Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.
Please take a moment to read our updated TOS, Privacy Policy, and Forum Rules.

SAT concordance table - compare old and new SAT scores


Replies to: SAT concordance table - compare old and new SAT scores

  • homerdoghomerdog Registered User Posts: 1,405 Senior Member
    @KennyT Yes. That's a big difference between 1520 and 1540 for sure. And Bowdoin's 770? No words.
  • OHMomof2OHMomof2 Registered User Posts: 10,139 Senior Member
    Amherst broke it down for the ATTENDING freshmen (not the accepted freshmen, yet, presumably those numbers would be higher).
    Their SAT composite (the “old test”) is 2232—also a record. And their redesigned SAT (first introduced with this class) is 1469.
    - assuming those are the 50 figures.


    2017 CDS is not out yet.
  • KennyTKennyT Registered User Posts: 11 New Member
    A new 1469 is not quite the 1530 the Concordance predicted a 2232 would yield.
  • ThinkOnThinkOn Registered User Posts: 335 Member
    Good grief, that's a huge difference!
  • am9799am9799 Registered User Posts: 683 Member
    It also looks like the ACT range at a lot of colleges got bumped up by one or two points. It could be that a lot of students took only the ACT OR that it was easier for a student to hit a 31-32 in the ACT than the concorded SAT number. Of course now that students had more practice time and more chances for super scoring those SAT numbers will rise. Interesting to see next years data.
  • nostalgicwisdomnostalgicwisdom Registered User Posts: 1,219 Senior Member
    Pomona and Williams also posted: https://www.questbridge.org/college-partners/pomona-college and https://www.questbridge.org/college-partners/williams-college

    SAT EBRW Middle 50%: 710-780
    SAT M Middle 50%: 690-780
    ACT Middle 50%: 31-34

    SAT EBRW Middle 50%: 680-750
    SAT M Middle 50%: 670-760
    ACT Middle 50%: 31-34

    Pomona and Williams had the exact same scores for enrolled students last year (670-770 per section SAT, 31-34 ACT), so it seems Pomona is going by actual data (their new SAT ranges are slightly lower) and Williams has used the concordance tables.
  • nostalgicwisdomnostalgicwisdom Registered User Posts: 1,219 Senior Member
    For comparison with Princeton and Stanford-

    Math: 700-780
    Evidenced-based Reading and Writing: 680-760
    ACT Composite Score: 31-35

    SAT Math Section: 700-780
    SAT Evidence-Based Reading and Writing: 690-760
    ACT Composite: 32-35

    Both of these are lower than previous old SAT ranges.
  • nostalgicwisdomnostalgicwisdom Registered User Posts: 1,219 Senior Member
    edited September 13
    Vassar has an interesting breakdown for both: https://admissions.vassar.edu/about/statistics/

    The old SAT range is 1350-1470. The new SAT range is 1380-1470. So technically, the New SAT is scoring higher. However, if you take a look at the percent scoring a 750+:

    Old CR: 31.5%
    Old W: 26.1%
    Old M: 31.5%
    New EBRW: 23.9%
    New M: 27%

    There are also far fewer scores with a 640 or below:

    Old CR: 16.9%
    Old W: 18.5%
    Old M: 17%
    New EBRW: 6.1%
    New M: 9.8%

    Note that there were twice as many enrolled students submitting new SAT scores compared to old ones, suggesting that they weren't disadvantaged in the process.
  • KennyTKennyT Registered User Posts: 11 New Member
    I do appreciate Vassar's detail. So far, this is the only one I've seen where the new SAT range is higher than the old SAT. However, it is on somewhat lower numbers. With all of these, it's important to use the Concordance table to see what the old SAT was predicted to be in the new SAT. With Vassar, the old SAT range of 2030-2210 was predicted to a 1430-1520 range. The actual scores still came out some 50 points lower than predicted.
  • evergreen5evergreen5 Registered User Posts: 189 Junior Member
    edited September 13
    @nostalgicwisdom That's interesting. Wiliams appeared not to use the concordance tables in actual admissions decisions because it explicitly separated out Old and New SAT scores when it reported data last spring (with New scores averaging lower than Old).
    Average scores on the old SAT are 736 in critical reading, 737 in math, and 732 in writing.

    Average scores on the redesigned SAT are 722 in evidence based reading and writing and 721 in math. The average super-scored ACT is a 33.

    Perhaps the middle 50 data concorded the Old scores to New - I suspect that the Common Data Set might require that approach although I think that would render the middle 50 data unhelpful.
  • mdphd92mdphd92 Registered User Posts: 50 Junior Member
    The Vassar distribution shows that scores of 750 and above are less common on verbal (31.5% on old CR, 23.9% on new EBRW) and about the same in math (31.5% on old Math, 27.0% on new Math). However, scores of 700 or above are more common on verbal (60.0% on old CR, 66.5% on new EBRW) and about the same frequency on math (57.6% on old Math, 58.6% on new Math).

    For the new Math test, at least, the scores seem to be about the same as the old Math test. This is also supported by my post #332 (on page 23 of this topic), where the middle 50% of scores are about the same over two successive years for all 9 University of California campuses.
  • suzyQ7suzyQ7 Registered User Posts: 2,984 Senior Member
    I think the evidence shows that the new SAT is easier than the old for students in the middle range of scores (under 1400) and harder at the tippity top.
  • KennyTKennyT Registered User Posts: 11 New Member
    Not to quibble, but 1400 is almost certainly above 95th percentile which is not quite middle. However, from what I've seen I agree that above around 1380, the new SAT is harder than the old, is about even between 1340 and 1380 and a little easier under 1340 or so. Under every scenario I've seen, the Concordance table predicts much higher new SAT scores than actually occurred.
  • YnotgoYnotgo Registered User Posts: 3,470 Senior Member
    Have you seen other schools that only list middle 50 for the *old* SAT for the Class of 2021 profile? No mention of the new SAT.

  • nostalgicwisdomnostalgicwisdom Registered User Posts: 1,219 Senior Member
    Caltech has the highest SAT averages of any school in the country. Section scores have ranged from 740-800 for the middle 50% in reading and writing, so at least a quarter of the enrolling students have gotten an 800.

    So far, I've only seen 3 people here who self-reported an 800 on EBRW via the search function. Stanford's CR+W/2 75% was 785 last year; Princeton's was 790. If both are putting their 75% as a 760 this year, it doesn't seem there are many 790s/800s to go around for all the competitive schools. For a school at the extreme high end like Caltech, they likely have more scoring 800s in the old test than the new one.

    I mentioned this way back in the start of the thread, but since reading and writing are combined, students effectively have to demonstrate top notch proficiency in both to score in the 770+ range. That pool is inherently smaller than those who scored 770+ on CR and writing alone. Elite schools could alternate their acceptances such that the 75% range would be close to 800, as long as 25% of the class scored an 800 per section. Now, getting an 800 as the top 75% range is only possible by admitting students who are good at both sections. Furthermore, the curve is harsher on the upper end. Most old tests had -3 = 800 for reading and -2/11+ essay = 800 for writing. Now, if you miss just one on reading or writing, you're often brought down immediately to a 39/40 for each and can't get above a 790.
Sign In or Register to comment.