I would guess 215 for NJ. Just a notch above the start of the 99+ SI percentile range…which is where the NJ cutoff of 225 was last year.
CB say "User group percentiles are derived via a research study sample of U.S. students in the student’s grade, weighted to represent students in that grade (10th or 11th) who typically take the PSAT/NMSQT. " The user percentiles aren’t from all the students who actually took the test this year, as people would assume and as the name implies. They don’t say whether these numbers come from a sample of this year’s students or from students who took the PSAT last year as an experimental section or from a small study group who took the PSAT on another day. But what is wrong with just reporting the percentiles for the entire group of students who took the test this year? What am I missing here?
I am new to this. Why do they wait until October to announce the cutoff? Why is this a National Merit when the scores are state to state. I never knew that until recently. So my child who would be a NMSF in almost every state (score deep into the 99th percentile) probably won’t be b/c we live in one of the very top states. It is bizarre. If the kid does as well on the SAT, I will be happy. On another note, if you did well on PSAT should you stick with SAT or consider ACT. Clearly, we are a bit behind on our research and testing plan.
Whether or not to take the ACT is something we are weighing as well. DS did no prep whatsoever for the Dec SAT and while he did well, he should really attempt to do a bit better if he did indeed make the cutoff. This is where I wish we didn’t have to wait so long to know for sure about SM. I’m a little iffy on taking the new SAT until they’ve had a couple and worked out any issues but if he takes it in the fall it means missing a xc meet. His current SAT is sufficient for the highest merit award at his intended university but I worry it won’t be high enough for finalist.
@CA1523, that crucial bulletpoint does seem to be missing from page 11, doesn’t it. It’s the most important table in the entire report and they are a bit fuzzy on what “Selection Index Percentile 11th Grade Only” means exactly. Three possibilities: Representative, User, or actual 2015 11th grade test takers. They’d catch it if those percentiles changed though. Too many have already noticed that they weren’t marked “Preliminary” LOL.
@beaglemom – I feel your pain…we live in Virginia…traditionally high cutoff. I had my first child take both SAT and ACT since he “likes” test taking and he refused to prep! He had an amazing score on the ACT…if I had known how well he would do, I wouldn’t have had him take the SAT but he did that first. If you can have him take a sample ACT test, you might be able to figure out which test is “his” test! Some kids do well on both but my kid was clearly better at the ACT.
He ended up as a commended student on the PSAT with a score just south of 220.
@mathyone I agree with you. I don’t understand why, once you’ve determined the section cutoffs, you can’t take the total SIs and rank them. Out of all of this data, that seems like it would be the easiest computer program, but I’m sure there is a reason.
I could be wrong, but it’s hard for me to believe that they would take a 214 score which is 99+ (99.5%) and drop it down to 98%. Testmasters is predicting LA to be 214. They are typically in the 98%. So, your percentile table would make a huge rise for 99+ from 214 to 220, the predicted DC cutoff. The total score percentiles may not change as much, but the percentile section scores would have to change some.
It was probably, I’m guessing, more of a priority to get scores and percentages out. The concordance can be used by students who took the old SAT to determine if they would be better off taking the new. It’s too late to register for the February test so students who got scores on the new PSAT and thought “Oh, I should take the old one” can no longer register.
So, the next important use for concordance isn’t until the Fall, when college admissions officers are trying to reconcile a score from the Fall SAT to a score from the Spring SAT. So, I’m guessing the concordance will have to change because how do you go from a 214 which is PSAT 2014 99.5+ = 2250 (225*10) to a 2120 (highest 98th percentile on 2014.
@micgeaux - if you want to just use the percentiles, see the table in my post:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/19181229/#Comment_19181229
I guess the only other caveat to all of this is that we are assuming states will behave the same. In other words, will LA now increase into the 99 percentile. Will West Virginia still hover around the commended 97%? I’m guessing yes.
I’m looking forward to the next big piece of data: The State Summary Reports. Is there anything before then that we can be expecting from College Board?
In CA, around 2,000 junior become NMSF. What happens if there’s hundreds of testtakers have the same cutoff score? How do they decide who gets and who doesn’t get the NMSF?
If that’s the case, that’s when they fine tune the scores by raising the cut a point or two, until they reach their desired number of semi-finalists. Last year we had a theory that the larger states maybe took turns being decision makers to keep the numbers approximately where they wanted them overall.
Thinmints. Thank you. Clearly, same boat on PSAT - I think it will be missed by a point/one question. I think I will have him do both too and go from there. Surprised he did so well on PSAT and then better on ACT than SAT. How is that?
@bdragon They raise the cutoff by one point or lower it by one. The do not cut in the middle of a score.
Thinmints - I meant I am surprised because I have heard that kids who do well on PSAT tend to do well (and slightly better on SAT).
FYI, I posted a somewhat long separate post about percentiles vs concordance tables:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-act-tests-test-preparation/1852040-psat-nmsf-cutoffs-concordance-tables-vs-percentiles.html
I could have posted it in this thread, but it’s kindof long, and - assuming it’s correct - it’s important.
@payn4ward, @PAMom21 If in CA there are say about 100 student each who have SI or 219,220,221, and assume with SI of 220 score the no. of students would exceed/fall short of the qty of scholarship that California can claim based on total Junior students in CA. Under such situation how can that be solved only by making the SI to 221 or 219, I am assuming the qty of scholarship is fixed for CA. The same situation would have occurred in prior years too, how does that get resolved
That’s where the multi-state theory comes in. CA takes the hit one year, TX another, etc. Who really knows!
@beaglemom – he did the same or a little worse on the SAT (I think the PSAT was around 218 or 219. I don’t remember the SAT score but think it was just under 2200. However, on the ACT, he got a 35 composite which is almost a perfect score. If I had known that up front, I would have directed him to only take the ACT. As it turns out, our county prints all of your standardized test scores on your transcript whether you ask for it or not so both of his scores were
printed on his transcript. I had to get special permission to remove the SAT scores as I didn’t want them showing up next to the far better ACT score. It took me about three weeks and numerous phone calls to get this done.
What state are you in?
So, they couldn’t change their methodology and say: “OK, for CA anyone with a SI of 220 and a Math subject score of 750 is in!”? They could really fine-tune that way. 