I see that the questions are online, but where can we find the answers?
The answers and the scoring guidelines aren’t posted until late July/early August. I’m sure someone will have an unofficial version soon.
Several unofficial answers have been posted:
https://apcomputersciencetutoring.com/exam-review/category/exam-answers/2016/
the more I look at the frq and unofficial answers, the more I think I messed up. welp
@puretruth omg same they look so unfamiliar LOL i don’t think i wrote anything like that
Any speculation on the curve for a 5? Out of 80?
On question 2 part c instead when they made the array list can we just make a list instead?
@jxw198 probably 60/80 I think the most recently released exam’s curve was a 62 or something like that and probably 2 lower this year bc of harder FRQ’s
Btw, was Card an interface being implemented by Deck. And IS hand A Deck? (MCQs)
Yup, I only labeled the ones that were supposed to be labeled.
I don’t think so as you can’t instantiate a list object (its an interface).
Do you guys know how the AP Comp Sci will be scaled / curved? I know some of you are saying it might be 60/80 but how does CollegeBoard come up with that number? Because it seems like a lot of people are saying that the FRQ was difficult and I definitely thought it was very difficult. Even some of the best programmers in my class found the FRQ to be very difficult. If that is the case, then how will CollegeBoard determine the composite score for a 5?
@kinddestiny I’m not sure how the other guys know but here’s my idea:
In the past there were some ap exams that were very difficult (similar to ours or even harder) and so they scaled the grading down. For example if a 4 is a 47/80 it was scaled to a 45/80 before. It’s Not gonna be much but if they do scale it’s still gonna be very helpful. A 3 and a 4 is a very big difference and same with a 5 and a 4. Hopefully they do the same and scale it down even a point this year so they can help those ( like me) that struggled on the frq.
I’ll talk in general terms about how the scores are set. I don’t know the specific details, because I’m not involved with them (see below).
So, the goal of ETS (the people in charge of the test) is to set the score cutoffs in a way that a 5 on this year’s exam is equivalent to a 5 on last year’s exam. Of course, that’s difficult to do, because the FRQs are completely new every year. Which is why ETS employs a bunch of statisticians to help with setting those lines.
Things that the statisticians take into account when they set the lines:
- Scores on the multiple choice portion. One reason that you're never allowed to discuss the multiple choice questions is that a few of them are re-used from year to year. This allows the statisticians to compare results from previous years to this year and say "gee, everyone who got questions 8 and 15 right still struggled on Q3, and they didn't struggle on Q3 last year, so maybe Q3 was harder this year".
- Correlations between your multiple choice portion and your FRQ portion this year. If there are certain multiple choice questions that 5s get but 4s don't, ETS can look at how those students did on the FRQs as some evidence of where the 4/5 cutoff line might be on those questions.
- Reports from teachers about the perceived difficulty of the question compared to previous years. Believe me, lots of people are talking about this exam online right now --- students and teachers alike --- and those ideas will be taken into account.
- Reports from the Reading itself. I've been a reader for 10 years, and you never know how a question will end up scoring until you get there and receive the rubric and get to work on real exams. Questions that we think are hard sometimes end up scoring really high; questions we think are easy sometimes end up scoring really low. We gather reports from readers and leaders at the Reading and throw them into the mix.
All of this analysis goes into the magic spreadsheets of the ETS statisticians, with some guidance from leaders in APCS, and the lines get set. But those lines aren’t set until after all the scoring is done and all the readers have gone home. (That’s somewhat intentional, I think; having the cutoffs decided by folks who weren’t involved in the reading removes some forms of bias.)
Part 1b was ridiculous. Although it was a one-liner, no one in my school had been taught how to call a static method from a subclass, and in what context to do so. It was not my Barron’s textbook OR my class textbook, which I found absurd, especially since the frq’s should test key concepts, not obscure details.
My class took the 2015 MC and FRQ as practice. The boundary for getting a 4 was from 44-61 and 5 was 61-80.
Do you guys think that they will lower the boundary for getting a 4 to like a 42 or 43?? I am desperately hanging on the border of a 3 / 4
@aabbccmoneysing really? The boundary was a 44 for a 4 last year?? I looked at the Barrons book and multiple wepsites online and they all said the boundary for a 4 was a 47ish. Was it really a 44? Cuz if it was then i have a much higher chance of a good score
It really does not matter what the curve was LY. This year’s curve may or may not be close to last year’s, but nobody here knows, and it is what it is anyway.
@skieurope oh yeah I understand. After taking the test I feel like the scale should be lowered 1 or 2 points because of how much harder the frq was than last year. The mc was a little easier and similar but still wasn’t enough to outweigh the difficulty of the frq. Did you take it? Do u think it the curve should be a little higher? I’m just curious what other people think and if I’m the only one who thinks this test was really hard and should be curved more than last year
@steve123234 No, I’m a college freshman, and never took APCS in HS, so I have no skin in this game. I just get amused by people who try to analyze score cutoffs, like it will have any effect on reality. 