going over your errors in reading comprehension

At the tutoring center where I work, I have plenty of SAT students. When it's time to score their performance in Critical Reading, I usually work it this way:

1. For the Sentence Completion portion of Critical Reading, I tell the students whether or not they've gotten a question right, but I don't tell them what the answer is. We go over the question and reason our way, together, to the correct answer.

2. For the Reading Comprehension section, I ask the students to perform what I call "the line-number exercise." I give them the correct answers to the RC questions they got wrong, then I ask them to go back into the reading passages and find the line numbers that provide evidence for why a given answer is correct. If the question already has line numbers in it, I ask the students to write a short sentence explaining why the answer is correct ("B is correct because the passage says X...").

The line-number exercise gets the students to train themselves in cognitive skills that can't be taught explicitly: skills like scanning and inference. I prefer this indirect method-- which places the burden of learning directly on the students-- to easier methods that involve leading students by the nose. Double-plus ungood, that.


_

SAT-style geometry problems

A good set of geometry problems for the SAT can be found here. I discovered these while planning a geometry tutoring session for my goddaughter. The Khan Academy website also has its own fairly comprehensive geometry section, as well as a massive SAT Math prep section.

Before I forget: this Cliffs Notes page does a very good job of explaining the relationship between circles, chords, secants, and tangents.


_

what's wrong with this sentence?

Found this sentence here:

Remove the stems from the dried peppers and place them in a food processor, spice grinder or coffee grinder.

Imagine you're trying to make red pepper flakes, like the kind you sprinkle on pizza. See any problems with the above instructions?

Avoid ambiguity. The above sentence is exactly the sort that might appear in the "find the error" portion of the SAT Writing section.


_

scan first? read the whole thing first? look at the questions first? aaaaaggghhh!!

Students sometimes ask me how best to approach long passages in the SAT's Critical Reading section. They're usually wondering which of the following options to take:

1. Read the whole passage first, then answer the questions?

2. Read the questions first to get an idea of what to look for, then scan the passage to answer the questions?

3. Use a "scan as you go" approach to answer the questions, trusting that the first question relates to the first part of the passage, the second question relates to the second part, etc.?

The answer is: it depends. Students have different cognitive styles, which makes it impossible for me to recommend one specific approach. There's also the issue of time pressure: if you're pressed for time, then certain options, like reading through the entire long passage first, may not be available to you as the clock runs down. This will affect your strategy.

A lot of test prep companies recommend simply reading the passage first, be it long or short. There are obvious advantages to doing this. First, you now have the entire passage in your head, making it easier for you to scan more quickly for whatever you need to know. Second, because you've internalized the passage, you can figure out context-based relationships better. Third, you probably have a clear notion of what the passage's main idea is. All of this means that, if you've read well, you should be able to march relentlessly through the ensuing questions as easily as Einstein doing basic algebra.

But what if you're not the type who can get through a long reading passage without falling asleep? My first reaction to this question is: I feel sorry for you and your future college career. The fact of the matter is that you're going to be doing a lot of reading while in college, and much of it will involve literature that you just won't want to study. So toughen up! The only way around this obstacle is through it. My second reaction is a little more moderate: true, many passages will be boring, so find a method that works for you. If Method (1), above, doesn't work, then try Method (2). This strategy has also been recommended by test prep companies before. Especially if you're pressed for time, you need to read for information in a targeted way as opposed to trying to swallow the entire passage in a single mental gulp.

Method (3) has its uses, too. I find it especially helpful if I see questions about vocab-in-context: "In the context of the passage, the word mortal on line 36 most likely means..." That sort of question can be answered quickly, and without reference to the entire passage: just scan the lines above and below it.

Don't get trapped into thinking that there's only one magical method to beat the SAT. There isn't. In the end, the so-called "tricks" that test prep tutors teach their students are nothing more or less than good old reading skills-- the selfsame skills that you'll be using (and hopefully honing) while you're in college. Every method has its merits and demerits. Figure out what you're comfortable doing, make sure you can do it efficiently, within the allotted time, and be ready to switch to a Plan B if your preferred method doesn't seem to be helping you.

As Bruce Lee said: Be like the nature of water, my friend. Be flexible; shape your technique to fit both yourself and the situation. What that really means is: master several different techniques so that you don't run out of options when it's crunch time. True freedom comes from having options. Having options comes from self-discipline, and that involves time, effort, and focus.


_

this week's MGRE Math Beast Challenge problem

From here:




My answer will appear in the comments, but I'll tell you right now that I don't like the way this problem's been structured. As it's worded, I'd say the answer is "cannot be determined." Why? A couple reasons:

1. We can assume the figure isn't drawn to scale. The only "given" is that the round figure is indeed a circle with its center labeled. We can also safely assume that Points A, C, and D are all on the circle. It's also safe to assume that Point B is on the circle as well. Beyond that, what do we know for sure?

2. We can't assume-- since the problem doesn't specify this-- that the squarish-looking figure is indeed a square, which means we can't assume that the circle is properly inscribed within a square.

3. We also can't assume that Segment GF forms a 180-degree angle with the bottom of the putative square.

For those reasons, I think "cannot be determined" is the best answer, but I'm going to ignore the above concerns and charitably assume that the circle is inscribed in a square, thus making Point B the midpoint of that side of the square. With those assumptions in place, I believe the problem is easily soluble. Without them, however, "cannot be determined" is the only legitimate answer.

Here's how I would have presented the problem, so as to avoid any confusion about what we can and can't assume:



I'll be basing my answer off the above image, not off MGRE's.


_

SAT: tone of passage

I have some students who are occasionally confused by "tone of passage" questions in the SAT I's Critical Reading section. I've just stumbled upon a decent resource that takes you through the thinking process for one passage. Give it a look. Be careful: the article is actually four pages long, so you'll need to click the page numbers just below the first part of the article to see the rest. After you've read the article, come back here and try your hand at determining the tone of the following passages. To see the correct answer, along with an explanation, highlight the bracketed space.


Passage 1 (from here):

[NB: The UK author of this piece is examining Arnold Trehub's theory of consciousness.]

What about the self, then? It’s natural that given Trehub’s spatial perspective he should focus on defining the location of the self, but that only seems to be a small, almost incidental part of our sense of self. Personally, I’m inclined to put the thoughts first, and then identify myself as their origin; I identify myself not by location but by a kind of backward extrapolation to the abstract-seeming origin of my mental activity. This has nothing to do with physical space. Of course Trehub’s system has more to it than mere location, in the special tokens used to signify belonging to me and truth. But this part of the theory seems especially problematic. Why should simply flagging a spatial position and some propositions as mine endow a set of neurons with a sense of selfhood, any more than flagging them as Fred’s? I can easily imagine that location and the same set of propositions being someone else’s, or no-one’s. I think Trehub means that linking up the tokens in this way causes me to view that location as mine and those propositions as my beliefs, but notice that in saying that I’m smuggling in a self who has views about things and a capacity for ownership; I’ve inadvertently and unconsciously brought in that wretched homunculus after all. For that matter, why would flagging a proposition as a belief turn it into one? I can flag up propositions in various ways on a piece of paper without making them come to intentional life. To believe something you have to mean it, and unfortunately no-one really knows what ‘meaning it’ means – that’s one of the things to be explained by a full-blown theory of consciousness.

Moreover, the system of tokens and beliefs encoded in explicit propositions seems fatally vulnerable to the wider form of the frame problem. We actually have an infinite number of background beliefs (Julius Caesar never wore a top hat) which we’ve never stated explicitly but which we draw on readily, instantly, without having to do any thinking, when they become relevant (This play is supposed to be in authentic costume!): but even if we had a finite set of propositions to deal with the task of updating them and drawing inferences from them rapidly becomes impossible through a kind of combinatorial explosion. (If this is unfamiliar stuff, I recommend Dennett’s seminal cognitive wheels paper.) It just doesn’t seem likely nowadays that logical processing of explicit propositions is really what underlies mental activity.

Some important reservations then, but it’s important not to criticise Trehub’s approach for failing to be a panacea or providing all the answers on consciousness – that’s not really what we’re being offered. If we take consciousness to mean awareness, the retinoid system offers some elegant and plausible mechanisms. It might yet be that the theatre deserves another visit.

1. The author's tone in this passage is

a. one of enthusiastic agreement, with only a hint of doubt.
b. politely skeptical, but not entirely so.
c. angrily critical, though not about the essential points.
d. purely humorously critical.
e. respectfully objective, expressing no personal opinion.

ANSWER AND EXPLANATION (highlight the space between the brackets to see): [The answer is (B). Why? Answer (A) doesn't work because, as the last paragraph says, the author has "important reservations" regarding Trehub's theory. The author notes that elements of Trehub's theory are "elegant and plausible," which means we can eliminate answer (C). By the same token, (E) also fails, because the author obviously has an opinion about Trehub's theory, both noting its flaws and acknowledging its merits. Answer (D) fails because the passage contains no humorous elements, and is not relentlessly critical of Trehub.]


Passage 2 (from here):

[NB: The author is writing about how to approach long, involved books on history.]

But apart from this matter of personal learning style, what I’ve found is that many of my students don’t know what to do when confronted by a whole book. Some try to study it as intensively as they would try to study a chapter in a work of philosophy or political theory. They spend hours and hours on their reading, and often end up angry and unfulfilled. They’ve spent an inordinate amount of time preparing, but they rarely feel they have mastered the text. And when the discussion in class focuses on other aspects of the book in question, their frustration grows.

Others read through an assigned book the way they get through their casual reading. They read at forty to sixty pages an hour, take no notes, and give little thought to the content beyond the impressions of the moment. If they are diligent, their eyes have indeed scanned every word in the whole three hundred-page book, but anything that sticks in the student’s memory got there by chance and two days later he or she won’t be able to say anything coherent about the book’s content or point of view.

The easy thing to do for a grumpy old professor when faced with these reactions is to throw up his hands in the traditional gesture of professorial despair, and launch into one of those eloquent and ever-popular rants, ancient already in the days of Socrates, about how young people today have no attention span, don’t know anything and don’t know hard work.

It is all true, and has been true since Socrates was a sprout, but repeating traditional laments doesn’t help either students or professors wrestling with big fat books in political studies seminars. As I’ve reflected on this problem, I’m increasingly aware that reading serious books – not textbooks and not tracts of theory or philosophy – is a skill that not everybody learns. I’ve been reading dozens and even hundreds of books a year for so long that these reading skills are second nature to me; I don’t think about how to read serious books that aren’t textbooks anymore than I think about how to ride a bicycle.

As I teach, though, I see that not everybody learns how to do this in high school. Through no fault of their own, many students are raised on textbooks and treatises rather than novels and history. You aren’t born knowing how to ride a bicycle and you aren’t born knowing how to read big books effectively for seminars. On the other hand, the basic skills required, either for bike riding or book reading, aren’t all that hard to learn — and once learned, they stick.

A history book is different from a book of political theory or logical argument, and it needs to be approached in a different way. When approaching a history book, the first thing to do is to ask the Winston Churchill question. At a dinner, Churchill once criticized the dessert: “This pudding has no theme.” Most puddings and books have a theme. In the case of a book, this is a big idea or subject. Your first job as an analytical reader is to figure out what that is: you must answer the Pudding Question.

What does the author think is the big story the book is trying to tell – and what does the author think is the point of that story?

2. The author's tone in this passage is

a. constructively critical of his students.
b. disparaging of his students.
c. wary or suspicious of his students.
d. condescending to his students.
e. one of pity for and solidarity with his students.

ANSWER AND EXPLANATION (highlight the space between the brackets to see): [The answer is (A). Why? Answer (B) fails because the author never adopts an insulting tone about his students. To the contrary, the author notes that it would be easy to react negatively to students' inability to read a large book intelligently. He is, in fact, sympathetic to his students' plight ("through no fault of their own")-- the opposite of disparagement. Answer (C) fails for the same reason, and there is no direct evidence in the text that the author both pities his students and feels solidarity with them, thus eliminating (E) as a possibility. A test-taker might be tempted to choose (D), but there is no evidence that the author sees himself as superior to students who are obviously inferior. Besides, it's hard to be sympathetic and condescending at the same time. (A) is the best answer given the textual evidence: "repeating traditional laments doesn’t help either students or professors wrestling with big fat books in political studies seminars" and "A history book... needs to be approached in a different way" are both clear examples of a constructively critical approach: the author has perceived a problem and is offering a way to solve it.]


Passage 3 (from here):

[NB: The author, Freeman Dyson, is writing on the need for "heretics" in science in the context of discussions of global warming and climate change.]

We are lucky that we can be heretics today without any danger of being burned at the stake. But unfortunately I am an old heretic. Old heretics do not cut much ice. When you hear an old heretic talking, you can always say, “Too bad he has lost his marbles”, and pass on. What the world needs is young heretics. I am hoping that one or two of the people who read this piece may fill that role.

Two years ago, I was at Cornell University celebrating the life of Tommy Gold, a famous astronomer who died at a ripe old age. He was famous as a heretic, promoting unpopular ideas that usually turned out to be right. Long ago I was a guinea-pig in Tommy’s experiments on human hearing. He had a heretical idea that the human ear discriminates pitch by means of a set of tuned resonators with active electromechanical feedback. He published a paper explaining how the ear must work, [Gold, 1948]. He described how the vibrations of the inner ear must be converted into electrical signals which feed back into the mechanical motion, reinforcing the vibrations and increasing the sharpness of the resonance. The experts in auditory physiology ignored his work because he did not have a degree in physiology. Many years later, the experts discovered the two kinds of hair-cells in the inner ear that actually do the feedback as Tommy had predicted, one kind of hair-cell acting as electrical sensors and the other kind acting as mechanical drivers. It took the experts forty years to admit that he was right. Of course, I knew that he was right, because I had helped him do the experiments.

Later in his life, Tommy Gold promoted another heretical idea, that the oil and natural gas in the ground come up from deep in the mantle of the earth and have nothing to do with biology. Again the experts are sure that he is wrong, and he did not live long enough to change their minds. Just a few weeks before he died, some chemists at the Carnegie Institution in Washington did a beautiful experiment in a diamond anvil cell, [Scott et al., 2004]. They mixed together tiny quantities of three things that we know exist in the mantle of the earth, and observed them at the pressure and temperature appropriate to the mantle about two hundred kilometers down. The three things were calcium carbonate which is sedimentary rock, iron oxide which is a component of igneous rock, and water. These three things are certainly present when a slab of subducted ocean floor descends from a deep ocean trench into the mantle. The experiment showed that they react quickly to produce lots of methane, which is natural gas. Knowing the result of the experiment, we can be sure that big quantities of natural gas exist in the mantle two hundred kilometers down. We do not know how much of this natural gas pushes its way up through cracks and channels in the overlying rock to form the shallow reservoirs of natural gas that we are now burning. If the gas moves up rapidly enough, it will arrive intact in the cooler regions where the reservoirs are found. If it moves too slowly through the hot region, the methane may be reconverted to carbonate rock and water. The Carnegie Institute experiment shows that there is at least a possibility that Tommy Gold was right and the natural gas reservoirs are fed from deep below. The chemists sent an E-mail to Tommy Gold to tell him their result, and got back a message that he had died three days earlier. Now that he is dead, we need more heretics to take his place.

3. The author's tone in this passage is

a. intensely scolding
b. scientifically inquisitive
c. curiously frightened
d. slightly annoyed
e. drily humorous

ANSWER AND EXPLANATION (highlight the space between the brackets to see): [This question may be the most difficult for test-takers to answer, and I deliberately designed it to be that way. The correct answer is (E). Were you, perhaps, inclined to choose (B)? I don't blame you, but if you chose (B), you fell into my trap. You see, sometimes SAT questions are constructed in such a way as to mislead you by playing into your expectations and presumptions. This article is by Freeman Dyson, a well-known scientist, and we all automatically associate scientists with human qualities like curiosity and fascination with the universe. Without a doubt, Freeman Dyson is a scientifically inquisitive individual. The problem, though, is that the test question is asking you about the tone of the passage, not about the attitude of the author. That's an important difference.

Don't be tempted to read anything into the passage: use only the textual evidence before you when answering a question. In this case, you'll observe that the passage contained not a single inquisitive-sounding sentence. This was not an exploration of the universe's mysteries; it was, instead, a fond meditation on the need for different thinkers-- "heretics"-- in scientific discourse. So (B) is wrong. Answer (A) is also wrong because Dyson's tone is gentle, not caustic. He certainly expresses no fear, so (C) is also wrong, and (D) fails because, even though Dyson makes reference to certain problems, he never expresses annoyance about them. Instead, the passage is suffused with wry humor as he chronicles the way in which Tommy Gold was repeatedly right while the rest of the scientific establishment turned out to be repeatedly wrong. The first paragraph, with its reference to being burned at the stake, is also obviously humorous in intent, as is the frequent use of the words "heretic" and "heretical," words normally employed in a religious context. None of this passage is laugh-out-loud funny, of course, which is why it qualifies as dry humor.]

I hope this little exercise in determining tone has been helpful to you. Keep on reading! There's no substitute for it. Read a lot, and read widely. Don't stick to just one genre. And as the author of Passage 2, above, recommends later on in his article: read actively. That's the best way to benefit from your studies.


_

this week's Math Beast Challenge

From here:



Go to it! My answer will eventually appear in the comments.


_

this week's MGRE Math Beast Challenge

This week's challenge:



My answer will eventually appear in the comments, but you're free to take a stab at the problem and provide your own answer. Show your work! Note to SAT students: this might be a GRE problem, but it isn't so different from the sort of problem you might see on the SAT I. Feel free to join in.


_

right again!

The official answer to last week's MGRE Math Beast Challenge problem is indeed (E)!

Here is MGRE's explanation:

Interest on debt comprises 2% of total expenses for each division. So if the pharmaceutical division spends 4 times as much as the chemical division does on interest, then total expenses for the pharmaceutical division must be 4 times total expenses for the chemical division. The best thing to do is pick some smart numbers:

Total expenses for pharma = 400
Total expenses for chem= 100

{We might pause here to check our earlier logic. With these numbers, chem would spend 2 for interest on debt and pharma would spend 8. This agrees with what the problem told us about interest on debt.}

Payroll expenses for pharma = 26% of pharma total = (0.26)(400) = 104
Payroll expenses for chem = 38% of chem total = (0.38)(100) = 38

The question asks “What percent of the chemical division's payroll expense is the pharmaceutical division's payroll expense?”
With our numbers, this question is “What percent of 38 is 104?”
Rephrasing a bit: “104 is what percent of 38?”

We can see that 104 is more than 100% of 38, so (A) and (B) can be eliminated.
Actually, 104 is more than twice 38 (i.e. 104 > 76), so (C) and (D) can also be eliminated.

We can solve to prove that (E) is the answer by translating the percent question into an equation:
104 is what percent of 38?
104 = (x/100)(38), where x is the answer.
x = (104)(100)/38
x = 273.6842....

To the nearest whole percent, 104 is 274% of 38.

The correct answer is E.

I like MGRE's explanation, which involves, arguably, a little less math than my own explanation does. Many math problems on both the SAT and the GRE can be solved in this way: through logical deduction instead of hardcore algebra. Remember to eliminate possibilities as you work: by narrowing the number of plausible answers, you increase your chances of guessing correctly-- if you find yourself needing to make a guess. Of course, if you're able to use deduction to eliminate four out of five possibilities, then you're golden!


_

if you prefer impersonal videos

The Khan Academy, essentially a cyberspace school, offers all students free(!) instruction in a variety of subjects ranging from math to lab science to history. Salman Khan started making YouTube videos a few years ago-- originally to help his cousins, but then as part of a larger educational project that has taken much of the country by storm.

If you're looking for Khan's SAT prep videos, click here. If you have the College Board's official guide to the SAT I, you can follow along with Khan on his videos.


_

Happy New Year!

It's 2012! If you're taking the SAT in late January, good luck to you! I've already written a great deal about handling the SAT Critical Reading section; click on the relevant labels (see the tag cloud in my blog's left-hand margin).


_

endurance

Whether you're taking the SAT, the GRE, or the TOEFL, the harsh fact of the matter is that you'll be undergoing an endurance test. Such standardized exams aren't merely a measure of your verbal and mathematical ability; they're also a test of your stamina and willpower.

All of these tests are somewhere in the neighborhood of four hours long. If you're tired during the first hour, it's hard to imagine how well you'll do during the final three. If you're pumped up with nervous energy at the beginning, but feel yourself crashing by the halfway point, you're toast.

Takers of the computer-based GRE are allowed a ten-minute break after the first couple hours; it's the only official break (other breaks may be possible by special request, but I don't think they stop the clock for you). High schoolers taking the SAT I will normally get several short breaks (about five minutes) and one long break (about 30 minutes). For TOEFL takers, ETS gives one sanctioned break and allows testers to take additional breaks without stopping the clock.

Obviously, most testers will prefer to tough it out and stay at their desk except during the mandatory breaks. This means that, before the test, testers should get themselves mentally and physically ready for the ordeal ahead.

The most common and long-standing piece of advice is to sleep well the night before the test. Another bit of practical wisdom is to work on practice problems just before going to sleep so as to be in the proper frame of mind on test day. Manhattan Prep's GRE blog also recommends watching one's nutrition: a tester should eat well and go for complex carbs and natural sugars on the morning of the test: oatmeal, wheat bread, fruit, etc. will break down slowly, releasing energy in a steady stream, thus reducing the chance of a high-and-crash, such as when one eats processed sweets (think: candy, Pop Tarts, etc.).

What you do before the day of the test will affect your performance on the test. If you cram the day before, sleep fitfully the night before, wake up tired and anxious the morning of the test, and feel yourself drowsing (or becoming generally unfocused) during the test, you aren't doing yourself any favors, and you shouldn't be surprised at your low score when test results are sent out.

Keep in mind that knowledge isn't enough for these standardized tests: endurance matters.


_

this week's MGRE Math Beast Challenge problem

From here:

"Walter's Exercise"

Every day, Walter burns 500 calories from cardio exercise. On some days, he also burns an additional 600 calories from weight training. If, over a 240-day period, Walter burns an average of 850 calories per day from cardio exercise and weight training combined, then on how many more days did Walter engage in both cardio exercise and weight training than in cardio exercise only?

(A) 40
(B) 60
(C) 80
(D) 100
(E) 140

My answer will appear in the comments.


_

MGRE problem: wrong!

Even a teacher can get things wrong, and this time around, I did.

My answer to last week's Math Beast Challenge problem turns out to be incorrect. You'll recall that my answer was (D); MGRE's answer is (C): the quantities are equal. And they're right. But why? Because of one little fact about right triangles that I had missed: the triangle's altitude, drawn from the vertex of the two legs to a point on the hypotenuse, creates two right triangles that are geometrically similar to the large triangle. I should have realized this. Anyway, without further ado, here's part of MGRE's explanation for why (C) is correct:

This could be solved with the Pythagorean Theorem, as there are three right triangles in the figure: the small one on the left, the bigger one on the right, and the largest right triangle comprised of the other two. It should also be noted that these three triangles are similar triangles; that is, the three triangles have the same three angle measures.

For the largest triangle, a² + b² = c² so by substitution, Quantity B = hc². Now that Quantity B is more similar in form to Quantity A, we will compare.

Quantity A: abc
Quantity B: hc²

Divide both quantities by c. Dividing both quantities by the same positive number will not change the relative values; the larger quantity will still be larger. This comparison becomes

Quantity A: ab
Quantity B: hc

For similar triangles, the ratios of side lengths will be equal. For example, the ratio of the short leg to the hypotenuse will be the same in each triangle.

(short leg)/(hypotenuse) = a/c (from the largest triangle) = h/b (from the triangle on the right)

a/c = h/b

By cross-multiplying, we conclude that ab = hc and thus the two quantities are equal.

MGRE's explanation continues, but it's basically a plug-in-the-numbers approach. What bugs me is that I was obviously on the right track, but I stopped in my ruminations before I'd figured out the "similar right triangles" part. Had I done that, I'd have seen that the equality I had discovered for one case (45-45-90 triangles) must also obtain for all cases.

Live and learn, eh?


_

"Will reading old books help my vocabulary on the SAT?"

So you're stuck reading Twain's The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Melville's Moby-Dick. You find yourself wondering whether the effort will be worth it: will any of this reading pay off when it's time to take those dreaded SATs? Can reading old books help me develop my SAT vocabulary?

The short answer to this question is: probably. Why? Because many of the words used in those old books are still very much in circulation.

You have two types of lexical libraries in your head. In linguistics, these libraries are called "passive vocabulary" and "active vocabulary." Passive vocabulary is associated with listening and reading; active vocabulary, which is usually smaller, is associated with speaking and writing. Passive vocabulary develops first: as a baby, you spend about a year producing no understandable words, and during that time, your rapidly self-wiring brain is greedily absorbing all the language it hears. Even when you finally start speaking, your passive vocabulary continues to grow. Trying to get your active and passive vocabularies to be about the same level is one of the Great Quests of your life. Many people are voracious readers; this by no means guarantees they'll be competent writers.

This biological reality obtains all throughout high school: your brain is still self-wiring, believe it or not, so everything you cram into it will have some sort of influence. The authors you're reading in English class are master word-slingers; they don't write a lot of "Duhhhh..." and "Uhhhh..." dialogue. Instead, they tend to lace their prose with phrases like "a vexatious situation" and "her surreptitious glance"-- almost as if they knew that, over 150 years later, someone would be needing such vocabulary to score well on the SAT.

The best thing you can do for yourself is to be curious about the words you encounter in your reading. Look up every single word you don't know; don't simply rely on context, because context can be misleading. Make flashcards, write sentences, look the words up on Google to see how they're used by others. Do everything you can to help yourself! Don't act as if your test results are a matter of fate. They aren't. You control your destiny, which means you're responsible for how well you perform on those crucial exams.


_

don't let the SAT Critical Reading sectionmake your head explode

At my day job, I often help students familiarize themselves with the SAT. Many of them dislike the Critical Reading section, which is composed of two parts: Sentence Completion and Reading Comprehension. Here's a bit of advice for how to handle each of those parts.

I. Sentence Completion

1. Know your vocabulary. You have to know what a word means if you want to understand it. You might be able to guess a word's meaning in context, but while you have time in the weeks before you test, you should think about learning the definitions of as many SAT-level words as you can. Myriad publishers have created myriad lists of the so-called "1000 words most likely to appear on the SAT." Strangely enough, every publisher seems to have a different idea as to what those 1000 words are, which means you might want to study more than one such list.

Vocabulary words are the most basic building blocks of a language. Without knowing words, you can't even think about more complex notions like grammar. Vocab is fundamental. You know what the deadliest moment on the SAT is? It's when you've got a selection of five words... and you don't know what a single one of them means.

Here-- from the College Board's website:

There is no doubt that Larry is a genuine _____ : he excels at telling stories that fascinate his listeners.

(A) braggart
(B) dilettante
(C) pilferer
(D) prevaricator
(E) raconteur

Do you know the above words? No? Then you're toast. But surely you can at least figure out that a braggart is someone who brags. Choices (B) and (E) are loan words from French; if you've studied French, you may or may not be able to figure these words out. Choice (C) is of uncertain origin, but probably French; choice (D) is derived from Latin.

The above question is ridiculously easy to answer, however, if you know these words. A braggart is someone who brags; a dilettante is a dabbler who engages in many activities, but none of them deeply; a pilferer is a thief; a prevaricator is a liar; and a raconteur is a storyteller. It should now be obvious, if it wasn't before, that (E) is the correct answer.

If you're an avid reader, take advantage of that tendency: read around. Read works that interest you, but be sure to include works that challenge you. Reading older works can be useful, too: many words on the SAT have a venerable pedigree; they've been in use for centuries. If you're not an avid reader, then you need to get reading, but try sticking with subjects that interest you. Find books about your favorite subjects that aren't written for kids. Interested in sports? There are tons of books about your favorite sport-- memoirs, books on technique, etc.-- and they'll all use SAT vocabulary at some point. Don't give up by uttering a lame, "I'm just not a reader." Well, too bad: the SAT tests reading skills. If your skills suck, don't be surprised if you end up with an execrable score.

2. Study etymologies. The two most basic etymologies to study would be Greek and Latin, but German can also be useful. I often tell my students about the Greek or Latin origins of a given word; alas, very few students actually write down what I say! But I'd recommend that you do so: print out or photocopy some etymology lists and look them over. See whether you can use those lists to help you guess at word meanings.

One root I've seen repeatedly in my tutoring sessions is anima: it's Latin for "soul" or "mind." An animal is an "ensouled" lump of matter: it's animate: because it has life, it moves. When something moves as opposed to sitting still, it's animated, like an animated cartoon or an animated keynote speaker (as opposed to a boring, lifeless keynote speaker). If you and a group of people have to vote on something, and your vote is unanimous (uni + anima), this means you've acted with one mind. A magnanimous person is generous because he or she has a great (magna) soul (anima).

Studying etymologies won't guarantee that you'll successfully decode every unfamiliar word you come across. Some roots can mean different things, so you have to be careful. Take the Latin root di-, for example: in the word dioxide, it means "two." But in the word diurnal, di- means "day," and is in fact from a totally different Latin root (dies, day). This happens sometimes: two similarly-spelled words will prove to be from two totally different roots. A harpy has nothing to do with harps, for example.

But don't let the fact that etymologies aren't a foolproof weapon discourage you: the more test-taking techniques you have at your disposal, the more likely you are to score higher on the SAT. Knowledge of etymologies is but one tool in your arsenal.

Visit Etymonline.com for more etymological information. Wikipedia also has a pretty impressive list of Greek and Latin roots. See here.

3. Understand the sentence you're reading. Here's an example straight from the College Board's website:

Although some think the terms "bug" and "insect" are _____ , the former term actually refers to _____ group of insects.

(A) parallel . . an identical
(B) precise . . an exact
(C) interchangeable . . a particular
(D) exclusive . . a separate
(E) useful . . a useless

Very quickly, you need to understand that the word Although indicates a contrast. It also helps to realize that you're probably reading a sentence from a biology textbook, or some bio-related article. Plunge into the miniature "universe" of each sentence you encounter. It's a bit like flipping channels on TV: in a fraction of a second, you can understand whether you're looking at a movie, a game show, a commercial, a drama, a comedy, the news, etc. In the same way, as you leap from sentence to sentence in the Sentence Completion section, try to grasp what each sentence is about as quickly as you can.

Since we know the sentence is hinting at some sort of contrast, it's a good guess that the two words you'll need will either be opposites or else just very different in their meanings. We can eliminate (A) right away: "parallel/identical" isn't a pair of opposites. Same for (B): "precise/exact" isn't a pair of opposites, either. (C) is a possible candidate: the word "interchangeable" implies sameness, whereas "particular" implies distinction and difference. With (D), we're back in the swamp: (D) doesn't work because "exclusive" and "separate" may actually be synonymous, or at least notionally similar, in certain contexts. Think about an exclusive party. Is that a party for the general public? Hell, no-- it's for a group of people who are separate from the mainstream. Choice (E) is interesting because it is a pair of opposites, but once you plug those words into the blanks, you see right away that "a useless group of insects" is a hilariously ridiculous phrase. Of all of our choices, (C) seems to be the best, and (C) is indeed the correct answer.

4. Classic tip: try filling in the blank(s) with your own word(s) first. This advice follows hard on the heels of what we just talked about. Once you have a good grasp on what the sentence is saying, where the writer is coming from, it's possible to make some educated guesses as to what might go in the blanks. You can use the process of elimination discussed a paragraph ago, but you can also try guessing like this:

Although some think the terms "bug" and "insect" are [similar, synonymous] , the former term actually refers to [a different/specific] group of insects.

Notice that the guesses I wrote in the blanks don't use sophisticated vocabulary. The point, here, is to get your mind into the correct notional ball park so that, when you do finally look at the answer selections, you're mentally primed to see the correct answer right away.

This method often gets you to the correct answer more quickly than does the method described in (3.) above. But the two methods are so interrelated that you may find yourself using both nearly simultaneously. That's good! It means your brain is doing some furious parallel processing to get you to the correct answer.



II. Reading Comprehension

One thing I've learned in tutoring students the Reading Comprehension section is that attitude affects comprehension. If a student has decided that he or she hates a particular reading passage, then from that moment on, it's a struggle for the student to stay focused. The advice I have to give in this section is a bit more holistic and less technique-oriented.

First, come into the SAT session well-rested and well-breakfasted. If you're tired and hungry, there's a good chance this will affect your focus. Come in awake and alert and ready for war, not sleepy and sluggish like a doomed security guard in an action movie.

Second, practice scanning the reading passages for information. Many test prep companies recommend reading through each passage first; my own advice tends to be, "Go with what works for you." If you're a fast enough reader, then go ahead and read the passages; familiarizing yourself with them that way is very effective, and your brain, which will be operating on several levels simultaneously, may form connections that become evident to your conscious mind once you turn to the reading comp questions.

One of the best scanning methods involves reading the questions first and isolating where, in the passage, you think the answers are most likely to lie. As a rule (there are exceptions, of course!), the questions follow the flow and sequence of the passage itself: the answer to the first question is likely to be located in the first part of the passage; the answers to the ensuing questions can probably be found in the middle, etc. While not as comprehensive a method as reading the entire passage through, this strategy might save you time, and might even be your preferred method if you consider yourself a slow reader.

Third, if you have access to an SAT manual with an answer key, use the answer key to your advantage: after you've checked your answers and determined which ones you've gotten wrong, look at the correct answers to those problems, then re-scan the text to determine why those answers are correct. Find, if you can, the line numbers where the evidence is located. If the question itself provides line numbers, then write yourself a brief sentence to explain why a given answer is correct: "B is correct because the passage says..."

The point of such an exercise is to help you improve your ability to scan for information. If you initially got the problem wrong, this is because you failed to find the information you needed. Now, post-test, you have the luxury of scanning the passage at a slower speed. Do so. The cognitive skill you're learning here isn't one that can be taught directly by any teacher. As you practice scanning over and over again, you'll find yourself getting better at it.

In the meantime, practice active reading in your daily life. Don't simply scroll through an article when you're online; ask yourself questions to stimulate thought. If you're reading an article about, say, the economic crisis in Europe, ask yourself whether you know who the major players are, what historical forces have contributed to the crisis, what different solutions have been proposed, and which ones seem best. Get curious! Don't let a negative attitude affect your ability to comprehend something. Approach all texts with an open, inquisitive mind. Do what you can to develop your scanning skills, and while you're at it, build your vocabulary by noting words you don't know, defining them, and writing sentences with them. Don't be afraid to Google words and see how they appear in various sentences. You can learn a lot that way.


III. Conclusion

People who do well on the SAT are those who practice this sort of global mindfulness: they're awake, alert, and curious about whatever they're reading. They care about their futures and are proactive in their attempts to master the SAT. They energetically strive to build vocabulary, understand words in context, think logically about conceptual interrelationships, and ask questions about whatever they're reading. You can do that, too. It means a lot of work, but now is the time to be doing such work.



_

writing an essay for the SAT I

On the SAT I (which we old-timers knew simply as "the SAT," back when it had only two sections), you've got Math and you've got Verbal sections. The Verbal subdivides into Critical Reading (which further subdivides into Sentence Completion and Reading Comprehension) and Writing-- each considered a section in its own right. The Writing section contains a Multiple Choice portion (error identification, sentence improvement, paragraph improvement) and an Essay portion. This post focuses on the Essay portion, which counts for one-third of the total Writing score (Multiple Choice counts for two-thirds). To be honest, I consider this-- the Essay portion-- a rather minor part of the SAT; some colleges apparently ignore the Writing section altogether in their evaluations of a student's portfolio, and the Essay portion itself, being only one-third the total value of the entire Writing section, isn't something I'd worry too much about if you have to budget your time and energy to study for the entire SAT I. Still, it's important to keep in mind the following tips:

1. The Essay section is graded according to a commonsense notion of good writing, so WRITE WELL.

You'll have 25 minutes to write an entire essay. This really means you have about 15 minutes: 5 minutes to plan (brainstorm and outline), 15 minutes to write, and 5 minutes at the end to proofread like the wind. Practice writing quickly and neatly; get to a point where you can squeeze a lot of ideas into a limited amount of space. Don't worry about your hand cramping; bear the pain and keep on writing.

The scoring scale for the Essay portion is from 0 to 6. Here's a link to the College Board's scoring guide for the Essay. Two raters will rate your essay; their scores will be added together for a total from 0 to 12. If you're in the 10-12 range, you can be proud of the job you've done. If you're in the 8-9 range, you've done fairly well, but not great. If you're below an 8, then you've got problems, and it may be too late to teach you how to write. People scoring at that level have already developed too many bad habits to unlearn in a short time.

If you're the type of student who bothers to read a tutoring blog, you're not likely to get a 0, so we won't worry about that. Most students need to worry about scoring higher than a 6 (i.e., a 3 and a 3 from two raters), which is, as you can imagine, a mediocre score. Remember that SAT scores aren't about passing or failing, however: different colleges will look at your scaled scores and assess you according to their own standards.

What is "good writing"? If you followed the above link to the College Board site, then you learned that the College Board's notion of good writing isn't far removed from what your own teachers have been telling you for years and years: you need to demonstrate clarity, organization, logicality, and persuasiveness. Reason and emotion, which together form the grounds of rhetoric, are your guardian angels. Heed them well. You need them both.

I've already written about writing logically and clearly; feel free to peruse that blog post at your leisure. Note, however, that with only 5 minutes to brainstorm and outline your essay, you can't expect to be making detailed outlines. At the same time, you'll want to avoid the mistake of simply rushing into writing your essay with no thought as to what details you'll be using to support your argument. Running out of ideas, while the clock is ticking, is deadly on the SAT. The clock stops for no one, and no one at the College Board will care about your excuses for being unable to come up with any ideas. You're just a student number to them; the raters have no clue who you are.

So: be organized, be clear, be logical, be persuasive. While you're at it, if you're looking to earn a 6, avoid making silly mistakes in spelling and grammar, and for goodness' sake be sure your penmanship is legible. The old rule, croaked by every teacher in every subject you've ever taken, is: If I can't read it, it's wrong. That applies as much to the SAT Essay as it does to math, science, or any other subject. SAT Essay raters will take only about 2 or 3 minutes to evaluate your essay; they've been trained to perform such analyses very quickly. I know: I was trained by ETS to be a TOEFL essay rater, which involves much the same skill set. Essay raters won't take any time to marvel at every single point you make; they have to rate holistically, i.e., their ratings are based, not merely on the details they see, but on their overall impression of the whole essay. Did they have to struggle through your horrible handwriting in order to understand your point? If so, you're certainly not getting a 6. Did they trip repeatedly over bad grammar and careless spelling? That's another point gone. Did they have trouble navigating your slipshod logic? Well-- sloppy writing equals sloppy thinking, so there goes another point. And so on. Help the raters out by giving them a smooth ride through your argumentation.


2. Budget your time wisely. If you have to choose between preserving overall structure and writing an incomplete essay, go for preserving the structure.

You've probably had the notion of the five-paragraph essay drummed into you: intro, 3 body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Here's the problem, and I've noticed this with a lot of my students: people will start writing SAT essays that have beautiful, top-heavy introductions... and then they won't be able to finish in the allotted time. If I were a rater reading such an essay, there's no way I'd be giving it more than a 3... and a 3 would be generous! I hear you asking: Why not show a little compassion to the student who has begun well? Two reasons occur to me right off the bat: first, the student hasn't demonstrated any ability to pace him-/herself, so why should I reward that inability? Second, the student hasn't done the most basic thing, which is answer the question. Again-- as a rater, why should I reward the student for not having met the most basic requirement?

So what should a student do in that situation, if s/he knows that s/he is a slow writer, and won't be able to write a full, five-paragraph essay in the allotted time? I say to you: cut your losses. Go for a streamlined intro and conclusion, and use only two body paragraphs. A score of 6 is possible with only four paragraphs; the College Board has acknowledged this. All the same, I wouldn't consider a 6 likely if you write a shorter essay, but the point is to write something complete, something that'll allow you to aim for a 5. Don't leave the essay rater hanging by turning in an essay that begins beautifully, then coughs, sputters, and dies well before the finish line. A fair-to-poor score on the Essay section can exert an evil gravitational pull on the rest of your Writing score. That's precisely the fate you want to avoid.

Learning to budget your time is something that comes with practice, practice, practice. Find a list of typical SAT Essay topics and just start churning out essays. Get an honest friend to critique your efforts. Ask your English teacher for help in this area. (And hey-- I am a tutor, so think about registering with me if you want my help!) There's simply no substitute for hard work. Don't be disappointed if your first few efforts go awry-- if you find you're still writing when time is called, or that your essay is a logical mess. As long as you practice mindfully and have someone to help you, you will improve.


3. Adopt a clear position.

There's little use in doing any of the above if your strategy is to write as neutral or wishy-washy an essay as possible. You need to take a firm, clear stance that directly addresses the essay prompt. The prompt itself is usually in two parts: a quote from a famous thinker, followed by a starkly-worded yes/no (or Choice A/B) question. Here's an example, straight from the College Board site:

You have twenty-five minutes to write an essay on the topic assigned below.

Think carefully about the issue presented in the following excerpt and the assignment below.

Many persons believe that to move up the ladder of success and achievement, they must forget the past, repress it, and relinquish it. But others have just the opposite view. They see old memories as a chance to reckon with the past and integrate past and present.
--Adapted from Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot, I've Known Rivers: Lives of Loss and Liberation

Assignment: Do memories hinder or help people in their effort to learn from the past and succeed in the present? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations.

Assuming five minutes to plan your essay, you need to do several things at once:

a. Be sure you understand what the essay prompt is asking for.
b. Figure out your stance.
c. Get brainstorming and outlining!
d. Write!

I've had a few students who failed to understand the question being asked, and they went on to write essays that completely missed the point. Quite a few students seem uncomfortable with SAT essay prompts, because the prompts tend to be about Big Thoughts-- ideas and notions that are philosophical in nature. While Big Thoughts may seem intimidating to you, rest assured that the College Board isn't asking you to wax philosophical: the expectation is that you'll present the SAT Essay raters with a narrowly focused thesis and equally focused essay. Yes, the prompt is cosmic in scope; no, you don't have to write cosmically. Quite the contrary: write specifically.

Let's look at the above block-quoted example. Do you get what it's asking for? The issue of success seems important here, but success is a vague, general notion, so you need to decide what your idea of success is. Is success about financial/material gain? Is it about being satisfied with where you are in life? Is it about the attainment of fame? Spiritual enlightenment? Being able to look in the mirror, and liking what you see? You need to figure this out within the first 30 seconds, because success can mean a host of different things. Without locking down your view of success, you risk writing a loose, potentially incoherent essay. NB: The Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot quote seems to lean toward an equation of success with personal achievement. Still vague, but possibly something to work with.

The prompt doesn't stop there, of course: success is linked with how we handle the past. Does the past (i.e., our memories) help or hinder us on the path to success? The prompt writer is actually trying to help you here by offering you two clear choices: (a) the past can be helpful on the path to success; (b) the past can hinder us on the path to success.

You'll need to decide very quickly what your stance is. Yes or no? Pro or con? A or B? The essay prompt has presented you with stark choices, and it's often best to follow one of those choices. But, I hear you asking, what if I find the extremes ridiculous and want to adopt a nuanced 'middle' position?

That's an excellent question, and the wisdom on this is varied. Many test prep centers (the company I work for says this, too) recommend that you avoid taking a middle position because of the high risk of sounding wishy-washy. Hogwash! I say. A middle position is perfectly respectable... but this doesn't exempt you from the obligation to be clear and firm in your stance. An essay filled with a series of "I believe X, but on the other hand Y" makes for an awful-- not to mention frustrating-- read. The SAT Essay rater needs to have a clear understanding of your position in order to give you the high score. Keep all this in mind as you figure out where you stand.

[NB: The College Board strongly implies that an essay that adopts a middle position won't be penalized. Click this link to see an essay that received a 4; it received that mediocre score not because it took a middle path, but for other reasons. In fact, the rater complimented the student for adopting a nuanced position: "This essay provides adequate reasons and examples to support both aspects of its point of view..., thus demonstrating competent critical thinking."]

And now: this is the moment to start brainstorming. Our memories: a help or a hindrance as we strive to succeed? Rewording the prompt in this way can help make it clearer in your mind. Draw a quick chart, if that helps you; label one side "HELP" and the other side "HINDER," then start listing examples of each. You're brainstorming, so don't waste time using complete sentences. Just jot down words and phrases that come to you, no matter how lame-sounding they might be.

Strangely enough, it may not matter what your actual opinion is: if you find you've gathered more ideas on the side of the chart that you weren't leaning toward, you should stick with writing an essay about that. Example: your personal opinion is that your memories can help you on the path to success, but as you brainstorm, you realize that you've got five examples in the "HINDER" column and only one example in the "HELP" column. If that's the case, then stick with "HINDER" as your thesis. Why? Because, quite simply, you can't write an essay without ideas to fuel it.

Let's say you've got six or seven quick ideas under the "HINDER" column. That's more than enough. Pluck out the best of those ideas, and start outlining.

I. intro-- THESIS: hinder

II. body
  A. attchmt to past = not cnstructiv
  B. memories ≠ PLANS
  C. lookg backwd = usu more pessimistic thn lookg fwd

III. conc

Notice anything missing from the above outline? Oh, yeah: actual, concrete examples! We'll deal with that next.


4. Choose your examples wisely.

You're pressed for time. You really need to start writing. My hope is that, while you were brainstorming, you thought of some good examples to fit into your outline. (You may, in fact, have to brainstorm and outline simultaneously! Five minutes isn't a lot of time, after all.) In case you're not sure where to look for examples, here's a list of possible sources:

1. Your personal life. Yes, it's perfectly OK to mine your own life for details, although I wouldn't recommend over-using this option. You can, in fact, fabricate an episode from your life; no one on the College Board will be the wiser. Lying is perfectly OK, as long as your example remains within the realm of the plausible. (Don't write about how your dog was able to talk and do higher math after the aliens dropped it back in your yard.)

2. Literature, TV, and other pop-culture sources. Is there a character on TV with whom you can relate? Has that character been in a situation where putting aside/dismissing memories of the past was crucial to that character's success/fulfillment/etc.? Can you think of a character whose attachment to the past proved destructive, e.g., someone so hell-bent on revenge that s/he ended up destroying him-/herself? (Captain Ahab certainly comes to mind. Hamlet arguably loses his sanity, then loses his life in his quest to avenge himself upon his uncle Claudius.) Literature and pop culture are rich with such references. Just make sure you get the story facts straight, or you'll end up embarrassing yourself. (Don't write about Hamlet fighting Grendel, for example.)

3. History. Real-life personalities are arguably better examples than fictional characters. Surely you can think of any number of successful people, be they businessmen or politicians or military leaders or religious figures-- or even successful writers and orators who defied the odds to become great. All those years of taking history class after history class should stand you in good stead at this moment on the SAT. (If you're using an example from history, don't fictionalize!)

With all these sources at your disposal, I find it hard to imagine that you'll completely blank out during the test. If you do blank out, it's probably because you (1) haven't properly understood the essay prompt, and (2) haven't bothered brainstorming and outlining. Some talented students think they can tough it out and just start writing. If you know yourself well enough to try such a trick, then go for it with confidence! You'll definitely save time by not having to pause and plan. But most students need to take those crucial five minutes to formulate some sort of plan of attack. In all probability, you, Dear Reader, belong to that crowd. Start writing!

To sum up, then-- these are the four crucial tips to help you maximize your score on the SAT Essay.

1. Write well: logically, clearly, persuasively.

2. Budget your time and pace yourself.

3. Adopt a clear position, and show it in your essay's thesis.

4. Choose your examples wisely: make them cogent and relevant.

Good luck!


_