CareerMom66

I'm a mom in my 40s and I remember what the SATs were like back in the 80s, and I remember applying to colleges. I know the obvious difference between then and now is the addition of the "writing section" and the scale is 2400 instead of just 1600. But let's just consider the CR and CM (1600 scale) now, compared to 25 years ago. It seems like colleges have raised their standards quite a bit for SAT requirement scores. I remember friends of mine getting accepted to a competitive school like Drexel with only 860 combined CR/CM. My brother got into Villanova with only 1000. Back then 1000 was considered a great score. Now it is considered a low score. Maybe our education curriculum is much more advanced these days and students are scoring higher on the SATs, which causes colleges to raise their standards.

Back in the 80s when I was taking the SAT, I also think I remember that if you omitted a question, it was automatically marked wrong. Nowadays this is not the case. Could that also account for higher scores/higher standards?

Any other parents out there around my age have any thoughts on this? Thanks.

UDUBHUSKIES

what do you mean not marked wrong. we still don't get that point for the question by omitting.

wcgh13

SAT scores have increased (and IQ scores as well) in America, not because people are getting smarter, but because people are figuring out how to beat the test. I think its called the flynn effect (we learned it in Psych)
Flynn effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

times2

Are you sure you're not remembering incorrectly? 860 was never considered a "good" score -- probably more like average, and I can't possibly imagine Drexel letting you in with an 860 unless you were bringing a lot to the table with grades & extras ... you practically got 400 for just filling out your name and handing in a blank score sheet. IIRC, my sister scored about 1150 and didn't get into Villanova. I graduated from high school in '92. I scored a 1480 on the SAT and was valedictorian in a class of ~400, and I remember being nervous about getting into Penn / Wharton.

Plus scoring methodology was the same back then. +1 for correct answers, - a fraction for wrong answers (usually -(1/x) where x=(total number of answer options)-1), 0 for questions left blank.

CareerMom66

times2, I'm remembering correctly. I used to keep a journal when I was teenager and I wrote it in there. I am still friends with this guy and we talk about it from time to time, and surely he did get into Drexel with an 860. Keep in mind this was 1981.

SansSerif

I graduated hs in 78 and got a 1240 M and V. That was considered pretty damn good. Now it's no big deal. I got into Penn State main campus with that SAT and a 3.2. No honors classes.

Definitely a different world today.

times2

Perhaps things changed from the early '80s to the early '90s, as well. In any case, if you have a child who is taking the test now, I'm guessing the best bet is to treat your experience as anecdotal (or supplemental at best) and go by what one of the big name books or prep courses say. So much has changed with the world in general that I can only imagine how relevant (or irrelevant) our personal experiences are to the young folks taking the test today. :-)

I'm reasonably sure no one was told to turn their smartphone off before the test back when we took it. ;-)

fignewton

The single biggest change affecting scores was the rescaling of the test in 1995.

As an example of the effect, the class of 1985-86 had only 9 perfect scores. In all of 1994 only 25 students received a perfect score. The very first rescaled SAT in April 1995 had 137 perfect scores. These days about 300-400 seniors per year get perfect scores (it is actually a little tougher than 1995-2004 to get a perfect score because of the writing section).

A single wrong question or question left blank on an 80s SAT would result in a non-perfect score, unlike today's.

The other major change is the prep being done for the SAT. The first "10 SATs" book came out in 1983, but an ETS survey in 1987 showed that only about 15% of students used the book, and only 40% of seniors took the test more than once.

bublubu

The Internet has made studying for the SAT considerably less lonely and a lot more efficient. I remember spending many lone hours with my Barrons book and a few other materials only to study the wrong way. Places like CC on the web connect many a test taker and make it more collaborative (and competetive) to study for standardized tests. The SAT has changed in some ways from the 80's but old tests are still good drills particularly the math sections and vocab with CR.

times2

fignewton... good info. That would also explain why MENSA stopped allowing the SAT to be used as qualification for membership. Scores of 1250 or above from tests taken 9/1974 and 1/1994 can be used for admission. Considering that MENSA is supposed to be a group for the top 2%, one could infer that a score of 1250 back then would put you in the 98th percentile.

myuusmeow

Were the scores still on a normal curve back then, ie 500 on a section is the mean, median, and mode score and 100 was the standard deviation, like they are today? An 860 on the old scale would have been somewhere around the 20th percentile, meaning about 80% of test takers did better, unless this all only applies to modem SAT scores.

---

My parents also echo that taking the test more than once is a new concept to them.

times2

As far as taking the test more than once is concerned, back when I was taking the test 20 years ago, it was customary to take it once and then again if you weren't satisfied with your score. I don't recall many (if any) people taking it more than twice. With subject tests, most people just took three tests on one day and that's it.

I can't see the 500 mean / standard deviation being how they scored it back then. 860 was definitely not 20th percentile... it was probably close to average or slightly above average for people who were about average college bound students, at least from what I can recall from about 20 years ago.

SansSerif

From what I remember in the 70s, I agree that some people took it twice, but many didn't. Very few studied for it. We looked upon those who studied for it the way you'd look upon someone today who wants to retake a 2380.

But I do remember an 860 not being a great score. That's about what my husband got and he was always using that score as an example of what a terrible test taker he was. About 1000 was where it got good. Around 1400 was getting into low Ivy territory.

wcgh13

Around 1400 now-a-days, while not ideal, is still in low ivy territory

ridethewave

fignewton is correct, rescaling (or re-centering) the scores made a big difference. The mean score was dropping, so they re-centered the test.

The addition of the writing section -- the essay in particular -- makes grading more arbitrary. However, I would argue that the test itself is easier than it was "back in the day." Analogies and other critical thinking questions are gone. As some folks I know say, the SAT now mainly measures how good one is at taking the SAT. Even the name has been changed; "SAT" no longer stands for "Scholastic Aptitude Test," it just stands for "SAT."

The test prep industry has changed things a lot, I suspect. I am amazed when I come on here and see students writing about spending the summer or a semester preparing for SAT subject tests, or for the SATI. I cannot imagine doing that! When I was in high school, I was not even aware of test prep books -- I don't even know if they existed.

As for the Flynn effect, well, there is a great deal of debate as to whether or not it exists. But given that perfomance on the SAT has less correlation to intelligence than it did in the past, I think that matter is moot.