Let's take this out of the realm of personal opinion and into
methodology, shall we? (and let's assume that everyone on this list
had extraordinarily high SAT scores, I don't see any need to throw
numbers at each other.) From a methodological standpoint, any test
claiming to measure an innate ability should be administered on a
one-time, non-prepared basis. And yet, those who take standardized
tests more than once usually measure a significant upward score
differential. That is precisely WHY the Princeton Review makes
bucketloads of money preparing students to take standardized tests,
and why their methods work--they teach that you have to approach each
test as a game of sorts, not a measure of inner ability.
Sin,
Kathryn Aegis