There are some relatively high complexity vocabulary words in the rPSAT readings, but many fewer than in the old PSAT. The very high complexity academic vocabulary has been eliminated completely with the elimination of the sentence completions. For example, PSAT October 12, 2011 question 8 is
James Reavis was an opportunist with an arsenal of schemes, for even he ran out of … when his … regarding the fictional Peralta land grant was exposed.
A. remedies … clemency
B. gambits … bellicosity
C. ruses…artifice
D. mishaps…colpability
E. foibles … sycophancy
The October 2015 PSAT’s have few or no words like “foibles”, “sycophancy”, “bellicosity”, or “gambits” – words that were on only ONE old PSAT question. These are words that only someone who is well read is likely to know.
Further, the old PSAT had reading comprehension meaning in context questions about high complexity words. For example, question 41 of the same October 2011 PSAT asks, "In line 53, ‘broach’ most nearly means
A. pierce B. shape C. veer D. bring up E. draw off
It is true that there are some medium to medium-high complexity vocabulary words in the new PSAT passages. But there are no questions about them. No question asks the students what an even medium-high complexity word means.
The new PSAT has reading comprehension meaning in context questions about words that are more common in informal, every day idioms.
PSAT October 14, 2015, Section 1 Question 6: “scouring” most nearly means?
Question 15: “sheer” most nearly means?
Question 16: “regular” most nearly means?
Question 38: “state” most nearly means?
Question 40: “arrangement” most nearly means?
Question 41: “host” most nearly means?
So we have gone from “sycophancy” and “beliicosity” to “sheer” and “scouring”.
This change effectively “narrows the gap” between high-functioning native speakers of English who know words such as “sycophancy” and “bellicosity” and those who have no idea what these words mean, but know the various idiomatic uses of “scouring” and “state”.
However, I am sorry to say that this change seems to me also to introduce test bias against high-functioning internationals. Some high-functioning internationals use English only in academic contexts – at school, or when studying privately – and speak another language when talking informally with their families and friends.
There are plenty of high-functioning internationals who are more likely to know “sycophancy” than “scouring”, because they read widely and deeply in English but do not talk in English about cleaning out the bathtub.