Worried about my D’s 219 now. It would suck for her to miss it by 1 point. I think a 220 is a real possibility.
@kikidee9 …someone called and that is what they were told by NM.
Copied from other thread.
Today at 1:26 pm
I just called the NMSC. Commended this year is a 209.
Flag Like 1Helpful Reply Share on Facebook
thanks!
@dallaspiano …where are you at? What do you think about this?
Hi Art,
We are in Texas with 221 SI score for Class of 2017. Just heard the NMSC score to be a 209. Do you think Texas will go above a 221?
Reply
Art Sawyer says:
April 5, 2016 at 2:05 pm
Teresa,
I think 221 comes in safely above the Texas cutoff — even being cautious. Testmasters provided some useful data from the Houston area that helps establish a cap for Texas scores. Unlikely that Texas cutoff would even get to 220.
209 - Commended. Sound right?
If true, then National Mean should be 174 and SD 18.3, why did CB post 148(M) and 26 (SD)? CB screwed up whole nation?
Let’s hope it’s wrong! 
Definitely. it is wrong
If 209 commended, then with Total score we will have ~36000 Commended from 1430 to 1490 and 16000 NMSF for score lots 1500, 1510, 1520. IOW we have at least 3000 perfect scorers at max scores 1520. 4000 at 1510 and 9000 at 1490. Where are they?
@dallaspiano, how did you turn an SI of 209 into a total score of 1430 - 1490?
Edit/Update: I see what you did: You assigned a total score of 1430 to the 209. But 209 also corresponds to a total score as low as 1330. Perhaps your assumption about what total score is implied by that 209 is too high?
@Mamelot,
Your assumption may be another way. I based on 1,724,416 test takers (2015) and from NMSC annual report (13-14)
that we had 36946 Commended and 16277 NMSF or a~53000 first stage qualifier or 3.07% (normal 3% selected every years) then translated into percentile 97. Use %tile to estimate at 1430.
@dallaspiano I agree that 1.7 million testers, 37,000 commended, and 16,000 NMSFs are reasonable numbers. And they are based on fact. What I question is your view that a 1430 total score should represent an SI of 209. A 209 will result from a total score ranging from 1330 - 1420, with a whole bunch of those data points likely to be around the midpoint of 1380.
So if we assume that the average total score of a commended student is 1380 or higher, then by using your analysis we see those 16,000 NM kids beginning in the mid-1400’s or so, not low 1500’s. (In reality, SF cut-offs vary by state and so won’t exactly correspond to national percentiles. But your methodology should be a good approximation as long as the mean and SD are correct).
As it turns out, a 1380 total score concords to a 202 (previous test) via the preliminary concordance tables. That can’t be ignored because it suggests that last year’s commended score of 202 should be about a 207 or 208 this year. So that 209 isn’t out of the ballpark.
@Mamelot, refer back #226
You are right “methodology should be a good approximation as long as the mean and SD are correct).”
CB data - M 148, SD 26, SI 209 Commended - conflicts very much with top 53K. At this point, I just say CB data (in provided 2015 data table) not consistent
Rght now 10:24AM TX time, have not heard any 209 (calls to NM), strange?
@dallaspiano True Believers are stung! Commended 209 is only 1 point less than the worst case scenario. 
Yesterday I called NMSC myself and 209 is what they confirmed.
Bad…, whole US got screwed by published CB data. Thank @JAMCAFE
I just called on 4/6. 209 is confirmed as Commended.
Another way to hope for (not sure but for me - posted before but rejected by many CC posters)
209 may be considered as First Stage qualifiers (top 53K test takers since 209 associated with TS 1330)
Second stage, NM will use Total Score to select NMSF… cross my fingers. Hallelujah.
Has there been any indication whatsoever that your theory could be correct? I’ve seen no indication that total score would be used this year. It wouldn’t surprise me if they did in the future but changing the goal posts at this point would be egregious even by CB standards.
@dallaspiano …So what you are saying is instead of them using the SI index number they would use the 1460 number?
Absolutely not going to happen.