I dunno, I never really believed in SAT prep courses. They seemed a silly notion to me and an unnecessary effort. I ended up with a 1400 with zero prep. I have to think that most colleges don't put a lot of emphasis on it anyway, unless it's really awful, like less than 1000 or something.
Actually standardized tests are by far the best predictor of how well a student will do in college, no other single factor comes close to it.
By matter of principle, I think it's absurd to study for a standardized aptitude test. Several try-hard students in my high school did fine their first time taking the SAT (1200-1300 range) and then after taking a prep course, scored at least 100 points better--I felt like they just bought their new and improved score. Then again, it seems to be the norm among well-to-do and/or aspiring students, so I suppose you just have to accept it. As for colleges considering scores... well, I'm still under the impression that it's a significant factor when judging a student. Flawed or not, you have to have some sort of measuring stick for intelligence when looking at kids from all over the country.
It's more likely you got one with a name like Jontro. I keed.... It's reinforcing selective prejudicial thinking and possibly inaccurate stereotypes. Hey, let's all talk about how black people are stereotypically more physically athletic and have giant dongs. But with the positive, there's also the negative... Mentioning positive stereotypes is almost like a precursor for more racist statements.
Ayo brah, why you gotta hurt my feelings? I worked hard for my low sat scores. However I do feel bad for the kid who COPIED off of my answer sheet...who had a DIFFERENT version of the test.
