Customer Reviews

Cracking the SAT, 2007 Edition (College Test Preparation)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Note: This is an abridged version of a review on CEEAE dot org.

Princeton Review's Cracking the SAT is the Anti-SAT book. This book, 2007 edition appears to be the preeminent strategy book for SAT preparation. Indeed, the entire book appears to be designed in order to demystify the SAT and it is strategy or "trick" focused. Many efficient test-taking strategies are presented for each subject area and question type.

However, one of the strategies has had its share of issues. Many students have reported that they were flummoxed by the pervasive "Joe Bloggs" method. While the method is not being called into question, we do question Princeton Review's constant usage of the method throughout the text. The "Joe Bloggs" method has been endemic to Princeton Review preparation books since the mid-90s, if not earlier, but we have seen many students who have improved their scores, sometimes dramatically, by relinquishing this method and focusing only on how to complete the questions efficiently. Hence, while we appreciate this method, we remain dubious of Princeton Review's recommendation of pervasive usage.

This book also features 3, extremely accurate, practice SATs. Moreover, each test has an Equating section (no other book does), and explanations are provided to every question on the exams. There are 7 tests, but only 3 of them are in the book. Although The Official SAT Study Guide has 8 exams and they are made by the College Board, this book features accurate practice exams that have full explanations and Equating sections. Hence, some have concluded that the tests in this book are preferable to those in The Official SAT Study Guide.

Finally, this book as well as more than 20 other SAT prep books are reviewed and ranked on CEEAE dot org. Every book review has a direct link to its page on Amazon, so you can read the reviews, view the rankings and then purchase your selections from Amazon.

I am an SAT tutor and instructor (with my own company) with over 9 years' experience, and I used this book recently in a 3-session SAT refresher course that took place just before the October 2006 SAT. The students improved overall in the Critical Reading section, but they actually DROPPED in their Math scores on average (the students had fairly high Math scores at the start). I had used Math questions exclusively from this book as review, and I will never make the same mistake again. The book, and Princeton Review in general, does not have a good grasp of the style and "flavor" of actual SAT Math questions. An experienced SAT tutor who has worked with the official and real SAT questions should be able to detect small, but important, differences in the Cracking the SAT Math questions as compared to official SAT questions. For one thing, the last few questions on a section are not tough enough, and they are a bit off in the style and emphasis on "question types." The Math coverage and questions are probably good enough for a student scoring below 550 on the Math section, but I would hesitate to recommend them to any students scoring 550 or higher on Math. On the other hand, the Critical Reading and Writing sections are probably strong enough for students of almost all levels. As for the claim from one reviewer that the practice tests in this book are "extremely accurate" and preferable to those in the Official SAT Study Guide, I would have to STRONGLY disagree with that assertion. I've already stated that the Math questions are not representative, but readers should know that the Critical Reading questions, while fairly representative, contain some blatant (and sometimes subtle) errors in the answer choices and stated correct answers. For good practice alone, stick with the Official SAT Study Guide and the College Board Official SAT Online Course.

Princeton Review challenges the ETS (the test's creator) party line on prepping and coaching. By studying patterns in the ETS answer choices and question sequences, Princeton Review came up with what it calls the Joe Blog approach. At its core, Joe Blog says that on easy questions, go for the obvious answer that Joe Blog (a hypothetical Joe-Average) would guess; on the hard ones, avoid the "obvious answers, because they are "tricks" to fool Joe Blog. Even for top scorers, the Joe Blog techniques could add points by increasing the odds of successfully making educated guesses on the toughest questions. Moreover, the Princeton Review writers do provide excellent practice beyond the Joe Blog approach. They seem to have studied the content of the test better than most authors. If there is one flaw, it is that the explanations to the practice questions need a lot of work.

While not perfectfor everyone, this book is still an important and helpful resource. I do recommend this book overall.

This book gives a great perspective on how to think about the SAT. Strategies as well as technical skills (on grammar, algebra, etc) are presented clearly by P.R. My only concern is the accuracy of the sample questions and the full tests. It might be best to read this book and then do the practice tests from the College Board book.

I bought this book as a high school senior looking to improve upon my already pretty good score on the SAT reasoning. My desire going into the test was simply to raise my score on the math section and keep the others around the same. However, what I discovered is that the first time i took the test, WITHOUT STUDYING, I fared better than I did with this book. Now, I may have been setting my sights too high, but this book promises an INCREASE of about 100 points by using their special techniques. What I found out, however, is that it did change my score by about that much, but in the OPPOSITE DIRECTION!! I am thoroughly disappointed, as I know that I'm not stupid... my application to Rice University is already in and I'm planning to apply to Georgetown, Stanford, Duke, and the University of California. I certainly hope that this doesn't jeopardize my standing with these colleges, but please, DON'T think that this book is worth the money... it's not.

Purchased this as a study aid for my grandson as he was starting to prepare for his SAT test. The text was in good condition and arrived quickly. Sorry for late processing of feedback.

My 16-year-old son ordered this book. I took a quick look at it today and found two mistakes on the first page I checked, page 295, question 3. The author insists that "none" always requires a plural verb, but all the best usage manuals (Fowler, Follett, Garner, even the OED) say that it may be singular or plural, with plural being more common. The sense is clearly plural, not singular in question 3 ("none of the fish are native"). Also, in question 4, who in the world would ever use "you and me" instead of "us"? Why is someone who is tone-deaf to his own language trying to teach it to students? I want my money back.

To begin with, the Joe Bloggs approach designed for the retarded is a major flaw in this book. Almost every explanation encountered dealt with this average-student on the SAT who almost always misses the hard questions, thinks like an idiot and scores less than the average on the actual test. Bla bla bla approach which paradoxically (!?) occupies half of this book.
The book is filled with all kinds of paranormal approaches, irrelevant references ( the one where you are told to compare the reading section with the tale of a thief who robs banks???)
On the other side, there are some things to consider : three almost realistic tests with an experimental section, some hard math questions well worth passing through ( though I noted some errors in giving the right answer...)and excellent reading passages.
Yet I cannot help not being haunted by that famous Joe Bloggs whenever I open this book so...Try the College Board book instead.

MY GRANDSON WAS HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE TEST AND THE BOOK REALLY HELPED HIM PASS THE TEST.

I really liked the Princeton Review and recommend it to other people who would like to use this product. It is very well done and helps much.