Link's a no-go.

And, "the second time..."

Hmmm...my brother missed one question out of the total -- just one -- and he took the test once, and he didn't even practice. Nor was he a twin. But he was/is my brother. Proud of him. The twins should be, too, but I don't think the SAT should be something anyone can "retake," same with the MCAT. But many people do and most of them practice, preview, rehearse and retake until they arrive at a result they like, which to my understanding, defies the very premise of the testing process, particulary the SAT and the MCAT, which are, to the contrary, supposed to evaluate what you've learned independently.

I also think that people who retest and sample testing processes should be awarded with a different measure of a result: one set of achievements for those who test without introduction or rehearse or preview (my experience, as was my brother's), and those who sample the tests multiple times. Such that, whatever their secondary testing results are, they should be dinged or reduced by a gradient if not fifty or so points.

We breed them smart on Long Island!

P.S.: the fifty point reduction random suggestion was in reference to the SAT...because the MCAT measures in just double digit maximum, just to be clear.

P.S.: the fifty point reduction random suggestion was in reference to the SAT...because the MCAT measures in just double digit maximum, just to be clear.

I didn't do that double-post intentionally...I received an error report after the first one, then returned to the comments to look, then reposted...*scuze*.

Well, I took the SAT 3 times, and went up 200 points between the first two, and about 100 points between the last two... I have no problem with people retaking the SAT.

(For full disclosure, I took the SAT at age 12, 15, and 17... so the score increase isn't that surprising.)

I'm sure Kimberly Swygert could tell you what the variability of scores would be. I don't think 30 points difference is that much between retakings, but 300 points sure is. I bet for most people, taking the test under good conditions (not hungover, well-rested, etc.), the scores would be pretty stable... the ETS designs these tests to make them so.

I'm just confused. If you topped 1500, WHY would you retake?

Isn't being in the 99th percentile good enough?

1500 is competitive for getting into the top tier of universities, but it doesn't give you an edge. Better to be sure.

Harvey,
I can't open the link and don't see the story elsewhere, but one possibility here is that this was a bit of a sporting event for the brothers, and they may have "trained" extensively for it. But whether it was pure aptitude or hard work, or both, it's still apparently hard to do.

"We breed them smart on Long Island!"

So you are saying there is proof of that controversial "reverse inbreeding" after all?

Interesting.

I didn't take my SATs until back from Vietnam.
I was hung over from way too much LSD and beer
and took them on a Saturday. Got 1576 and spent
most of the time outside burning butts waiting for
everybody else to get finished with each segment.
But under those conditions ... if I'd taken the test
twice I probably would have gotten 2850. Retakes
should only be for scores less than 1000. These
twins gamed the system. They are either terminally
anal or their parents are. Fie on 'em.

All this high scoring from public school trained people. If the machine's not broke....

Another success story occurring during the Bush administration.

meep and those who reason thus:

The SAT is not a performance piece, or a work of theater. It's a testing process for purposes of evaluating what a person knows when they know what they know.

Unfortunatley, when people take and retake the SAT, they also are coached, practice, have already "previewed" the entire testing process, and thus, are not evaluated by the same measures and conditions that they are, anyone is, when the test is taken once and only once, without coaching or previous introduction or even preview about specific questions posed.

Coaching and trial runs on any process provide you to encourage and correct and amplify your ability to master the practice, not the actual act. If you are tested on what you've memorized and understood the "right" and "wrong" answers are, you aren't revealing what you've learned in your earlier educational process but you are providing an indication on what you've acquired about how to take the test.

Different processes involved. The SAT is supposed to measure what an individual has learned and how they reason in previous educational years and experiences. It isn't a testing process about a testing process, or an act of performance art that is "improved with practice."

You should take the test once and do so without a preview of the testing process, beyond proper instructions and comfortable conditions for the test, with about a twenty-four hour announcement prior to, such that you can rest and eat well before the day. Other than that, practice runs only indicate a performance, how well you''ve "memorized" and/or modified how you reason based upon a unique set of conditions that actually violates the nature of the SAT process itself.