New SAT scores vs PSAT scores?

<p>multiplied PSAT*10 to calculate variance from SAT</p>

<pre><code>PSAT SAT Variance
176 1860 100
178 1860 80
179 1990 200
180 1930 130
191 2260 350
191 2330 420
192 2110 190
194 2110 170
195 2120 170
197 1930 -40
197 2130 160
201 2290 280
202 2190 170
202 2020 0
205 1930 -120
206 2300 240
206 2130 70
210 1960 -140
211 2240 130
212 2220 100
213 2200 70
215 2260 110
215 2120 -30
215 2150 0
215 2390 240
215 2140 -10
216 2190 30
217 2310 140
218 2340 160
219 2210 20
219 2150 -40
221 2340 130
222 2280 60
222 2250 30
224 2250 10
225 2300 50
225 2260 10
227 2140 -130
227 2280 10
227 2310 40
230 2280 -20
231 2390 80
232 2250 -70
233 2320 -10
233 2340 10
235 2230 -120
240 2400 0
</code></pre>

<p>Mean 212 2192 75</p>

<p>Observations still hold:

  • mean variance is 75, that is SAT score is on average 75 points better than PSAT score (after PSAT is adjusted by one order of magnitude)
  • 3:1 improvers to “de-provers”; 33 with SAT scores higher than PSAT, 11 with SAT scores lower than PSAT, and 3 status quo.
  • much more improvement potential at the lower end of the reported PSATs; for instance, reported scores with PSAT <200 averaged 175 point SAT improvement
  • more potiential to regress on SATs with higher starting PSATs; for instance, reported scores with PSAT >225 averaged 21 point decrease (2400 scale) on the SAT</p>

<p>A scatter plot says it all, but unfortunately can’t copy one in.</p>

<p>I know that SATs are not the most important thing, but I still wanted to decently. I got a 196 on the PSAT and a 2090 on the SAT. I guess this is not terrible, but it is certainly not where i wanted to be after the practice that i did. Everyone here did rather well, so can anyone give me some study tips? Thanks</p>

<p>hello32 - honestly, I have no idea how I got a 2390. However, between the PSAT and SAT, I did take a practice test each week, which def. helped just in learning the test. Good luck!</p>

<p>Each tick mark is 10 SAT points;
PSAT on Y axis, lowest on top;
Variance to SAT score marked by an “x”, negative on left side of PSAT “axis” and positive on right side of axis;
Accent (`) marks used to scale;
Did not mark 3 data sets where PSAT*10=SAT (Status quo)

neg SAT Var`````PSAT````positive SAT Var        
``````````````  175 
``````````````  176 `````````x
``````````````  177 
``````````````  178 ```````x
``````````````  179 ```````````````````x
``````````````  180 ````````````x
``````````````  181 
``````````````  182 
``````````````  183 
``````````````  184 
``````````````  185 
``````````````  186 
``````````````  187 
``````````````  188 
``````````````  189 
``````````````  190 
``````````````  191 ``````````````````````````````````x``````x
``````````````  192 ``````````````````x
``````````````  193 
``````````````  194 ````````````````x
``````````````  195 ````````````````x
``````````````  196 

x``` 197x 198 199 200 201``````x `````````````` 202 ````````````````x `````````````` 203 `````````````` 204 `` x``````````` 205 `````````````` 206 ``````xx 207 208 209 x````````````` 210 211 x 212x 213 ``````x 214 x`x 215</code><code>x</code><code>x </code><code>216 ``x 217 218x x``` 219 `x </code><code>220 </code><code>221</code><code>x </code><code>222 ``x``x 223 224 x 225 x```x 226 ` x</code><code>227 x``x 228 229 x` 230 </code><code>231</code><code>x </code><code>x</code> 232 <code>x 233 x </code><code>234 </code><code>x</code><code>235 </code><code>236 </code><code>237 </code><code>238 </code><code>239 </code>```` 240</p>

<p>This helps me visualize the proportion of positive versus negative variances, as well as their position on the PSAT scale, i.e., high variances in the 175 to 200 PSAT range.</p>

<p>223…220…2160. Chronological order. How…sad.</p>

<p>2190 vs. 220
and whats worse is that my math/verbal combined this time was only 1420 (AAHH!!) when I took the old sat I on the last time it was offered i got a 1490
i TOTALLY deproved
only writing went up by 10 points</p>

<p>Wow, excellent work Papa Chicken!</p>

<p>At the risk of over-analysis, here are some other conclusions regarding the GROUP of data (n=first 47 reported).</p>

<p>In plotting the variances, one can observe a discernably larger positive variance at the lower PSAT values than the higher PSAT values. Fitting a least-squared line to the variances between 190 and 240 shows a 5 to 6 point drop in variance for every PSAT point, meaning for the GROUP of data overall, one can expect SAT score improvements to drop 50 to 60 points for every increase of 10 PSAT points within the 190-240 PSAT range. The fit is not so great statistically, but nevertheless, a trend is apparent. Other take-aways from the fit line: the GROUP showed a positive variance of 200 SAT points at 190 on the PSAT, a negative variance of about 75 SAT points at 240 on the PSAT, and no variance (i.e., the fit line crossed 0 variance) between 225 and 230 PSAT.</p>

<p>This mearly substantiates the age-old CC point (and an obvious one) that there is more potential to improve from PSAT scores when starting lower. What I find also interesting is that there is substantial potential for “de-provement”, especially with PSAT scores greater than 225.</p>

<p>When looking at the INDIVIDUAL scatter, no simple GROUP statistics like these can predict INDIVIDUAL correlations between PSAT and SAT. That is, many plotted variance points are considerably distant from the fit line. Undoubtedly, other factors not represented in the GROUP analysis are at play, such as pre-test practice, condition the day of the test, variations in each test, and many more also noted throughout CC. The hard lesson here is that there is “de-provement” potential starting from any PSAT score, but there is also plenty of potential to improve on lower scores or to hold good ones.</p>

<p>Wow. You’re so awesome papa chicken</p>

<p>or he just has no life</p>

<p>jq722… why u makin fun of papa chicken, we’re posting on an sat board… we probably don’t have lives…</p>

<p>I don’t have a life. And I find it really interesting what he’s posted.</p>

<p>2220 (i love my score but it now seems billions less than your scores lol) </p>

<p>v. </p>

<p>205psat </p>

<p>LOL, but i got 800-80 math (all i care about)</p>

<p>Yea, jq722, if he/she is willing to do this (inpart for you as well), just let him do it… its helping people understand things that could be confusing to them about their future. </p>

<p>And I would like to think that I have a life… </p>

<p>:)</p>

<p>jq722-- you would be correct; as a parent by definition I have no life.</p>

<p>I must admit that CC is somewhat addictive and I enjoy all of the spirited chatter…goodluck in Annapolis…PC</p>

<p>Thanks Papa Chicken! How wonderful to make order out of chaos.</p>

<p>PSAT: 201
SAT: 2100</p>

<p>I’ll definitely be re-taking, probably in October.</p>

<p>PSAT: 203
SAT: 2140</p>

<p>Retake in May, w00t</p>

<p>PSAT: 187
SAT:2070</p>

<p>Retake in June.</p>

<p>Pulled in a few PSAT-SAT pairs from another PSAT/SAT correlation thread to make 60 total data sets.</p>

<pre><code>PSAT SAT Variance
176 1860 100
178 1860 80
179 1990 200
180 1930 130
187 2070 200
191 2260 350
191 2330 420
192 2110 190
194 2110 170
195 2120 170
196 2090 130
197 1930 -40
197 2130 160
201 2290 280
201 2100 90
202 2190 170
202 2020 0
203 2140 110
204 2320 280
205 1930 -120
205 2220 170
206 2300 240
206 2130 70
210 1960 -140
211 2240 130
212 2220 100
213 2200 70
213 2020 -110
214 2120 -20
214 2100 -40
214 2330 190
215 2260 110
215 2120 -30
215 2150 0
215 2390 240
215 2140 -10
216 2190 30
217 2310 140
218 2340 160
219 2210 20
219 2150 -40
220 2160 -40
220 2190 -10
220 2350 150
221 2340 130
222 2280 60
222 2250 30
224 2250 10
225 2300 50
225 2260 10
227 2140 -130
227 2280 10
227 2310 40
230 2280 -20
231 2390 80
232 2250 -70
233 2320 -10
233 2340 10
235 2230 -120
240 2400 0
</code></pre>

<p>Mean 211 2187 76</p>

<ul>
<li>patterns still hold, with ~+75 points on average added from PSAT to SAT.</li>
<li>for those that lost points from PSAT to SAT, average drop was 60 points.</li>
<li>for those that increased points from PSAT to SAT, avg increase was ~135.</li>
<li>one other note: these scores are obviously biased very high (i.e., PSAT & SAT scores are in the top few percentiles), hence, one should be leary of extrapolating to lower ranges.</li>
</ul>

<p>Thanks to all for self-reporting.</p>