<p>Do you think that NM is re-configuring the graduation rates somehow? It seems unlikely that states like NY, TX, and CA have these big spikes over the period of one year, or does it? Looking at some of the numbers, they don't seem (to me) to support these big increases. I know more people are prepping for the test, but I would expect a gradual increase because of that. Any thoughts?</p>
<p>In another thread, consensus favored mom2ck’s theory: tough economic times, so families with high-achieving kids are taking the PSAT very seriously, and they’re studying diligently to seize the opportunity. NY, CA and Tex are three big states with plenty of high achievers.</p>
<p>But as for NM somehow creeping in there and manipulating the actual state graduation rates, … well that’s paranoid conspiracy theory of a high degree, not quite at the 9/11 truther or CIA shot Kennedy levels, but close! Maybe above bigfoot but less than UFO.</p>
<p>I think the economy has caused families to encourage their kids to do well on that exam…practicing, etc.</p>
<p>And…as kids are taking the SAT during the early years…as young as frosh/soph…that also prepares them for the test. </p>
<p>Even taking the SAT a week before the PSAT can help a kid do better.</p>
<p>My daughter is one of those m2ck is describing. I learned about NM on CC and the large scholarships available for finalists. My daughter went through every past PSAT available and the Blue Book using the Xiggi method. She went up 40 points from her first practice test to her final score, putting her well above the TN cut-off. Without the studying she might have made it, but the studying guaranteed it. She will most likely attend Alabama next year with the large scholarship. I bet there are more kids who studied for it than previous Juniors because of the economy.</p>
<p>I think in the Parent Cafe thread a short time ago, there was a mention of Calif people losing a ton in equity over the last few years. In the past, people have used their equity to help pay for college costs. With that source gone, there are people looking for other sources of money…and not just Calif families. </p>
<p>It could also be a sign of the tuition bubble bursting. </p>
<p>There have been posts from families who committed/paid too much for Child #1’s college costs and they can’t pay for Child #2’s college costs.</p>
<p>In TX, a full ride and guranteed admission to UT may have had something to do with it. It was an awesome way to attend one of the best schools in the country. I am guessing, the top 8% kids, who usually attend probably worked hard to get the free ride. Unfortunately, UT has withdrawn from the NM program now, so it will be interesting to see if the increase in scores sticks over the next few years.</p>
<p>I looked at the numbers for Tennessee and they certainly seem to support an increase in score. But in CA, the numbers in the range from 75-80 increased 51 and the 70-74 decreased 541. This doesn’t seem to support a 2 point increase.</p>
<p>I certainly didn’t mean to imply there was a conspiracy on the part of NM as far as graduation rates, lol.</p>
<p>This cycle of kids would have (or at least should have) known National Merit was gone at UT at the time they took the test. I know mine did.</p>
<p>In some of the states, it is easy to look at the data and see the reason for the increase. There are a bunch of reasons the cutoff scores can go up.</p>
<ol>
<li>Kids are performing better.</li>
<li>A big jump in test participation.</li>
<li>A states number of NMSF slots goes down because it’s graduation class is smaller in comparision the rest of the nation as compared to previous years.</li>
</ol>
<p>You can make a pretty educated guess on most of the states based on these 3 factors, but there are a few states where it’s more difficult to understand the increase.</p>
<p>Steve, as rising sophomores, didnt these kids think that UT would give them guaranteed admission and a free ride for being NMFs? A&M could be a factor too. Both schools have improved national rankings.</p>
<p>The Austin American-Statesman carried the story on 9/2/2009. The PSAT that determined this year’s winners was taken in October 2010. I don’t see any connection to UT here.</p>
<p>I don’t think we have much in the way of evidence yet, but I tend to agree with the speculation that this is is the result of the state of the economy. Student loan debt used to be seen as “good debt.” Lately, many are reconsidering that and taking steps to reduce the cost of higher education.</p>
<p>UT withdrew from the National Merit program in 2009 – so even the Texas kids who are current college freshman knew before taking their junior year PSAT that they wouldn’t be getting any benefit from UT if they made semifinalist – so prospects for a full ride from UT definitely weren’t motivating the current crop of NMSF seniors at the time that they were prepping for the test. (And I may be wrong, but I think that Texas never gave a full ride – I think that it was just a couple thousand a year. A&M, in contrast, often comes up with a package that equates to at least full tuition for NMFs – but most of their scholarship funding isn’t tied explicitly to being a NMF.) </p>
<p>UT really doesn’t do much in the way of merit scholarships for anyone – NMF or otherwise. My daughter, who was a NMF with loads of other achievements, didn’t get a cent of scholarship money from Texas though she got large merit from every other school to which she applied.</p>
<p>a full ride and guranteed admission to UT may have had something to do with it. It was an awesome way to attend one of the best schools in the country.</p>
<p>I don’t think UT ever gave a “free ride”…if it did, it was a long time ago. We began looking at NMF scholarships in 2005 and UT wasn’t offering a free ride then.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks for clarifying on UT. I see Texas A&M actually guarantees admission and a generous merit scholarship to NMFs:</p>
<p><a href=“Home - SFAID”>Home - SFAID;
<p>Even Texas A&M has cut their “guaranteed” scholarship to NMF by almost half since my son received the award as an entering freshman in fall of 2010. It is probably a result of more NMF heading their way after UT did away with theirs, as well as state funding cuts across the board. Higher scores, lower scholarships…</p>
<p>Personally, everyone I know including many on here simply thought this year’s test was easier (at least Wednesday’s). Last October they were talking about how there would be a harsh curve and that seemed to hold when results came in Dec. So, if there were more perfect or almost perfect scores, that means only higher scores would fill in the rest of their 16,000 slots.</p>
<p>I’m not surprised at all and fully expected this. It merely confirms all the talk about the test.</p>
<p>With these big increases why do you think the Commended cut off stayed about the same as usual?</p>
<p>The fact that the test was “easier” should not be a factor. All these tests are curved based on their difficulty. On both days, the curve for math was -1 = 76.</p>
<p>But you can’t curve perfect. If there were more perfect scores than usual that skews the results. Since the curve was so harsh that a -1 = 76, that leads me to believe there were plenty of those too. What were they supposed to do? Make -1 = 72 just so lower scores would be the cut off point?</p>
<p>I know they like a perfect bell curve, but I think they simply had more high scores than they could curve down to make the numbers “normal.” It totally matches what I heard about the test from multiple sources. Many kids do multiple practice tests and to a person, they all told me this test was easier than any of their practice tests. Every year kids do multiple practice tests. That hasn’t changed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wider pool with mistakes - easier to curve with a harsh curve. It’s only the top that is very difficult to curve as there were few mistakes on this test.</p>