Ugh this is disgusting… Just got my scores. Let me give an overview first.
So last year (sophomore year): I got 68 W, 59 M, and 52 CR total 179/240.
This year, I got: 29/38 W, 34.5/38 M, and 25/38 CR total of 1230/1520 and 177/228. Is this an improvement or a failure ugh… I feel bad.
Anyway, here’s what happened. We went to take the test at this highschool nearby but there was no AC over there literally everyone was sweating. So our proctor (my teacher) reported this issue to CB and he was told by our school principal last week that we might have a retake or something like that. However, we still got our CB scores. So could it still be possible that we do a retake or no? and yea is my score a fail for a junior?
@YoohooAddict, I think you’re in luck. Last year, my daughter’s school goofed up the seating arrangement (test takers took test as round tables!). The students got their scores but were given an alternate route to NMSF. They were allowed to take the SAT as many times as they liked (up to and including June) and submit those scores. Let me tell you, it’s a lot easier to get NMSF this way than the single-sitting PSAT! So maybe you’ll get another opportunity.
@chillkitty I hope I do get another chance… Has this ever happened btw… like anyone do a PSAT retake?
I learned a little info today - per report to GCs, the National mean score for juniors was 1010 & for NY it was 968.
If I read the tables right the national mean of 1010 on the 2015 test concords to an SI of 140 per the 2014 report & a 140 was the 49%ile. The national mean in the 2014 report was 141.9 so the mean seems to have gone down a little. Not sure what if anything we can estimate based on this though. Thoughts from our statisticians? 
Here’s a thought: how can the national mean be 1010 if on page 7 it says 969 (representative) and 987 (user)?
@YoohooAddict, do you know if the proctor’s reporting got the PSAT scores disqualified? That’s what is important to determine if you can take the SAT as an alternate route to National Merit. Last year, my daughter’s school’s scores were contested because the proctor had told the students that they had 30 minutes for a section of the test, but the test only allowed for 25 minutes. Time was called at the 25 minute mark, which upset some students who thought they still had time. College Board ruled that the scores would stand because the students were allotted the correct amount of time. However, the scores were ultimately disqualified because the school had the students take the test in the school cafeteria at round lunch tables. Apparently there are strict guidelines about seating that the school violated. Anyway, you need to find out how College Board ruled on your proctor’s complaint.
@Mamelot – please share link of what you are referring to - is that National Representative Sample? Maybe GCs are getting actual user data & means? We’ll know a bit more when the state reports come out but it would be great if GCs could share their reports with families - without giving student identify info of course.
Wouldn’t a 987 (user) mean and a 1010 (actual) mean seem to indicate that the user study is not out in left field?
@Pickmen the 50,000 is pretty much fixed. The 34,000 vs. 16,000 fluctuates a little because NMSC chooses the SI tat which the state’s allocation is most closely filled (meaning it can be a bit above or below).
Here’s the Official Guide for the Class of 2017:
@CA1543 the link would be to the Understanding Scores - I just took the numbers from page 7 and cited mean scores for both representative and user.
@CA1543 Is the median listed as well as the mean?
Also - a 1010 is 56th percentile (user) on this year’s charts. 56th percentile on the published SI chart is between 151 and 152. So last year’s mean SI was a 141.9, and this year it’s a 151.5?
@DoyleB – I wish I could report more. I think parents & students should approach their GC’s and ask for as much info as they can get - the College Board webinar said the GCs can customize reports and I thought the could get some sense of the SI percentiles too - I am asking about that but don’t want to be a LOUD squeaky wheel - would be great if more info could be gather by others. Perhaps the CB is suggesting what GCs share with their families - or could do so if we asked the CB. The state summary reports should be out soon too.
@Willis1313, this was the student I was remembering. I’m not sure about actual established addresses though.
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/18784342/#Comment_18784342
@LivinProof wrote: “Wouldn’t a 987 (user) mean and a 1010 (actual) mean seem to indicate that the user study is not out in left field?”
Not really. A 23 point difference is fairly significant. 987 is about the 52nd percentile; 1010 is the 56th. It means the actual test takers outperformed the reference population by a fair amount. And since the percentile tables were built using the reference population, those tables will yield percentiles that are higher than the actual numbers.
The big question is what is the difference actual vs. reference at the upper tail of the distribution. Not sure the mean information can help us there - can it?
Ooh, more predictions are coming out! Prepscholar just updated their cutoff predictions (and I’m pretty sure Allen is trustworthy and helped to crank out the numbers). Overall, Prepscholar’s predictions looks like Testmasters’ predictions (they also used the concordance tables, so no surprise there), however the states with the usual lower cutoffs have a lower prediction than that of Testmasters. What do you guys think?
Here is the link:
http://blog.prepscholar.com/national-merit-scholarship-cutoff-2015-2016
I don’t like these, since he is predicting 222 in DC, and we need 221
216 for MN. Definitely based on the concordance tables.
DC and NJ are showing 224 for last year which is wrong, that cutoff was 225.
Honestly, I don’t think prepscholar spent much time on this… They are basically using the concordance only. Not a lot of details in methodology or “deep thoughts” on the numbers. The post is mostly focused on next year’s testers and how to study. (Which is testscholars line of business, of course)
@suzyQ7 I noticed the errors, too. Ohio was a 215 last year. Would you say that if the correct cutoffs from last year were posted that the Prepscholar’s predictions would be higher?