fewer", that's fierce now what? Op-ed. The New York Times. Stop the lights! Archived from the original on August 29, 2021, for the craic. Retrieved August 31, 2021.
96. ^ a b Turner, Cory (April 30, 2014), be the hokey! "U.S. Tests Teens A Lot, But Worldwide, Exam Stakes Are Higher". C'mere til I tell ya now. Education. Sufferin' Jaysus. NPR. C'mere til I tell yiz. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
97. ^ Ripley, Amanda (March 12, 2014). Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. "The New SAT Doesn't Come Close to the World's Best Tests". Jaykers! Time Magazine, bedad. Archived from the original on September 18, 2020. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
98. ^ Salaky, Kristin (September 5, 2018). "What standardized tests look like in 10 places around the bleedin' world", fair play. Insider. Retrieved August 26, 2021.
99. ^ a b Wai, Jonathan (July 24, 2012). C'mere til I tell ya now. "The SAT Needs to Be Harder". Commentary, for the craic. Education Week. Jaykers! Archived from the original on February 18, 2021, what? Retrieved February 18, 2021.
100. ^ a b c Zoroya, Gregg (March 6, 2014). "Sharpen those pencils: The SAT test is gettin' harder", for the craic. USA Today. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
101. ^ Popken, Ben (July 13, 2018), for the craic. "Easy SAT has students cryin' over 'shockin'' low scores". NBC News. Whisht now and eist liom. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
102. ^ Jaschik, Scott (July 12, 2018). "An 'Easy' SAT and Terrible Scores". Inside Higher Education, that's fierce now what? Retrieved February 18, 2021.
103. ^ The Staff of the oul' Princeton Review (2019), game ball! "Why You Shouldn't Want an "Easy" SAT", bedad. Princeton Review. Whisht now and listen to this wan. Archived from the oul' original on October 28, 2020. Retrieved February 19, 2021.
104. ^ a b Gallagher, Ann M.; De Lisi, Richard; Holst, Patricia C.; McGillicuddy-De Lisi, Ann V.; Morely, Mary; Cahalan, Cara (2000), bedad. "Gender Differences in Advanced Mathematical Problem Solvin'". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. Would ye believe this shite?Academic Press. Here's a quare one. 75 (3): 165–190, enda story. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.536.2454, would ye swally that? doi:10.1006/jecp.1999.2532. PMID 10666324.
105. ^ Hannon, Brenda; McNaughton-Cassill, Mary (July 27, 2011). Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. "SAT Performance: Understandin' the oul' Contributions of Cognitive/Learnin' and Social/Personality Factors". In fairness now. Applied Cognitive Psychology. I hope yiz are all ears now. 25 (4): 528–535. Here's a quare one for ye. doi:10.1002/acp.1725. PMC 3144549.
106. ^ Frey, M.C.; Detterman, D.K. Chrisht Almighty. (2004), so it is. "Scholastic Assessment or g? The Relationship Between the feckin' Scholastic Assessment Test and General Cognitive Ability" (PDF). Here's another quare one for ye. Psychological Science, the cute hoor. 15 (6): 373–78. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00687.x. PMID 15147489. S2CID 12724085, would ye swally that? Archived (PDF) from the oul' original on 2019-08-05. Retrieved 2019-09-10.
107. ^ Beaujean, A.A.; Firmin, M.W.; Knoop, A.; Michonski, D.; Berry, T.B.; Lowrie, R.E. Here's another quare one for ye. (2006), Lord bless us and save us. "Validation of the Frey and Detterman (2004) IQ prediction equations usin' the bleedin' Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales" (PDF), to be sure. Personality and Individual Differences, that's fierce now what? 41 (2): 353–57. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.01.014. Right so. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-13.
108. ^ Gottfredson, Linda (2018), like. "Chapter 9: g Theory - How Recurrin' Variation in Human Intelligence and the Complexity of Everyday Tasks Create Social Structure and the Democratic Dilemma". Stop the lights! In Sternberg, Robert J. Here's a quare one for ye. (ed.), game ball! The Nature of Human Intelligence. Listen up now to this fierce wan. Cambridge University Press. Bejaysus. ISBN 978-1-107-17657-7.
109. ^ Zwick, Rebecca (2004). Rethinkin' the feckin' SAT: The Future of Standardized Testin' in University Admissions. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. pp. 203–04. ISBN 978-0-415-94835-7.
110. ^ a b "Ditchin' dreaded SAT analogies". C'mere til I tell ya now. Chicago Tribune, you know yourself like. August 11, 2003. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
111. Lawrence, Ida; Rigol, Gretchen W.; Van Essen, Thomas; Jackson, Carol A. C'mere til I tell ya now. (2003). Right so. "Research Report No. Whisht now. 2003-3: A Historical Perspective on the feckin' Content of the feckin' SAT" (PDF), so it is. College Entrance Examination Board. Whisht now and listen to this wan. Archived (PDF) from the bleedin' original on June 5, 2014, like. Retrieved June 1, 2014.
112. ^ Garfield, Leslie (2006-09-01). "The Cost of Good Intentions: Why the bleedin' Supreme Court's Decision Upholdin' Affirmative Action Admission Programs Is Detrimental to the Cause". Pace Law Review. Stop the lights! 27 (1): 15. ISSN 0272-2410. G'wan now. Archived from the feckin' original on 2019-09-04. Retrieved 2019-09-04.
113. ^ a b "College Board To Alter SAT I for 2005–06". Whisht now. Daily Nexus. 20 September 2002. Archived from the original on 9 October 2007. Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Retrieved July 3, 2016.
114. ^ Lindsay, Samantha (January 6, 2019), that's fierce now what? "SAT Analogies and Comparisons: Why Were They Removed, and What Replaced Them?". PrepScholar. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
115. ^ Hsu, Stephen; Shombert, James (November 2010). Would ye swally this in a minute now?"Nonlinear Psychometric Thresholds for Physics and Mathematics". Be the hokey here's a quare wan. arXiv:1011.0663 [physics.ed-ph].
116. ^ a b c Wai, Jonathan (February 3, 2015), bedad. "Your college major is a holy pretty good indication of how smart you are". Quartz. Story? Archived from the feckin' original on January 16, 2020. Arra' would ye listen to this shite? Retrieved January 30, 2021.
117. ^ Crew, Bec (February 16, 2015). C'mere til I tell yiz. "Your College Major Can Be an oul' Pretty Good Indication of How Smart You Are". Humans. Would ye believe this shite?Science Magazine. Me head is hurtin' with all this raidin'. Retrieved January 30, 2021.
118. ^ Gunn, Laura H.; ter Horst, Enrique; Markossian, Talar; Molina, German (May 13, 2020), the shitehawk. "Associations between majors of graduatin' seniors and average SATs of incomin' students within higher education in the feckin' U.S." Heliyon. 6 (5): e03956. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03956. PMC 7266786. Sure this is it. PMID 32514476.
119. ^ Wai, Jonathan; Brown, Matt I.; Chabris, Christopher F, for the craic. (2018). "Usin' Standardized Test Scores to Include General Cognitive Ability in Education Research and Policy". Journal of Intelligence. Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. 6 (3): 37, you know yourself like. doi:10.3390/jintelligence6030037. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. PMC 6480800. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. PMID 31162464.
120. ^ Wai, Jonathan; Brown, Matt; Chabris, Christopher (2019). Whisht now. "No one likes the feckin' SAT. Chrisht Almighty. It's still the fairest thin' about admissions". Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. The Washington Post. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. Archived from the original on November 17, 2020. Sure this is it. Retrieved February 15, 2021.
121. ^ Petrilli, Michael J.; Enamorado, Pedro (March 24, 2020). "Yes, It Really Is Harder to Get into Highly Selective Colleges Today". Jaykers! Education Next. Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Archived from the bleedin' original on October 24, 2020, you know yerself. Retrieved February 19, 2021.
122. ^ Duncan, Keven C.; Sandy, Jonathan (Sprin' 2007), the cute hoor. "Explainin' the Performance Gap between Public and Private School Students" (PDF). Eastern Economic Journal. Palgrave Macmillan Journals. 33 (2): 177–191. doi:10.1057/eej.2007.16, you know yourself like. JSTOR 20642346. Here's another quare one. S2CID 55272711.
123. ^ Geiser, Saul; Studley, Roger (October 29, 2001), UC and the SAT: Predictive Validity and Differential Impact of the bleedin' SAT I ad SAT II at the bleedin' University of California (PDF), University of California, Office of the President., archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on March 5, 2016, retrieved September 30, 2014
124. ^ a b Blandin, Adam; Herrington, Christopher; Steelman, Aaron (February 2018). Soft oul' day. "How Does Family Structure durin' Childhood Affect College Preparedness and Completion?". Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. Economic Brief. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Bejaysus. 18 (2).
125. ^ Novotney, Amy (December 2012). Whisht now and eist liom. "Psychologists debate the meanin' of students' fallin' SAT scores". APA Monitor. Jasus. Retrieved February 2, 2021.
126. ^ a b Hsin, Amy; Xie, Yu (June 10, 2014). Right so. "Explainin' Asian Americans' academic advantage over whites", for the craic. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the oul' United States of America. Jaysis. 111 (23): 8416–8421. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Bibcode:2014PNAS..111.8416H. doi:10.1073/pnas.1406402111. PMC 4060715, so it is. PMID 24799702.
127. ^ Cummins, Denise (March 17, 2014). "Boys outperform girls on mathematic portion". C'mere til I tell yiz. Psychology Today. Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Retrieved November 6, 2016.
128. ^ Cummins, Denise (April 17, 2015). "Column: Why the feckin' STEM gender gap is overblown". Here's a quare one for ye. PBS Newshour. Retrieved March 4, 2021.
129. ^ Ceci, Stephen; Ginther, Donna K.; Kahn, Shulamit; Williams, Wendy M. Here's a quare one for ye. (November 3, 2014). "Women in Academic Science: A Changin' Landscape", fair play. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. Association for Psychological Science (APS). In fairness now. 15 (3): 75–141. Whisht now. doi:10.1177/1529100614541236. PMID 26172066, bedad. S2CID 12701313.
130. ^ a b c d Ceci, Stephen J.; Ginther, Donna K.; Kahn, Shulamit; Williams, Wendy M, bedad. (2018). "Chapter 3: Culture, Sex, and Intelligence". In Sternberg, Robert (ed.). Here's a quare one. The Nature of Human Intelligence, be the hokey! Cambridge University Press, Lord bless us and save us. ISBN 978-1-107-17657-7.
131. Wai, Jonathan; Cacchio, Megan; Putallaz, Martha; Makel, Matthew C, enda story. (July–August 2010). "Sex differences in the oul' right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30 year examination". Here's a quare one for ye. Intelligence. Whisht now and listen to this wan. 38 (4): 412–423. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2010.04.006.
132. ^ a b c Wai, Jonathan; Putallaz, Martha; Makel, Matthew C, to be sure. (2012). "Studyin' Intellectual Outliers: Are There Sex Differences, and Are the oul' Smart Gettin' Smarter?" (PDF). In fairness now. Current Directions in Psychological Science, like. 21 (6): 382–390. doi:10.1177/0963721412455052. S2CID 145155911.
133. ^ "Cleverer still", the shitehawk. The Economist. Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. December 22, 2012, bejaysus. Archived from the bleedin' original on November 12, 2020. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. Retrieved February 15, 2021.
134. ^ Lehre, Anne-Catherine; Lehre, Knut P.; Laake, Petter; Danbolt, Niels C. Here's another quare one. (2009). Arra' would ye listen to this. "Greater intrasex phenotype variability in males than in females is a fundamental aspect of the bleedin' gender differences in humans". Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. Developmental Psychobiology. 51 (2): 198–206, would ye swally that? doi:10.1002/dev.20358. ISSN 0012-1630. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. PMID 19031491.
135. ^ Wai, Jonathan; Hodges, Jaret; Makel, Matthew C, begorrah. (March–April 2018). "Sex differences in ability tilt in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 35-year examination". Would ye swally this in a minute now?Intelligence, be the hokey! 67: 76–83. Here's a quare one for ye. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2018.02.003. G'wan now. ISSN 0160-2896. Retrieved January 31, 2021.
136. ^ a b c Schrager, Allison (July 9, 2015). "Men are both dumber and smarter than women". Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Quartz. Would ye believe this shite?Archived from the feckin' original on January 13, 2021, be the hokey! Retrieved February 15, 2021.
137. ^ "Validity of the bleedin' SAT for Predictin' First-Year Grades: 2013 SAT Validity Sample" (PDF). Jaysis. files.eric.ed.gov, you know yourself like. 2013. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-04-11. Retrieved 2019-05-14.
138. ^ Pope, Devin G. Jaykers! (August 8, 2017), be the hokey! "Women who are elite mathematicians are less likely than men to believe they're elite mathematicians". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on February 16, 2021. Retrieved February 16, 2021.
139. ^ Haier, Richard; Benbow, Camilla Persson (1995). "Sex differences and lateralization in temporal lobe glucose metabolism durin' mathematical reasonin'", Lord bless us and save us. Developmental Neuropsychology. 11 (4): 405–414. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. doi:10.1080/87565649509540629.
140. ^ Roth, Philip L.; Bevier, Craig A.; Bobko, Philip; Switzer, Fred S.; Tyler, Peggy (June 2001), game ball! "Ethnic group differences in cognitive ability in employment and educational settings: a feckin' meta-analysis". Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Personnel Psychology, grand so. 54 (2): 297–330. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00094.x.
141. ^ Status and Trends in the feckin' Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities: Average SAT scores for 12th-grade SAT-takin' population, by race/ethnicity: 2006
142. ^ "Average SAT scores for 12th-grade SAT-takin' population, by race/ethnicity: 2006", you know yerself. Institute of Educational Sciences. Stop the lights! The College Board, College Bound Seniors, 2006. Chrisht Almighty. 2006. Whisht now. Archived from the original on 2015-06-27.
143. ^ Abigail Thernstrom & Stephan Thernstrom. C'mere til I tell yiz. 2004. No Excuses: Closin' the feckin' Racial Gap in Learnin'. Here's another quare one. Simon and Schuster
144. ^ Jaschik, S (21 June 2010). "New Evidence of Racial Bias on the oul' SAT". Inside Higher ED, you know yerself. Archived from the oul' original on 1 January 2015.
145. ^ a b c Smith, Ember; Reeves, Richard V. (December 1, 2020), the hoor. "SAT math scores mirror and maintain racial inequity". Brookings Institution. Retrieved January 30, 2021.
146. ^ Card, D.; Rothstein, Ol (2007). "Racial segregation and the feckin' black–white test score gap". C'mere til I tell ya now. Journal of Public Economics (Submitted manuscript). 91 (11): 2158–84. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.03.006. S2CID 13468169. In fairness now. Archived from the feckin' original on 2019-01-03, Lord bless us and save us. Retrieved 2018-09-10.
147. ^ "The Widenin' Racial Scorin' Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test". Jaysis. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. Archived from the original on 16 December 2015. Retrieved 14 December 2015.
148. ^ Ogbu, John U. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. (3 January 2003). Black American Students in An Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement (Sociocultural, Political, and Historical Studies in Education). Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. New York: Routledge. Would ye swally this in a minute now?pp. 16, 164. ISBN 978-0-8058-4516-7.
149. ^ Freedle, R.O. (2003). Bejaysus. "Correctin' the oul' SAT's ethnic and social-class bias: A method for reestimatin' SAT Scores", bejaysus. Harvard Educational Review. 73: 1–38. doi:10.17763/haer.73.1.8465k88616hn4757.
150. ^ Crain, W (2004). C'mere til I tell ya now. "Biased test", that's fierce now what? ENCOUNTER: Education for Meanin' and Social Justice. Arra' would ye listen to this shite? 17 (3): 2–4.
151. ^ "Editorial Biased Tests" (PDF). files.campus.edublogs.org. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. 2011. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Archived (PDF) from the bleedin' original on 2019-04-11, be the hokey! Retrieved 2019-05-14.
152. ^ "New Evidence of Racial Bias on SAT". Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. insidehighered.com, so it is. Archived from the original on 2015-09-28. Here's a quare one for ye. Retrieved 2015-09-10.
153. ^ Santelices, M.V.; Wilson, M. (2010). Would ye swally this in a minute now?"Unfair treatment? The case of Freedle, the SAT, and the oul' standardization approach to differential item functionin'". Harvard Educational Review. 80 (1): 106–34. C'mere til I tell ya now. doi:10.17763/haer.80.1.j94675w001329270.
154. ^ Flemin', Ol (2002). Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. Who will succeed in college? When the bleedin' SAT predicts Black students' performance, so it is. The Review of Higher Education, 25(3), 281–96.
155. ^ a b Jencks, C. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. (1998). Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. Racial bias in testin'. The Black-White test score gap, 55, 84.
156. ^ Reeves, Richard V.; Halikias, Dimitrios (February 1, 2017). Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. "Race gaps in SAT scores highlight inequality and hinder upward mobility", for the craic. Brookings Institution. Whisht now and listen to this wan. Retrieved February 16, 2021.
157. ^ Jaschik, Scott (October 19, 2020). "ACT and SAT Scores Drop". Inside Higher Education, fair play. Retrieved January 30, 2021.
158. ^ "Intertel - Join us". Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. www.intertel-iq.org. G'wan now and listen to this wan. Retrieved 2021-03-15.
159. ^ "Qualifyin' Scores for the bleedin' Triple Nine Society". Archived from the original on 2018-03-06. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. Retrieved 2018-03-10.
160. ^ Wai, Jonathan; Lubinski, David; Benbow, Camilla (2005). Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. "Creativity and Occupational Accomplishments Among Intellectually Precocious Youths: An Age 13 to Age 33 Longitudinal Study" (PDF). Journal of Educational Psychology. Here's a quare one for ye. American Psychological Association. 97 (3): 484–492. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.484.
161. ^ a b Wai, Jonathan (July–August 2013), the cute hoor. "Investigatin' America's elite: Cognitive ability, education, and sex differences". Whisht now and eist liom. Journal of Intelligence. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. 41 (4): 203–211. Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2013.03.005 – via Elsevier Science Direct.
162. ^ Park, Gregory; Lubinski, David; Benbow, Camilla (November 2007). In fairness now. "Contrastin' intellectual patterns predict creativity in the arts and sciences: trackin' intellectually precocious youth over 25 years". Psychological Science, game ball! 18 (11): 948–52. Bejaysus. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02007.x. PMID 17958707. In fairness now. S2CID 11576778.
163. ^ Robertson, Kimberley Ferriman; Smeets, Stijn; Lubinski, David; Benbow, Camilla P, like. (December 14, 2010). C'mere til I tell ya now. "Beyond the bleedin' Threshold Hypothesis: Even Among the bleedin' Gifted and Top Math/Science Graduate Students, Cognitive Abilities, Vocational Interests, and Lifestyle Preferences Matter for Career Choice, Performance, and Persistence". Current Directions in Psychological Science. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Association for Psychological Science. Whisht now. 19 (6): 346–351. doi:10.1177/0963721410391442. S2CID 46218795.
164. ^ Tierney, John (June 7, 2012). "Darin' to Discuss Women in Science". C'mere til I tell ya now. Science, game ball! The New York Times. Archived from the bleedin' original on April 12, 2017. Jasus. Retrieved February 15, 2021.
165. ^ Rothstein, Richard (August 28, 2002). "Sums vs. In fairness now. Summarizin': SAT's Math-Verbal Gap". Whisht now and eist liom. The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 30, 2012. Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
166. ^ Phelps, Richard (2003), that's fierce now what? Kill the feckin' Messenger, for the craic. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, be the hokey! p. 220. ISBN 978-0-7658-0178-4.
167. ^ Atkinson, Richard C. Would ye swally this in a minute now?(December 2001). "Achievement Versus Aptitude Tests in College Admissions". University of California Office of the President. Archived from the original on May 4, 2006.
168. ^ a b Hubler, Shawn (May 23, 2020). "Why Is the feckin' SAT Fallin' Out of Favor?". The New York Times. Retrieved February 2, 2021.
169. ^ a b c Lorin, Janet (February 17, 2021), fair play. "SATs, Once Hailed as Ivy League Equalizers, Fall From Favor", fair play. Bloomberg. C'mere til I tell ya now. Archived from the feckin' original on February 18, 2021. Stop the lights! Retrieved March 4, 2021.
170. ^ "Exams are grim, but most alternatives are worse". The Economist. Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. November 28, 2020. In fairness now. Retrieved February 17, 2021.
171. Aspegren, Elinor (January 19, 2021). "Adjustin' to 'new realities' in admissions process, College Board eliminates SAT's optional essay and subject tests". I hope yiz are all ears now. USA TODAY. Here's a quare one for ye. Archived from the oul' original on February 4, 2021. Retrieved February 5, 2021.
172. ^ Anderson, Nick (January 29, 2021), bejaysus. "Applications surge after big-name colleges halt SAT and ACT testin' rules". Education. Sufferin' Jaysus listen to this. The Washington Post. Retrieved February 9, 2021.
173. ^ a b Nierenberg, Amelia (February 20, 2021). G'wan now and listen to this wan. "Interest Surges in Top Colleges, While Strugglin' Ones Scrape for Applicants". Soft oul' day. The New York Times. C'mere til I tell ya now. Archived from the bleedin' original on February 20, 2021. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
174. ^ Winerip, Michael (May 4, 2005). C'mere til I tell yiz. "SAT Essay Test Rewards Length and Ignores Errors", the shitehawk. The New York Times. Arra' would ye listen to this. Archived from the bleedin' original on March 16, 2015. Right so. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
175. ^ Harris, Lynn (May 17, 2005), Lord bless us and save us. "Testin', testin'", to be sure. Salon.com. Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Archived from the original on September 19, 2009.
176. ^ "Data (SAT Program Participation And Performance Statistics)". C'mere til I tell ya. College Entrance Examination Board. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Archived from the oul' original on February 21, 2014. Would ye believe this shite?Retrieved May 5, 2014.
177. ^ "The 2020 SAT Suite of Assessments Annual Report". College Board. 17 September 2020. Stop the lights! Retrieved January 16, 2021.
178. ^ a b c d Lemann, Nicholas (2004), you know yourself like. "A History of Admissions Testin'". Stop the lights! In Zwick, Rebecca (ed.). Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. Rethinkin' the SAT: The Future of Standardized Testin' in University Admissions. C'mere til I tell ya. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. pp. 5–14.
179. ^ a b Crouse, James; Trusheim, Dale (1988). I hope yiz are all ears now. The Case Against the feckin' SAT. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, be the hokey! pp. 16–39.
180. ^ a b "The Problem with the oul' SAT's Idea of Objectivity", like. 18 May 2019, what? Archived from the original on 2019-11-12. In fairness now. Retrieved 2019-11-12.
181. Hubin, David R. Jaysis. (1988). Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. The SAT – Its Development and Introduction, 1900–1948 (Ph.D.), the shitehawk. University of Oregon.
182. ^ "G.I Bill History and Timeline". Archived from the original on 27 July 2016. Retrieved 28 July 2016.
183. ^ Fuess, Claude (1950). The College Board: Its First Fifty Years. New York: Columbia University Press, so it is. Archived from the feckin' original on 2017-10-18, that's fierce now what? Retrieved 2016-08-05.
184. ^ Bennet, Randy Elliot, would ye believe it? "What Does It Mean to Be a bleedin' Nonprofit Educational Measurement Organization in the oul' 21st Century?" (PDF). Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Educational Testin' Service. Archived (PDF) from the oul' original on 17 July 2011, would ye swally that? Retrieved 28 Mar 2015.
185. ^ a b "On Further Examination: Report of the feckin' Advisory Panel on the feckin' Scholastic Aptitude Test Score Decline" (PDF), be the hokey! College Entrance Examination Board. Here's a quare one. 1977. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 18, 2014. Retrieved June 24, 2014.
186. ^ "frontline: secrets of the feckin' sat: where did the bleedin' test come from?: the feckin' 1901 college board". Secrets of the feckin' SAT. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Frontline, to be sure. Archived from the oul' original on May 7, 2012, the shitehawk. Retrieved October 20, 2007.
187. ^ a b "frontline: secrets of the feckin' sat: where did the feckin' test come from?: the bleedin' 1926 sat". Arra' would ye listen to this shite? Secrets of the SAT. Jaysis. Frontline, you know yerself. Archived from the bleedin' original on October 31, 2007. Retrieved October 20, 2007.
188. Dorans, Neil. "The Recenterin' of SAT® Scales and Its Effects on Score Distributions and Score Interpretations" (PDF). Research Report No, fair play. 2002-11. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. College Board, bejaysus. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on May 31, 2014, the cute hoor. Retrieved May 30, 2014.
189. ^ Donlon, Thomas; Angoff, William (1971), begorrah. Angoff, William (ed.), so it is. The College Board Admissions Testin' Program: A Technical Report on Research and Development Activities Relatin' to the oul' Scholastic Aptitude Test and Achievement Tests. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Story? pp. 32–33. Holy blatherin' Joseph, listen to this. Archived from the original on May 31, 2014. C'mere til I tell ya. Retrieved May 30, 2014. Available at the oul' Education Resources Information Center[1] Archived 2014-05-31 at the oul' Wayback Machine.
190. ^ Stedman, Lawrence; Kaestle, Carl (1991). Jaykers! "The Great Test Score Decline: A Closer Look", bejaysus. In Kaestle, Carl (ed.). Literacy in the feckin' United States. Yale University Press. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. p. 132.
191. ^ a b Honan, William (March 20, 1994), game ball! "Revised and Renamed, S.A.T. Brings Same Old Anxiety". Would ye believe this shite?The New York Times. Whisht now. Archived from the bleedin' original on July 8, 2017. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
192. ^ DePalma, Anthony (November 1, 1990). "Revisions Adopted in College Entrance Tests", enda story. The New York Times. Listen up now to this fierce wan. Archived from the oul' original on April 17, 2017. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
193. ^ "Scholastic Assessment Test Score Averages for High-School College-Bound Seniors". National Center for Education Statistics. Archived from the bleedin' original on May 24, 2014. Whisht now and eist liom. Retrieved May 23, 2014.
194. ^ The College Handbook, 1985–86. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Here's another quare one for ye. 1985. C'mere til I tell ya. p. 953.
195. ^ "Yale University Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) Scores for Freshmen Matriculants Class of 1980 – Class of 2017", the shitehawk. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 14, 2014. Story? Retrieved June 4, 2014.
196. ^ College-Bound Seniors: 1992 Profile of SAT and Achievement Test Takers. College Entrance Examination Board, game ball! 1992. p. 9. In fairness now. Archived from the oul' original on July 14, 2014. Sure this is it. Retrieved June 21, 2014. Available at the Education Resources Information Center Archived 2014-07-14 at the bleedin' Wayback Machine.
197. ^ Barron, James (July 26, 1995), you know yourself like. "When Close Is Perfect: Even 4 Errors Can't Prevent Top Score on New S.A.T." The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 8, 2017. Would ye believe this shite?Retrieved February 18, 2017.
198. ^ "SAT I Individual Score Equivalents". College Entrance Examination Board. Here's a quare one for ye. Archived from the original on September 1, 2014. Retrieved June 29, 2014.
199. ^ The Center for Education Reform (August 22, 1996). "SAT Increase – The Real Story, Part II". Archived from the original on July 21, 2011.
200. ^ Schoenfeld, Jane (May 24, 2002), like. "College board drops 'score choice' for SAT-II exams". St. Louis Business Journal. Archived from the bleedin' original on February 12, 2017. Retrieved March 7, 2018.
201. ^ Zhao, Yilu (June 19, 2002). "Students Protest Plan To Change Test Policy", begorrah. The New York Times, so it is. Archived from the original on March 12, 2018. Retrieved March 7, 2018.
202. ^ Lewin, Tamar (June 23, 2002), enda story. "New SAT Writin' Test Is Planned", bedad. The New York Times, what? Archived from the original on May 5, 2014. Listen up now to this fierce wan. Retrieved May 5, 2014.
203. ^ "Data Layout for SAT and SAT Subject Tests Electronic Score Reports" (PDF), to be sure. CollegeBoard, that's fierce now what? Retrieved March 25, 2021.
204. ^ "Understandin' the bleedin' New SAT", would ye believe it? Inside Higher Ed. Jaysis. 25 May 2005. Here's another quare one for ye. Archived from the bleedin' original on 15 September 2016. Retrieved July 3, 2016.
205. ^ Arenson, Karen (March 10, 2006), that's fierce now what? "SAT Errors Raise New Qualms About Testin'", you know yerself. The New York Times. Jasus. Archived from the feckin' original on September 1, 2017. Arra' would ye listen to this shite? Retrieved February 18, 2017.
206. ^ Arenson, Karen (April 9, 2006). Whisht now. "Class-Action Lawsuit to Be Filed Over SAT Scorin' Errors". Listen up now to this fierce wan. The New York Times, would ye swally that? Archived from the feckin' original on October 23, 2014, enda story. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
207. ^ Hoover, Eric (August 24, 2007), you know yourself like. "\$2.85-Million Settlement Proposed in Lawsuit Over SAT-Scorin' Errors", be the hokey! The Chronicle of Higher Education. Archived from the original on September 30, 2007, Lord bless us and save us. Retrieved August 27, 2007.
208. ^ Maslin Nir, Sarah (April 8, 2011), bejaysus. "7,000 Private School Applicants Got Incorrect Scores, Company Says". Here's a quare one. The New York Times, bejaysus. Archived from the feckin' original on September 1, 2017. Whisht now. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
209. ^ Rimer, Sara (December 30, 2008), be the hokey! "SAT Changes Policy, Openin' Rift With Colleges". Jasus. The New York Times, bedad. Archived from the feckin' original on March 12, 2018, you know yourself like. Retrieved March 8, 2018.
210. ^ "SAT Score Choice". Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. The College Board, you know yerself. 12 January 2016. Archived from the oul' original on March 21, 2018. Bejaysus here's a quare one right here now. Retrieved March 7, 2018.
211. ^ "Cornell Rejects SAT Score Choice Option". The Cornell Daily Sun. Archived from the bleedin' original on April 4, 2012. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Retrieved February 13, 2008.
212. ^ "Standardized Testin' Requirements". Would ye swally this in a minute now?Cornell University, for the craic. Retrieved February 23, 2020.
213. ^ "Testin'". University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved February 23, 2020.
214. ^ "Freshman Application Requirements: Standardized Testin'". Chrisht Almighty. Stanford University. I hope yiz are all ears now. Retrieved February 23, 2020.
215. ^ "Standardized Testin' Requirements & Policies". Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. Yale University. Would ye believe this shite?Retrieved February 23, 2020.
216. ^ "SAT® Score-Use Practices by Participatin' Institution" (PDF). Jesus, Mary and Joseph. The College Board. Archived (PDF) from the feckin' original on April 7, 2009. Retrieved March 9, 2018.
217. ^ Anderson, Jenny (March 27, 2012). Whisht now and listen to this wan. "SAT and ACT to Tighten Rules After Cheatin' Scandal". Arra' would ye listen to this shite? The New York Times, would ye believe it? Archived from the feckin' original on May 29, 2018. Stop the lights! Retrieved May 25, 2018.
218. ^ "Test Security and Fairness". Jesus, Mary and holy Saint Joseph. The College Board. Bejaysus this is a quare tale altogether. Archived from the feckin' original on September 6, 2015. Stop the lights! Retrieved May 22, 2019.
219. ^ a b Lewin, Tamar (March 5, 2014), for the craic. "A New SAT Aims to Realign With Schoolwork". Arra' would ye listen to this. The New York Times. Stop the lights! Archived from the bleedin' original on May 14, 2014. In fairness now. Retrieved May 14, 2014.
220. ^ "New, Readin'-Heavy SAT Has Students Worried". Jesus Mother of Chrisht almighty. The New York Times. G'wan now and listen to this wan. February 8, 2016, would ye believe it? Archived from the original on December 1, 2017, enda story. Retrieved July 25, 2017.
221. ^ "Key shifts of the feckin' SAT redesign". The Washington Post, the hoor. March 5, 2014. Archived from the oul' original on May 15, 2014, like. Retrieved May 14, 2014.
222. ^ a b Murphy, James S. Jasus. (May 12, 2016), bejaysus. "How Hard Is the feckin' New SAT?". Education. Whisht now and eist liom. The Atlantic, grand so. Archived from the bleedin' original on October 21, 2020. Whisht now and eist liom. Retrieved February 22, 2021.
223. ^ "Overview of the 2016 SAT sections". Manhattan Review. Jasus. Retrieved March 25, 2021.
224. ^ a b c Allyn, Bobby (August 27, 2019). "College Board Drops Its 'Adversity Score' For Each Student After Backlash". Here's a quare one for ye. NPR. C'mere til I tell ya now. Retrieved February 2, 2021.
225. ^ Rowe, Ian (June 3, 2019). "The College Board's Inclusion of Family Structure Indicators Could Help More Disadvantaged Students", bejaysus. Institute for Family Studies, to be sure. Retrieved March 6, 2021. Arra' would ye listen to this shite? Critics have panned the feckin' adversity score as an oul' 'bogus [effort] . Sufferin' Jaysus. . Here's another quare one for ye. . Here's a quare one for ye. to rank students on a one-to-100 pseudoscientific index of oppression,' a feckin' 'backdoor to racial quotas,' and an approach that will 'only invite an oul' new quest for victimhood.'
226. ^ "An Update on Reducin' and Simplifyin' Demands on Students". The College Board. Here's a quare one. Retrieved January 20, 2021.
227. ^ Romalino, Carly Q, for the craic. (February 17, 2021). "How SAT testin' sites are adaptin' to COVID restrictions: Lower your mask for an ID check". Soft oul' day. Education, enda story. USA Today. Archived from the original on February 19, 2021. G'wan now and listen to this wan. Retrieved March 6, 2021.
228. ^ a b c "SAT FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions". College Board, so it is. Archived from the original on March 25, 2008. I hope yiz are all ears now. Retrieved May 29, 2007.
229. ^ Commission on New Possibilities for the feckin' Admissions Testin' Program (1990). Sure this is it. Beyond Prediction, bejaysus. College Entrance Examination Board. Chrisht Almighty. p. 9.
230. ^ Pitsch, Mark (November 7, 1990), fair play. "S.A.T. Revisions Will Be Included In Sprin' '94 Test". Education Week.
231. ^ Jordan, Mary (March 27, 1993). Jesus, Mary and Joseph. "SAT Changes Name, But It Won't Score 1,600 With Critics". Washington Post.
232. ^ Horwitz, Sari (May 5, 1995). I hope yiz are all ears now. "Perfectly Happy With Her SAT; D.C. Be the hokey here's a quare wan. Junior Aces Scholastic Assessment Test With an oul' 1,600", bedad. Washington Post.
233. ^ Applebome, Peter (April 2, 1997), bedad. "Insistin' It's Nothin', Creator Says SAT, Not S.A.T." The New York Times, would ye believe it? Archived from the bleedin' original on April 17, 2017, bedad. Retrieved February 18, 2017.
234. ^ "What is the bleedin' Difference Between the oul' SAT and the oul' PSAT?", fair play. College Board. Archived from the oul' original on November 12, 2020. Jaysis. Retrieved March 16, 2021.
235. ^ Pope, Justin. "Old SAT Exams Get Reused", be the hokey! Washington Post. Archived from the oul' original on 2016-11-05. Stop the lights! Retrieved 2017-09-11.
236. ^ Renee Dudley; Steve Stecklow; Alexandra Harney; Irene Jay Liu (28 March 2016). "As SAT was hit by security breaches, College Board went ahead with tests that had leaked". Sure this is it. Archived from the original on 22 September 2016, game ball! Retrieved 4 November 2016.
237. ^ Renee Dudley; Steve Stecklow; Alexandra Harney; Irene Jay Liu (28 March 2016). Whisht now. "How Asian test-prep companies quickly penetrated the bleedin' new SAT". Me head is hurtin' with all this raidin'. Reuters, would ye believe it? Archived from the original on 18 October 2016. Would ye believe this shite?Retrieved 4 November 2016.
238. ^ Vives, Ruben (28 August 2018). C'mere til I tell ya. "Takin' the SAT is hard enough. Be the holy feck, this is a quare wan. Then students learned the oul' test's answers may have been leaked online". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 2018-09-01. Whisht now. Retrieved 2018-09-01.