jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (17 posts)

Famous SAT scores. Amazing!

  1. habee profile image95
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Paul Allen - 1600

    Bill Gates - 1590

    Bill O'Reilly - 1585

    Rush Limbaugh - 1530 (???)

    Al Gore - 1355

    George W. Bush - 1206

    Bill Clinton - 1032

    Al Franken - 1020

    Howard Stern - 870

    http://www.powerscore.com/sat/help/celebrity_scores.cfm

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image64
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I wonder where they got those numbers. Some of them don't look correct to me, especially George Bush's. I smell a GOP rat. I simply don't believe that Bush's score is higher than Al Franken's and certainly not higher than Clinton's. I find it hard to believe Limbaugh's score also.

  2. WryLilt profile image93
    WryLiltposted 7 years ago

    I think I was 1100 or something. WOOT I beat Bill Clinton! (Wait, is that even worth being happy about?)

  3. habee profile image95
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    I would love to know the score of the POTUS, but he won't release it.

    I've never listened to Rush. Is he really that smart??

    I was surprised that W scored higher than Clinton. Maybe Bill just had a bad day. I'm not saying W is stupid - I think he's smarter than most people give him credit for...

    I read somewhere a while back that Nixon had an IQ of 180! Reagan's was only like 105, I think, and Carter's is around 150.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image64
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Nixon was very smart. So was Carter. Clinton was among the smartest and more important, street smartest. So was LBJ. SAT scores are correlate with parental income, biasing the scores in favor of privileged children, assuming they get good parental attention, and against poor ghetto kids.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I'm not sure I follow you, Ralph.  It has been many years indeed since I took a SAT (I actually don't remember if they were used when I graduated from high school), buy my imperfect impression of the current ones is that they are intended to give an indication of the scholastic learning in school.  A measurement of the knowledge base of the student in particular areas the test designers feel would assist in higher education.  They are not an IQ test but rather a knowledge test limited to narrow fields of scholarly endeavor rather than life experiences.

        If that is correct I would certainly expect "privileged" children with attentive parents to score better than poor ghetto kids but that is not biased, it is an accurate measurement of knowledge.  Very few "poor ghetto kids" could be expected to accumulate large stores of knowledge in the areas being tested, but that is simple fact, not bias.  I suppose the SAT's could include tests to see if the kids understood gang emblems and how to avoid police cars, but I doubt that would be very valuable knowledge to gaining more knowledge from the classes offered in colleges, and isn't that what the SAT's are all about?  Or am I misunderstanding the SAT entirely (certainly possible!)?

      2. Patty Inglish, MS profile image94
        Patty Inglish, MSposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        When my HS junior class took the tests, boys took the SAT and girls took the ACT, so for some years in Ohio. gender bias was added, I think.

        An aquaintance made his daughter take the pre-SAT then SAT every six months from ages 13 - 17, pushing for the perfect score. She was worn out and depressed.

  4. Uninvited Writer profile image83
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    Is a SAT score really important? To me things like that and IQ are really meaningless. It's what you do in University and after that counts.

    That is not to attack you but just my opinion smile

    1. Lisa HW profile image80
      Lisa HWposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think IQ is meaningless at all.   There ought to be a minimum IQ for a whole lot of jobs.   smile

      1. habee profile image95
        habeeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Oh, I sooooo agree with that! Such jobs should include working for the IRS! lol

      2. K9keystrokes profile image94
        K9keystrokesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I think this is a brilliant idea! ...IRS...hilarious!!  wink

      3. Patty Inglish, MS profile image94
        Patty Inglish, MSposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Inanimate objects have an IQ of 12. Is that high enough? lol

  5. camlo profile image89
    camloposted 7 years ago

    I'm a bit tired today ...
    What's a 'SAT' score?

  6. Len Cannon profile image90
    Len Cannonposted 7 years ago

    1200 isn't that great if you have the opportunities GWB did, although none of it matters.  An SAT score of 1600 doesn't mean you'll do better in life than someone who scores a 980.  SATs aren't universal measures of intelligence, either.

    Don't get me started on the problems with the IQ test.

  7. Mighty Mom profile image87
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    SAT scores absolutely reflect the quality of high school education as well as how diligently said education is absorbed (and perhaps valued) by the student.

    Case in point:

    Clinton went to Hot Springs High School in Hot Springs, Arkansas.
    W went to private prep schools in Houston , TX and Andover, Mass.

    Clinton managed to overcome his relatively poor SAT scores and graduate Yale Law School AND become a Rhodes Scholar.

    1. habee profile image95
      habeeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Clinton is very smart, and he's great with people. Obama is smart, but he doesn't have the "people gift" that Bill has. And say what you want, but W isn't as dumb as you think! Carter is very intelligent, and Nixon was brilliant, which just goes to show that you need more than smarts to be an effective leader.

  8. Mighty Mom profile image87
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    And that 1020 was good enough to get Al Franken into Harvard.
    Hmmmm.

 
working