5 ms·

Looking just at SATs, it is very common for people to take a practice test early on, then do lots of work/ revision, then eventually recieve a much higher score

Looking just at SATs, it is very common for people to take a practice test early on, then do lots of work/ revision, then eventually recieve a much higher score. If SAT score were measuring some immutable value, then it wouldn't be so easy to improve one's score with revision, and tutors.

maldusiecle 5y ago
The degree to which the SAT is coachable is a subject of debate. The biggest studies have suggested that even private tutoring has an effect of less than 40 points.
- usgroup 5y ago
  Kasparov had a nice line about this in "How life imitates chess". I'm paraphrasing but it was something along the lines of "there are lots of things that cannot be tought to you which you can nontheless teach yourself". I think that thinking processes is very much in that category, and I think that the investment in time is considerable. I think its typical to expect gradual improvement -- a constant response to training. Anecdotally, it doesn't work like that.
horsawlarway 5y ago
I'm not really sure anyone above has implied that intelligence is immutable - just that you can describe it generally. Consider the physical fitness correlations in the article - I don't think anyone would argue that your level of physical fitness is immutable. But just because the value is mutable is no reason to disregard the current value - it can still be a meaningful and useful indicator.
mercutio2 5y ago
It is not very common to increase your score on the SATs by a significant amount. The actual gains are very marginal, in the aggregate. Most money spent on test prep is just wasted.
Tenoke 5y ago
That's part of why the r for SAT-IQ is somewhere between 0.5-0.8[0] rather than higher. Also the average SAT score increase by retaking seems to be 40[1] points which doesn't skew things that much. 0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient 1. https://www.manhattanreview.com/sat-retaking/#:~:text=The%20average%20score%20improvement%20for,of%20100%20points%20or%20more https://www.manhattanreview.com/sat-retaking/#:~:text=The%20....
- usgroup 5y ago
  Well I think there is a separate question of "does this work on a population level" versus "does this work for any given individual". I think we are used to "vaccine mostly works for everyone" type thinking. However, I think that there are many things that will work for individuals but not for general populations. So SATs are not generally trainable by a universal approach -- including personal tuition. I think that is believable. However, that for any given individual there is no intervention which will substantially improve their SAT results is a much stronger statement which I find less believable.

maldusiecle 5y ago

The degree to which the SAT is coachable is a subject of debate. The biggest studies have suggested that even private tutoring has an effect of less than 40 points.

usgroup 5y ago
Kasparov had a nice line about this in "How life imitates chess". I'm paraphrasing but it was something along the lines of "there are lots of things that cannot be tought to you which you can nontheless teach yourself". I think that thinking processes is very much in that category, and I think that the investment in time is considerable. I think its typical to expect gradual improvement -- a constant response to training. Anecdotally, it doesn't work like that.

horsawlarway 5y ago

I'm not really sure anyone above has implied that intelligence is immutable - just that you can describe it generally. Consider the physical fitness correlations in the article - I don't think anyone would argue that your level of physical fitness is immutable. But just because the value is mutable is no reason to disregard the current value - it can still be a meaningful and useful indicator.

mercutio2 5y ago

It is not very common to increase your score on the SATs by a significant amount. The actual gains are very marginal, in the aggregate. Most money spent on test prep is just wasted.

Tenoke 5y ago

That's part of why the r for SAT-IQ is somewhere between 0.5-0.8[0] rather than higher. Also the average SAT score increase by retaking seems to be 40[1] points which doesn't skew things that much. 0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient 1. https://www.manhattanreview.com/sat-retaking/#:~:text=The%20average%20score%20improvement%20for,of%20100%20points%20or%20more https://www.manhattanreview.com/sat-retaking/#:~:text=The%20....

usgroup 5y ago
Well I think there is a separate question of "does this work on a population level" versus "does this work for any given individual". I think we are used to "vaccine mostly works for everyone" type thinking. However, I think that there are many things that will work for individuals but not for general populations. So SATs are not generally trainable by a universal approach -- including personal tuition. I think that is believable. However, that for any given individual there is no intervention which will substantially improve their SAT results is a much stronger statement which I find less believable.