@suzyQ7, thank you Mme.
I plan to apply schools accept super scores and I have money in the bank. 800 Math SAT, and just had Jan 23 2016 SAT similar to Jun 2014 SAT (i took in freshman year).
I think I did very well since I remember most of the questions. I try to get away from here, but it’s so addicting
@suzyQ7, “Of all the anectotes out there, have we seen even one that says they have less? Nope, I don’t think so.”
Not true.
According to @mphill1tx: “some info from our school. We have averaged 10 - 12 nmsf/year. we have 20 juniors with a 210 or higher and 5 with a 219 or higher. Texas school”
Texas was 220 last year. At 220, @mphill1tx school would drop from 10-12 to 5 SF - cut in half.
Thanks, but the cpa is misleading in that it stands for something other than the usual association with numbers.
People tend to share the good news and shout out but keep silent when news aren’t so good! I think…
Reposting the prediction from Prepescholar, which BTW have CA at 220, higher then testmasters 219. Obviously higher cutoff would make no one happier. http://blog.prepscholar.com/national-merit-scholarship-cutoff-2015-2016
@itsgettingreal17 mentions this being different test, and same school may not get similar # NMSF this year. Though tests are different, the No of #NMSF per state is fixed, so generally higher achieving kids should do well in this test too. I understand the new test has more emphasis on language skill than math. If so does that mean in those school where kids dominate, with relatively stronger math skill then English language skill will see their #NMSF change lower, any opinion on this angle?
@dallaspiano How did you do on the other 2 parts of the SAT? Schools usually focus on total.
What do you mean by this?
"plan to apply schools accept super scores and I have money in the bank. "
@SLparent did not include the sophomores. Just gave that data as an aside because it seems to me that with a modest amount of test prep for the PSAT, the school could significantly increase its numbers of NMSF for class of 2018.
Anyone in Texas I made this thread…National Merit Cutoff Predictions for Class of 2017 for TEXAS
@Mamelot wrote: But I simply can’t believe CB would release something that is so wrong. They. have. the. actual. data.
I was a true believer and this was the vine I clung to so as to keep from plunging into the concordance abyss. But I let go. I realized that CB will never need to admit to error. Those SI% are an accurate portrayal of exactly what CB said they were portraying. They just aren’t applicable in this case, but they aren’t wrong.
@Speedy2019 wrote:
"Not true.
According to @mphill1tx: “some info from our school. We have averaged 10 - 12 nmsf/year. we have 20 juniors with a 210 or higher and 5 with a 219 or higher. Texas school”
Texas was 220 last year. At 220, @mphill1tx school would drop from 10-12 to 5 SF - cut in half."
Testmasters has Texas at 217 this year, not 220. I’m not sure anyone is saying that last year’s cutoffs won’t change at all - the concordance tables certainly don’t say that. Just that they won’t be nearly as low as the SI table implies.
Also, as I’ve said before, I believe any cutoff that yields plus/minus 50% (for a school with a substantial number of NMSF) should be considered reasonable, based on what has happened in the past. Way beyond that range - not so much.
For schools with only a couple of NMSF - all bets are off. They could double or go to zero. Lots of variance there - you can’t predict much from them.
Okay, there was a request for a school with lower scores this year than last year… DS school is in PA and it just recently switched to common core. Last year there were 3 NMSF. This year he thinks he has the highest SI with a 210. which probably won’t be finalist.
@replyback wrote: " I understand the new test has more emphasis on language skill than math."
Verbal has been 2/3 of the SI score and math 1/3 for more than 20 years.
Why are we not seeing schools with lower numbers? Why would a school advertise that its students performed (or at least appear to have performed) worse than last year’s students? Although I sympathize with the GCs who sincerely aren’t comfortable releasing information (even though no one here has this motivation – from a GC perspective it feels like people are trying to figure out what other kids got – at my son’s school it would be relatively easy to figure out who got the scores above my son’s – I won’t ask because I absolutely would feel like I was getting into other kids’ business), I suspect at least some of them are unwilling to provide detailed information because their percentiles did go down. It’s just human nature to share the joy (20 kids in the 99th!) as opposed to admitting that the numbers look to be down.
I also don’t trust them to use the right terminology when providing information to parents. We all know that the first percentile provided by CB on the grade reports was the imaginary and inflated national number (one really had to dig to get user and SI percentiles). I think some of these GC’s are not distinguishing between that percentile and the SI percentile (some may not even realize how much they differ) even when they say SI percentile. The SI ranges (x kids over 210) given seem much more in the ballpark than some of the GC percentile numbers.
@suzyQ7, Mme
School like UT accepts highest score on single test date - to process award scholarship
School like UTD and other locals around accepts super scores on any test dates (the best out two - CR, M) - to process award scholarship
My mom is a teacher, so I will pick one that would give me full ride (tuition, fees, books, some or full room and board)
Currently, UTD award full ride if one has 1528 (CR+M), but my time it probably goes up 1540 or 1550
UT is not my consideration since the very max they offer is full tuition
@speed2019 Did someone predict 220 for Texas? Sorry didn’t see that. Testmasters prediction for Texas is 217:
@mphill1tx: said:
this year - "15 between 210-218 "
Last year 10-12 NMS. Passes sniff test.
@DoyleB, I stand behind my posting. @suzyQ7 said there were no anecdotes of schools that would have less SFs compared to last year. That statement is demonstrably false.
I STAND behind my posting.
@Speedy2019 I don’t disagree with you at all. There will definitely be schools that have fewer NMSF than last year if you use Testmasters cutoff numbers. They must exist for the numbers to work out.
The challenge will be to find schools that will have less SF than last year using the SI table cutoffs.
The SI based cutoff for Texas was 211. So the school you are referring to would almost double their typical number if that was the cutoff. You’ll have to keep looking 
Well then, thank goodness I’m not @suzyQ7.
@suzyQ7 no you did not miss a post. The “reset” table is the same page 11 SI Table. The curve has been reset this year. That’s what I was referring to.