This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SAT article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days

	SAT is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 23, 2005 Peer review Reviewed April 11, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted November 27, 2007 Peer review Reviewed Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 23, 2013, June 23, 2014, and June 23, 2019. Current status: Former featured article candidate

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Education High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Sociology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Statistics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. United States Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list for SAT: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2023-02-09 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Update : Update with more research from neuroscience and artificial intelligence

Section sizes Section size for SAT (53 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 9,687 9,687 Function 12,345 12,345 Structure 4,260 15,350 Reading Test 1,511 1,511 Writing and Language Test 1,450 1,450 Mathematics 3,031 6,094 Calculator use 3,063 3,063 Style of questions 2,035 2,035 Logistics 17 2,712 Frequency 1,977 1,977 Fees 366 366 Accommodation for candidates with disabilities 352 352 Change from paper-based to digital 3,186 3,186 Scaled scores and percentiles 2,830 8,963 Percentiles for total scores (2022) 702 702 Percentiles for total scores (2006) 2,129 2,129 Percentiles for total scores (1984) 929 929 Percentiles for verbal and math scores (1969–70) 1,348 1,348 Ceilings and trends 1,025 1,025 SAT–ACT score comparisons 4,234 4,234 Elucidation 18 110,697 Preparation 13,120 13,120 Predictive validity and powers 17,382 17,382 Difficulty and relative weight 6,807 6,807 Recognition 745 745 Association with general cognitive ability 8,039 8,039 Association with college or university majors and rankings 6,931 6,931 Association with types of schooling 1,450 1,450 Association with educational and societal standings and outcomes 6,319 6,319 Association with family structures 2,608 2,608 Sex differences 25 15,164 In performance 9,889 9,889 In strategizing 1,706 1,706 In confidence 1,526 1,526 In glucose metabolism 2,018 2,018 Association with race and ethnicity 12,825 12,825 Test-taking population 4,351 4,351 Use in non-collegiate contexts 40 14,938 By high-IQ societies 1,173 1,173 By researchers 8,679 8,679 By employers 5,046 5,046 Perception 18 20,682 Math–verbal achievement gap 823 823 Optional SAT 17,825 17,825 Writing section 2,016 2,016 History 10,154 10,154 Name changes 4,096 4,096 Reuse of old SAT exams 2,595 2,595 See also 294 294 Notes 26 26 References 30 30 Further reading 2,205 2,205 External links 257 257 Total 207,513 207,513

Text and/or other creative content from this version of SAT was copied or moved into History of the SAT with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

SAT test in spain is the only test used in many english language universities or to enter some majors. For example.. to study computer science in the university of murcia UMU the SAT is required with a score of 1500 minimum. To study medicine in barcelona the SAT is required along side the regular spain college entrance exam. The only other country to do that is israel.

@Nerd271: Agh! I was previously using the logo with the College Board 'acorn' logo attached (which I believe is above the threshold of originality), but later removed it to just use the SAT logo. For some reason, though, I still thought it was non-free. Thanks for catching that! Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:21, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've also reverted the squishing issue. Apparently setting a height override works differently between my computer and MediaWiki's SVG rendering. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tol: Cheers! I thought we were making a comedy or something. LOL! Nerd271 (talk) 20:30, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added some information about the switch to the digital format, which started outside the U.S. in March of 2023 and will probably be in use in States starting March 9, 2024. Since the digital test takes an hour less to do than the paper-based one, it will soon be necessary to modify mentions of the duration of the test (two hours instead of three) in other parts of the article. Tptasev (talk) 12:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nerd271 is insisting that this article include the following:

According to psycholinguist Steven Pinker, not only is the opacity of holistic admissions frustrating for college-bound high-school students and their parents, the policy also forces them to participate in extracurricular activities of dubious value in order to increase the competitiveness of their applications. Standardized testing, on the other hand, would ensure meritocratic admissions.^[1]

Pinker has no expertise in college admissions so I fail to see how his opinion is WP:DUE. Nerd271 insists that "But he is a psychologist and a university professor. He is well inside academia." but being a psychologist and a professor doesn't make one an expert on admissions. If I'm incorrect and he does have a substantive background in admissions, please accept my apologies. But simply working at an organization, especially one as complex as a modern, Western-style college or university, doesn't give someone significant expertise in any of its specific, complex processes (except for the specific processes in which one has worked, of course!). ElKevbo (talk) 00:01, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, it is an opinion, and is clarified as such. Second, he is an insider, so his opinion might be worth reading, even if you disagree. If a whistle-blower were to divulge the secrets of holistic admissions, Pinker's thoughts could be removed or replaced as appropriate. But for now, it is a black box for most people. If we can include the aggregate opinions of many prospective students and parents, who think that holistic admissions is vague, and we should, then including the opinion of a long-time academic is not unreasonable. Nerd271 (talk) 00:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But why is his opinion something that should be included in this article on this topic? Especially when there are a tremendous number of articles and other materials written by people with substantive, demonstrated expertise? I understand that Pinker is very prolific and readily offers his opinion on many topics but that in no way obligates us to include his opinion on topics outside of his realms of expertise.

So once again I ask: What demonstrated expertise does he have in college admissions?

Further, why does your opinion on this give you the ability to override the status quo by reverting other editors who challenge your addition of this material? ElKevbo (talk) 00:11, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But what do parents and students know about admissions? If anything, an academic like Pinker might know more than parents and children. I reverted your edit because I disagree with you, in the same manner you that reverted me in the past because you disagreed with me. I never held that against you. Why the question? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerd271 (talk • contribs) 20:15, July 9, 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't think that the opinion of a random parent or student would be something we'd include an encyclopedia article, either. Simply being "an academic" doesn't make Pinker or any other faculty member, administrator, or staff member an educated expert in admissions.

I object to your reversion of another editor's revert of your addition, especially when you do so without opening a discussion in Talk, because we try to stick with WP:BRD - and with over 12,000 edits you should know that. ElKevbo (talk) 00:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Opinions of parents and students are already included in the aggregate. Professor Pinker is one of the more outspoken of academics, at least on this issue. Besides, his opinion is attributed, so I don't see a problem with including it. I object to your insistence that your revert constitutes the "status quo" since the article was influx. Nerd271 (talk) 00:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Being an "outspoken academic" doesn't meet WP:DUE or any other criterion for inclusion in an article. If you want to add material to an article and another editor challenges that addition then the burden is on you to develop a consensus to support your addition. ElKevbo (talk) 00:23, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will keep editing the article the way I choose. Your objection lies in what you think of holistic admissions rather than with what might be wrong with it from the perspective of students, parents, and faculty members. I will find more information on this topic and include it as appropriate. Nerd271 (talk) 00:32, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [reply]