[posterboy]

There is another implication as a consequence of the statement "the influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests." That is, I first read thag the students don't suffer under these conditions. It is a valuable trait no doubt, to be able to cram swaths of loosely associated facts. I'd argue that it's a vital trade for study, but perhaps it is less severe than only twenty years ago, because very powerful memory aids have become ubiquitious.

> predict performance about equally well

having no tires or no engine predicts performance of a car--or rather the lack thereof--equally well. Yet grip and horsepower are independent variables. I think that means SAT scores don't predict success too well at all beyond a certain threshold.

Having the right motivation (haha, a pun) for a certain disciplin might make a huge difference. So you can test e.g. vocabulary learning in general, or top9cal knowledge, which requires precise choices of vocabulary nonetheless, but one not found in a general dictionary. It's more like knowing which dictionaries exist, and what texts are referenced therein.

[thaumasiotes]

> I think that means SAT scores don't predict success too well at all beyond a certain threshold.

Try reading about it.

https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/Webb_RM_2001_Top.pdf

> There is another implication as a consequence of the statement "the influence of test prep, cramming, test coaches, etc. is minimal for the subject tests." That is, I first read tha[t] the students don't suffer under these conditions.

This is not a valid inference to draw; the influence of test prep, cramming, coaches, etc. is also minimal for the main SAT, but students suffer through them anyway.