How George Hill Ruined My SAT Score

[Uriel]

Recently, CollegeBoard sent emails to students like me who took the SAT last November outlining our scores in the test. In my first and only time taking the test, I found something I thought was pretty amazing.

Out of 80 multiple choice items for the Writing section, I managed to nail 79: that amounts to only one missed item. What was baffling however was that my score in the subtest was only 750 out of a possible 800, compliments of an essay I wrote about George Hill.

The essay was supposed to be a discussion about whether optimism helps people make the necessary changes to improve their life, or if the confidence that necessarily comes with it might be excessive, and in turn, derail it.

I argued that optimism was beneficial by writing about how George Hill went from being a star player in IUPUI to a benchwarmer in his rookie season, only to keep his held high during the summer and come back the next season as runner-up for the Most Improved Player Award.

I can't post the essay here since CollegeBoard hasn't sent it yet, but I'm awe-struck at how I only managed to muster an 8/12 for it. I almost think that the teachers who read and scored it mistook the basketball terminology I used (i.e. get out on the break and score with ease in transition / expend effort on both ends of the floor) for inappropriate English.

In any case, I find the notion of a 79/80 in the multiple choice section in writing to be mutually incompatible with an 8/12 in the section that actually asks you to do it. Modesty aside, someone who only misses one item in that subtest has to be a pretty good writer in the first place, which means that you would think that person would merit a much higher score than that.

I'm just bitter, obviously. But in a strange sort of way, George Hill could imdirectly have denied me the chance to study in the college of my choice, and by extension, the opportunities that necessarily come with it.

[thispego]

George hill owned you

[boutons_deux]

George Hill didn't ruin your SAT, you did.

[lefty]

lol writing about a guy who has ole ole pics of him on the internet


What did you expect ?

[baseline bum]

It'd be funny if you get it back and written in red ink is "Overrated: that's why they traded his ass for Leonard".

[TDMVPDPOY]

writing about a guy, who the examiners probably dunno about...FAIL

shouldve just focus on positive thinking...

[pawe]

At least he's not ing your ex.

[ChuckD]

Recently, CollegeBoard sent emails to students like me who took the SAT last November outlining our scores in the test. In my first and only time taking the test, I found something I thought was pretty amazing.

Out of 80 multiple choice items for the Writing section, I managed to nail 79: that amounts to only one missed item. What was baffling however was that my score in the subtest was only 750 out of a possible 800, compliments of an essay I wrote about George Hill.

The essay was supposed to be a discussion about whether optimism helps people make the necessary changes to improve their life, or if the confidence that necessarily comes with it might be excessive, and in turn, derail it.

I argued that optimism was beneficial by writing about how George Hill went from being a star player in IUPUI to a benchwarmer in his rookie season, only to keep his held high during the summer and come back the next season as runner-up for the Most Improved Player Award.

I can't post the essay here since CollegeBoard hasn't sent it yet, but I'm awe-struck at how I only managed to muster an 8/12 for it. I almost think that the teachers who read and scored it mistook the basketball terminology I used (i.e. get out on the break and score with ease in transition / expend effort on both ends of the floor) for inappropriate English.

In any case, I find the notion of a 79/80 in the multiple choice section in writing to be mutually incompatible with an 8/12 in the section that actually asks you to do it. Modesty aside, someone who only misses one item in that subtest has to be a pretty good writer in the first place, which means that you would think that person would merit a much higher score than that.

I'm just bitter, obviously. But in a strange sort of way, George Hill could imdirectly have denied me the chance to study in the college of my choice, and by extension, the opportunities that necessarily come with it.

It's not at ALL incompatible that you kill on the multiple choice section and struggle with the essay section. That's why they put the essay section there: to see if you actually understand how to write instead of just picking answers from a few choices. Life isn't multiple choice.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Colleges don't even look at that writing section anyway. Most of them ignore that section and take the traditional score out of 1600 from the other two sections.

[DMC]

George Hill wasn't facing adversity and failure. He went from a relatively obscure IUPUI program to playing for an NBA perennial playoff team. It's not a setback to do that and come off the bench as a rookie. If it was a setback to Hill, then he has his priorities wrong.

Show me the best baseball player in any college program and then tell me he would be disappointed to make the majors and have to prove himself.

[BlackSwordsMan]

Kobe woulda gotta you a 14 incher out of that 12

[cheguevara]

why didn't you write about Dr. King?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Shoulda written your essay about the overwhelming success of Jelq Magazine tbhhhhhh

[baseline bum]

I would have written about RC's DUI.

[xellos88330]

It's not at ALL incompatible that you kill on the multiple choice section and struggle with the essay section. That's why they put the essay section there: to see if you actually understand how to write instead of just picking answers from a few choices. Life isn't multiple choice.

/Thread