WOW, @destined4harvard, this is a new development! Did others on this site hear from their GCs about new SI percentiles? Perhaps I missed this in the last 25 pages of chat on this thread.
@destined4harvard - can you get more info about this âupdatedâ sheet? Where does 99+ start? And/or can your GC show it to you?
@thshadow I can try, but right now all I have is the 17 scores that are in the 99th percentile (ranging from 208 to the highest score from my school with juniors, which was 224). My GC cannot show me anything because kids names are on it and thatâs confidential and I do not want to ask him to look at anything that I shouldnât be allowed to see.
@destined4harvard, great news. The page 11 SI % table has 205 at 99%. I think Iâve gone up a total of 3 points now to compensate for National numbers and Definition B. So that would put 99% around 208 for my predictions. The updated GC SI list COULD support the predictions I put together based on SI % table + modifications.
If anyone has access to the list from a GC counselor and can make a copy, please post OR try to find out where 99+ is at on the list AND 97% for commended.
@suzyQ7 I donât dispute your story - it could be true. What I suspect is that they might need the SI table to get a better estimate so they had to use Class of 15 data, the most recent one with a full picture. I donât think it was a typo or deletion of a wrong column because their predictions for VA and WA are the same. If you base the predictions on Class of 16 data, they will be different. As for the initial -12 predictions, basically almost everybody (Testmasters included) did the same thing. It was so natural.
Logical to expect the updated SI % sheet to be based on actual test takers. Their study group data has already been calculated.
This might be a silly question, but do parents of âhome schoolersâ receive any reports from CB such as they send to GCs?
Sensing things could heat upâŠmight have a new 99% cutoff line (SI208) per @destined4harvard. Since this differs by 3 points from the published guide (SI205) presumably the SI208 applies to the user rep study of âactualâ test takers of 1.7 mill test population. Or maybe itâs derived from the actual test population. Surely, CB has the data to do this. Still, the inconsistency is troublingâŠ
MastersOfTheUniverse, if you read this forum, you may want to get a hold of the new SI % table from your Houston school contacts. If 208 is 99%, then your 210 commended number is way off. Just sayingâŠ
@Speedy2019 #2863, agreed good news if true. Itâs only a 3 point shift and shouldnât affect your predictions, which by the way, many thanks for doing. Also a shout out to all the work from the @thshadow
@destined4harvard Why is your GC so nice & opened to share this secretive info because all others GCâs just clammed up.
@Pickmen, my predictions already incorporate the 3 point shift (National to User and Definition B). Could be good news.
@Tgirlfriend, didnât you say you were good friends with high school principal? Could be a good opportunity to ask whether GCs received an updated SI % table based on actual test takers and post info here.
Key data that would be helpful: SIs corresponding to 99+%, 99%, 97%
@SLparent The guidance counselors at my school are very nice, but itâs not like my GC did anything wrong. All guidance counselors should be communicating with students and parents. The info I provided is all that I have right now, but I encourage everyone to not get too excited because I donât know if the CB managed to mess up yet another report or if somehow nobody at my school scored from 205-207 (unlikely). Hopefully some others can get additional info from guidance counselors and see how it compares!
@Speedy2019 I think your estimates will prove to be more accurate than testmasters because you methodically applied for these adjustments as they came up, like change in def. and national vs. user SI percentiles.
@speedy2019 - - Any chance you could re-post your predictions or identify the comment number (there are so many pages on this thread now!) Thanks.
@destined4harvard, clarification please. So did your GC get a revised table similar to page 11 in the User Guide or was it a report that gave your schools studentâs SI and its associated percentage (with that percentage varying from the page 11 SI table or the percentage varying from a similar report produced earlier)?
I really hate to throw the thread slightly off topic, but can someone provide me with a link to the 2011 PSAT understanding your scores PDF, or just whatever the lowest 99% was listed in that guide. Iâm attempting to plot the Illinois cutoffs vs. the 99% with this new data.
@Speedy2019 I asked my GC for all scores in the 99th percentile after he told me that he received percentiles for student scores last week. He gave me 17 scores ranging from 208-224 and said that 208 was the lowest 99th percentile score, but didnât specify if that was just from my school or overall. Itâs unlikely that nobody scored a 205-207 in my though, considering the fact that 3 kids got a 208. Iâm going to need someone from another school to get their lowest 99th from a GC to see if this holds up.
@PicoLA, page 188 - but as I understand @destined4harvard, post 2872, there may not have been a new SI table, but a new report. So we need more info on this.
@destined4harvard, hey thanks for the info. I know you are trying to be helpful. Still need a clarification though? You said GC got an âupdatedâ list last week. Was there an earlier list in which the âupdatedâ list varied?
I think I saw you posting in the Feb 6th ACT forum. My daughter thought the English section was more difficult than any practice test sheâs taken. She was hoping for 33+, but now thinking maybe more like 31. Scheduled to take it again in April.