seems legit http://collageborde.■■■■■■■■■■
@thshadow I like your story #2008…it makes sense to me that its easier to tweak the SI % table (after the field test results) than the concordance tables…and perhaps there is some truth to when the gal in the public info. dept. told me “don’t use the concordance tables to try figuring out NMSF’s …those tables were designed for sophomores & GC’s to plan for their junior year prepping”.
No one here finds it bothersome that juniors among field testers were exposed to same ERW passages as in the official PSAT?
@OHToCollege eight months apart and with different questions…not a bit.
@OHToCollege I find it disturbing.
@websensation, like you, I am preoccupied too with my daughter. She is on the cusp of what I believe to be the predicted score of 215 for SF in Ohio. I expect simply far too many danglers at the cusp that don’t have enough room left to make it into the quota for the state’s SF. How will NMSC handle this? This issue of concordance is only relevant for CB for other purposes, and NMSC can simply sort the SI index scores for each state in descending order from 228 down to cutoff and not care a hoot about what concordance it refers to in prior year’s tests.
jesus take the wheel
@websensation - I disagree, if that’s question that everyone stumbled on, it would be unfair advantage for field testers to be provided the context already. No matter what the question was.
@OHToCollege, I only referred to the Reading passages.
@OHToCollege I find it disturbing that the same passage was used. I think they should of only field tested with then Freshman and Juniors and not Sophomores. It gave those Sophomore’s an advantage on this new test the other students didn’t have. And I believe that to be true even if it didn’t have the same passage.
Especially since CB also provides the correct answers and explanation of why the correct answer best fits the paragraph.
if a kid can remember a reading passage they spent 5 minutes on 8-10 months earlier, then they should go straight to nmsf…do not pass go…do not collect 200 SI.
That’s not the point, they can spend hours (like my daughter did) analyzing the mistakes she made when CB officially posts scores online. At this point, she is very clear on the context of the english passages. In fact, the douglas paragraph is the very one she messed up her answers on. So I disagree, if she were given one more chance at it, she would have an unfair advantage.
I can remember a fair bit of the >5000 pages of Game of Thrones books I’ve read. I still remember the one vocab word I missed on the PSAT in 1981 (“dormer”).
So more anecdotal coming in about high scores. This time IL. Not surprised but those numbers at least did not seem insane like GA. The pattern, if there is one, seems to be schools that produce a LOT of past SFs seem to be on a roll. The ? is: are the small producers seeing huge numbers of testers at 214 and above?
Curse those damn anecdotes!!! 
@thshadow Please read my #1973. I respond about why I think the % charts should be shifted up an entire percentile. Then in #2003 I repost a version of that chart but include the 2014 SI%. There I show that if you move the 2015SI% charts up one percentile group, the distribution and the numbers look very similar to last year. The trickiest part is to figure out where to start the 99+s as there is no 99++ to designate a start place. This might solve the SI%ile chart mystery and accommodate the anecdotes.
I was under the impression that some kids did better on the SAT than ACT and vise versa. I heard some people say that ACT is a more straight forward test, doesn’t try to trick the kids and really focuses on what they learned in school as opposed to raw talent. So if this new SAT is more like ACT, where lots of kids can do well, maybe it’s not surprising that many more kids seem to be populating the upper echelons of the scores. This test may be selecting the NMSFs who are studious, focused, and pay attention to detail. A different subset perhaps than in prior years.
@OHToCollege, I don’t know if the students doing the field test were every given a score (ie, shown correct answers to the field test or an explanation for wrong answers). Probably not. But remember, my daughter skipped the field test to sleep in that morning.
It will be interesting, once the final data is in, to figure out what kind of students do well on the new SAT!
@AnnMarie74 In my post #1973 I repost your argument about how to move the percentiles and expand upon it. Would you look at it and see if you still agree. If so, i reposted my chart with some extra information at #2003.