Join 3,413 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Lowest of the low
August 7, 2003 2:31 PM   Subscribe

On 2003 April 5th, a Saturday, at the age of 33, I threw away my dignity, mocked my Ivy League education, disgraced my Master's degree, and proved, in just over three hours, that humans can do things "The System" didn't anticipate. Rather than fight the test, I use the SAT's difficulty to my advantage, leveraging down to a new, elite level of distinction. Verbal: 200. Math: 200.
posted by gottabefunky (17 comments total)

 
The old saying about too much time on one's hands comes to mind--this even tops posting to MeTa!
posted by billsaysthis at 2:40 PM on August 7, 2003


So he signed his name; his score reflects he knows his name; and?
Cant remember the total in Ca to attend the Universities(grade point + SAT score), iirc, with straight A's he would have enough points to attend being a bottom candidate though.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:46 PM on August 7, 2003


I had a Freshman English student at West Georgia College who had a 270 math, 200 verbal SAT. I believe it was theft to take her tuition money--there was no way anyone could think she'd be able to get through college. She did every bit of extra work she could in my class, came to every office hour, did lots of revision, but there was really no hope.
posted by MrMoonPie at 2:49 PM on August 7, 2003


thomcatspike: So he signed his name; his score reflects he knows his name; and?

Leaving the test blank would result in a higher score than 400. As the article said, he had to deliberately answer the questions wrong (and know enough to spot a wrong answer lest he accidentally pick enough correct ones to raise his score!)

From the article: If a person fills out an SAT answer sheet with all required personal and site-
specific information, but doesn't answer a single question (i.e., "omits" all questions), the person receives a combined score that can be as low as 400, but is likely to be significantly higher (e.g., 470) based on the raw score to
scaled score conversion curves for that test edition.

posted by zsazsa at 2:53 PM on August 7, 2003


This guy is quite a dildo, isn't he?
posted by UncleFes at 2:58 PM on August 7, 2003


Or was it 200 points signing your name? Still trying to figure out what he is saying: he flunked a test which he feels didn't reflect his education. Few people in the work force learned their job at College. Now a professional that is different, doctor, lawyer, cpa...ect.
Where does he work; When was he educated, seems some the questions deal with society too not just math & reading. Who is Moby Dick? is one, if you didn't read the book how would you know. Does not reflect your education, just where you went to school.

Leaving the test blank would result in a higher score than 400
Not what I was toldd, I didn't need a high score to enter college, just a higher score than those appling too.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:59 PM on August 7, 2003


{Hit post by accident}
Leaving the test blank would result in a higher score than 400
Not what I was told, I didn't need a high score to enter college, just a higher score than those applying too.
posted by thomcatspike at 3:00 PM on August 7, 2003


(e.g., 470) based on the raw score to
Hey they lied to me, damn, I could have left some blank and done better.
posted by thomcatspike at 3:02 PM on August 7, 2003


An interesting link found in the FPP's link was to this, which shows the results of the 1996 "recentering".

A friend of mine who works for my alma mater was telling me the average scores of the incoming freshmen this year, and I about freaked - I would barely have made it *in*, I thought. Then I re-centered, and *snort*...those kids can bite my ass. ;)
posted by notsnot at 3:44 PM on August 7, 2003


Is that his picture near the bottom? I think it might be steve bucemi!

FWIW, I got an even lower SAT score: 0, coz' I didn't even sign my name. And it didn't make one shit of difference either, b/c I went to art school, where they'll let in just about any sad variety of sub-human intellect as long as they have a big ball of scratch and a trapper keeper full of finger-paiting.
posted by dgaicun at 4:54 PM on August 7, 2003


Damn, there goes Bush's record.
posted by uosuaq at 6:30 PM on August 7, 2003


notsnot -- Yeah, man. Preach on, brother. I can't believe they made the test easier, either. Such a cop-out. Used to be 1600 meant something. I hate grade inflation.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:32 PM on August 7, 2003


If you read the fine print, it says not to use that page to update individual scores, but this one.

FWIW, my verbal went up and my math down (?), for a net 3.6% gain.
posted by pmurray63 at 7:19 PM on August 7, 2003


Hey they lied to me, damn, I could have left some blank and done better.

As a former SAT prep teacher, this is absolutely true, and in practice turns out to be a difficult concept to drill into some students' heads.

Free SAT tip: many hard questions on the SAT I exist solely to waste your time, make you panic, and differentiate between people who score 750 and 760 for that particular half of the exam. If you're not trying to score above 700 in that section, you will benefit from skipping some questions.

Just another reason why the test is silly.
posted by DaShiv at 11:51 PM on August 7, 2003


DaShiv - yeah, I remember from some book I got on how to ride the odds in your favor that seemed to work. Things like if you have absolutely no idea then leave that one blank (and avoid the penalty for wrong answers), but if you can eliminate the obviously wrong one (and there is usually at least one of these, as in a:2 b:4 c:5 d:6 e:128), then it's better to guess. If you get the same answer (ie "d") three times in a row, one is probably wrong - four times, one almost definitely is. For pure guesses, I think it was "c" that was most often right (or maybe "b" or "d"?).
posted by gottabefunky at 6:39 AM on August 8, 2003


As stated by a friend of mine: "This is what happens when Ross Geller meets Jackass". Can't think of a better description.
posted by falameufilho at 7:17 AM on August 8, 2003


A score report tattooed on your ass or forehead, or burned in to your retina with a laser for a lifelong visual affirmation of your intelligence.

This should be required in order to take office in any political position.
posted by joquarky at 1:58 PM on August 8, 2003


« Older In their day, Trilobyte was at the height of the c...  |  Human cardiac catheterization... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments