Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 239 guests, and 35 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    streble, DeliciousPizza, prominentdigitiz, parentologyco, Smartlady60
    11,413 Registered Users
    March
    S M T W T F S
    1 2
    3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    10 11 12 13 14 15 16
    17 18 19 20 21 22 23
    24 25 26 27 28 29 30
    31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Page 1 of 2 1 2
    Joined: Feb 2011
    Posts: 1,432
    Q
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Q
    Joined: Feb 2011
    Posts: 1,432
    Has anyone else notice any additional ceilings effects of the new PSAT/NMSQT?

    I am not sure whether that was even a cause but the number of National Semi-Finalists for our district and particularly for our school dropped significantly for the class of 2017 (first year) and while it has risen for the class of 2018, those numbers are still lower compared to the numbers under the old PSAT/NMSQT.

    After researching a bit, I realized how easy it is to miss the cut if you are in a state with one of the highest cut-offs. Keeping in mind that the maximum score is 760 instead of 800, this means that the maximum index is 228 (76 + 2(38+ 38)). On an easy/moderate difficulty test, you need a perfect raw score to get 228 and perhaps minus one in each section to get 222-225. If you live in a state with a cut higher than 222, missing even one in each section may knock you out of the running on an easier test.

    I seem to recall that the old SAT/PSAT had a slightly higher ceiling so that there was a bit more room for a few careless mistakes. It would be interesting to see if the new PSAT/NMSQT is capturing the same category of students as far as ability or achievement, particularly in the states with the highest indices.

    I had previously assumed that National Merit Semi-Finalist shouldn't be difficult for DS/DD but I now realize that it is much easier to get a 1520 (i.e.,760+760) on the SAT than a 228 index (1520 equivalent) on the PSAT/NMSQT since you could miss quite a few questions on the SAT even on an easy version versus a perfect raw score on the PSAT/NMSQT for an easy version.

    Last edited by Quantum2003; 11/24/17 06:27 PM.
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 693
    C
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    C
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 693
    I don’t have enough exposure to the exams to analyze why, but our school had a steep drop,off in NMSF this year as well. I was quite surprised that a couple of DDs friends didn’t hit the cutoff. The cutoff did rise here, but I don’t know the answer. DD cleared it with a cushion, despite taking zero practice exams and bringing the wrong calculator, but she is skilled at that type of exam, time management, and was probably lucky as well. She thought the math was straightforward, and that a couple of the reading passages were odd or tricky-seeming. I remember she was irritated that one passage was a text many of her classmates who take Latin had previously analyzed in class (it was new to her, and one of the passages whose questions she found weird for some reason).

    Joined: May 2012
    Posts: 235
    N
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    N
    Joined: May 2012
    Posts: 235
    I don't if this has anything to do with it but I heard SAT scores on average have gone down for girls since the SAT switched from 2400 to 1600. The reason is because math is now worth 50 percent of the score instead of 33 percent. Thats because boys on average do better on the math part and girls do better on the other two parts.

    Joined: Dec 2012
    Posts: 2,035
    P
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    P
    Joined: Dec 2012
    Posts: 2,035
    Originally Posted by nicoledad
    I don't if this has anything to do with it but I heard SAT scores on average have gone down for girls since the SAT switched from 2400 to 1600. The reason is because math is now worth 50 percent of the score instead of 33 percent. Thats because boys on average do better on the math part and girls do better on the other two parts.

    Was this an intended consequence do you think?

    Joined: Nov 2012
    Posts: 206
    T
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    T
    Joined: Nov 2012
    Posts: 206
    Originally Posted by nicoledad
    I don't if this has anything to do with it but I heard SAT scores on average have gone down for girls since the SAT switched from 2400 to 1600. The reason is because math is now worth 50 percent of the score instead of 33 percent. Thats because boys on average do better on the math part and girls do better on the other two parts.

    Was there a up trend for girls when they first moved SAT to 2400 from 1600 then?

    Joined: May 2012
    Posts: 235
    N
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    N
    Joined: May 2012
    Posts: 235
    There was an article written by Art Sawyer about the change from 2400 to 1600. If I knew out to link I would.. I'm guessing it wasn't intended but no was from SAT has supposedly commented on this. As to when it changed from 1600 to 2400 I don't know if it did benefits girls or not but you would it would. Ironically on my daughters PSAT 8/9 she did better on the math.

    Joined: May 2012
    Posts: 235
    N
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    N
    Joined: May 2012
    Posts: 235
    Well the numbers dropped supposedly for the class of 2019 but not to the levels of the class of 2017

    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 683
    K
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    K
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 683
    Our state is now using the PSAT as the state standardized test in sophomore year. I wonder if the increase in our state NM cutoff might be related to prior exposure to the test material. My DD's score went up 3 points between her sophomore test and the NM qualifying test her junior year. She didn't cover any significant new material related to the test in the interim. I have to think that familiarity played a role.

    Joined: Feb 2011
    Posts: 1,432
    Q
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Q
    Joined: Feb 2011
    Posts: 1,432
    Congrats to your DD on a comfortable cushion!

    The problem is the lower hard ceiling (1520 vs. 1600) and a lower soft ceiling (easier test so no room for careless errors). I still remember when you can miss a few and still hit perfect scale score on the verbal section of the old SAT. These days, you need to be strong enough in both math and verbal to hit a almost perfect score (for competitive states) but not necessarily the strongest in either one. In the old days, a number of the lopsided kids made it, especially top verbal kids who are good but not great in math. On the higher Selection Index states, there is almost no cushion - unless my kids hit at least 224 or 225(1500 out of 1520), they can't be confident they will qualify. It is possibly for the SI to rise so perhaps even 224 or 225 may not be enough in two years.

    Joined: Feb 2011
    Posts: 1,432
    Q
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Q
    Joined: Feb 2011
    Posts: 1,432
    Actually, the PSAT/NMSQT selection index is still 1/3 math and 2/3 verbal (EBRW) so should favor girls. The new SAT may now favor boys as compared to the old one that it replaced.

    Page 1 of 2 1 2

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Testing with accommodations
    by aeh - 03/27/24 01:58 PM
    Quotations that resonate with gifted people
    by indigo - 03/27/24 12:38 PM
    New, and you'd think I'd have a clue...
    by astronomama - 03/24/24 06:01 AM
    For those interested in astronomy, eclipses...
    by indigo - 03/23/24 06:11 PM
    Son 2e, wide discrepancy between CogAT-Terranova
    by astronomama - 03/23/24 07:21 AM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5