As usual, the article is meant to be provocative and a little misleading. While it is true that converting with the concordance table may lead to an estimate that is up to a maximum of 80 points lower on the combined score, it isn't true across the board. I reviewed all the tables fairly thoroughly since two of my kids took the March exam. For example, DS' score converts a total of 40 points lower on the combined score.
As far as the difficulty levels of the old versus the new SAT, both my kids find the new Math sections more challenging than those on the old SAT but somewhat easier than the two practice tests they tried. The new Language/Writing section was somewhat more challenging than the old SAT and definitely more difficult than the two practice tests. However, the Critical Reading section was easier due mainly to the change in the vocabulary portion. I am not really sure how accurate the Concordance tables really are. For that matter, how accurate the percentiles are at this early stage. I read that the percentiles are based on a December administration (presumably mostly seniors who were paid $50) to kids who have previously taken at least one old SAT during the Fall.
I am also still confused regarding the relationship between some of the concordance tables versus some of the percentiles. For example, DD received the exact same Math score on both the old and the new SAT. According to the concordance table the new score is about 20 points "inflated" so she arguably performed worse, but her national percentile (compared to mostly December seniors) jumped about five percentage points which suggests she performed better.
What I do like about the new SAT is that there is so much more information compared to the old SAT. Instead of just four measures, there are now eight measures plus more detailed breakdown within measures.
