Sal Khan Quotes

I don't think anyone thinks that the SAT score is a measure of your innate intelligence. It is not. That is a fallacious concept, and we at Kaplan, and others who are in a position, should be out there making sure people know this is nothing, this score does not have anything to do with your innate intelligence.

It's unfortunate that sometimes in schools, there's this need to have things quantified and graded.

The SAT is not perfect. We all know smart, knowledgeable people who do badly on standardized tests. But neither is it useless. SAT scores do measure both specific knowledge and valuable thinking skills.

To apply for a gifted program, children as young as 4 are required to sit through hour-long verbal exams.

I read so slow. If I have a script, I'm going to read it five times slower than any other actor, but I'll be able to tell you everything in it. It kills me that there are standardized tests geared towards just one kind of child.

You know, I'm fairly intelligent, but I don't think my grades reflected that.

You still remember your SAT scores. And everybody else does too. Everybody's forgotten everything about themselves, everything else about high school. They remember their SAT scores.

The Scholastic Aptitude Tests do not predict success any better than the socio economic status of the parents.

Louisiana standards and Louisiana tests for Louisiana students.

I was about nine years old when a teacher administered my IQ test. Unfortunately, as I was nine, I didn't know that I needed to keep the paperwork for future reference.

In my business - SAT tutoring - you get used to sighs. A client's mother frets over the sheer amount of work her daughter has to do to get her score up, until she reaches the resigned moment when she will sigh and observe that no one thought you could prepare for the SAT back when she took it - it was 'untutorable.'

As yesterday's positive report card shows, childrens do learn when standards are high and results are measured. —New York, Sept. 26, 2007

I'm arrogant enough to tell you that I'm smart enough to have scored higher on my Scholastic Aptitude Test than any US president whose SAT score has been made public. I even scored higher than ex-presidential candidate Al Gore, whose SAT score was so high, it was deemed as potentially off-putting to voters.

In other words, the better they did on the IQ test, the worse they did on the practical test and the better they did on the practical tests, the worse they did on the IQ test.

I myself scraped seven poor passes at O-level.

It's important that kids learn, but I really don't like all the testing, testing, testing.

I hate tests. It's a really lousy way to judge a person's ability.

To young people born under the weird planet of the SAT, intelligence was equated with agility, with raw acuity. It produced a certain sort of person of which I was a typical specimen: the mental contortionist, able to rise to almost every challenge placed before him, except the challenge of real self-knowledge.

Well, first of all, we did lots of studies where we show practical intelligence doesn't correlate with G. We have probably two dozen studies that practical intelligence better predicts job success than IQ.

I went to a public school through sixth grade, and being good at tests wasn't cool.

I'd never taken an SAT prep course. They were for weaker students.

When I was growing up, the exam system didn't allow you to write fiction, so you never did.

We do recognise the need to move towards the publication of information showing the progress made by pupils from one stage of their education to another.

Well, I don't think that the SAT is a scam.

I scored a 910 on my SAT. I didn't care about education. I don't know what I cared about.