<p>GC says CA cutoff = 221. 2 pt raise from last year 
didn’t make</p>
<p>The “99” by 2200 on the chart means the score is better than 99% of the scores, meaning it is in the top 1%.</p>
<p>The only stipulation on that is that they are rounding up at 98.5. If they didn’t round, the actual top 2 percent starts at 2160 and the actual top 1% starts at 2240.</p>
<p>So in that respect, you are correct. That’s just not how the report reads.</p>
<p>^ Not to split hairs, but 2200 has 98, top 2% on chart.</p>
<p>I am starting to get a bad feeling about VA. I was hoping the states with traditionally highers scores wouldn’t show the same increases as these other states, but the 2 point increase in California gives me a bad feeling.</p>
<p>You are right, my bad. I was reading the 2210 line. I am getting old.</p>
<p>^ I’m with you. I had to get my reading glasses to see the chart.</p>
<p>S missed by a few points in Ohio. Still chances for other scholarships.</p>
<p>I think one of the reasons why Calif experienced such a jump is because it has been hit so hard with the economy that families pressured their kids to practice for this test because they need scholarship money and big scholarship school options.</p>
<p>Does anyone know the cut off in NY ? Dying to know.</p>
<p>lake42ks, yes, I’ve noticed the super competitive trend in my grade. The 2012ers are so much more accomplished and well-rounded (not to mention intellectually smarter) than any other grade in the school. But I’m not sure if this trend applies everywhere in the nation? I also wouldn’t think the 2012ers are competitive to the extent that the cutoff scores would go up by 4 points in some states - that’s too much.</p>
<p>There doesn’t seem to be anything significant in the numbers to warrant a 2 point jump in CA. The only thing that would make sense, is if they reduced the # of SF in the state.</p>
<p>Even though Hurricane Katrina happened in 2005, they didn’t start reducing the number of SF in the state of LA until the Class of 2010 (it went from 255 to 229). In 2011 it went from 229 to 186. I realize that it probably took some time for them to finally figure out how many permanently left the state. Maybe the same thing is happening to states like AZ and CA due to the economy.</p>
<p>Since the previously-posted cutoff for TX was questioned in post #262, I added a confirmation of the original (post #267).</p>
<hr>
<p>PLEASE DON’T FREAK OUT! Check the explanation of the notation in the first post. When you see, for instance, AZ <= 219, that means that Arizona’s cutoff is no higher than 219. This comes from a report like, “I live in Arizona, made a 219, and got my letter.” When you see, for instance, TX > 216, that means that Texas’ cutoff is higher than 216. This comes from a report like, “I live in Texas, made a 216, and didn’t make it.”</p>
<hr>
<p>Remaining states that need to be finalized:
AK, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, ID, IN, IA, KY, LA,
ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND,
OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY</p>
<p>Updating CA</p>
<p>**AL = 211<a href=“post%20#281,%20per%20NMSC”>/b</a>
AK = ?
**AZ = 213<a href=“post%20#126/#132,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
AR = ?
**CA = 221<a href=“post%20#321,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
CO = ?
CT = ?
DE = ?
DC = ?
**FL = 214<a href=“post%20#107,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
GA <= 221 (post #182)
**HI = 216<a href=“post%20#225,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
ID = ?
**IL = 216<a href=“post%20#110,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
**IN = 214<a href=“post%20#147,%20#193,%20established%20by%20score%20comparison”>/b</a>
IA = ?
**KS = 214<a href=“post%20#87,%20per%20principal”>/b</a>
KY > 211 (post #111)
LA <= 216 (post #101)
ME = ?
MD = ?
MA <= 228 (post #143)
MI = ?
MN = ?
**MS = 205<a href=“post%20#192,%20NMSC”>/b</a>
MO = ?
MT <= 209 (post #90)
NE <= 215 (post #10)
NV <= 211 (post #250)
NH = ?
NJ = ?
**NM = 210<a href=“post%20#302,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
NY > 217 (post #265)
NC <= 217 (post #288)
ND = ?
**OH = 214<a href=“post%20#28,%20established%20by%20score%20comparison”>/b</a>
**OK = 209<a href=“post%20#106,%20NMSC”>/b</a>
OR = ?
PA <= 215 (post #224)
RI = ?
SC = ?
SD = ?
TN = ?
**TX = 219<a href=“post%20#46,%20per%20principal;%20post%20#267,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
UT = ?
VT = ?
VA = ?
WA = ?
WV = ?
WI <= 209 (post #166, #191)
WY = ?</p>
<p>10(?) Boarding school regions
No scores reported yet.
These usually are set to be equal to the highest cut-off score among the individual states in the region.</p>
<p>Internationals=?
This usually is set to be equal to the highest cut-off score among all the individual states.</p>
<p>Commended (national cutoff) = 202 (Class of 2012 Notification Letters - College Confidential)
Any person with a score equal to or higher than this cutoff who is not a NMSF receives commended status. This group represents the highest 50,000 scorers.</p>
<p>There doesn’t seem to be anything significant in the numbers to warrant a 2 point jump in CA. </p>
<p>I agree, no matter what numbers I look at. Still, for those at the 219, 220 range in CA, my “spin” is that on my son’s resume where he lists scores, he can now list the PSAT and in parens note that it was 99%. Previously, he didn’t list his PSAT score, and just had a placeholder for nat’l merit in the honors list. Now, he can enter “commended” and that additional PSAT score can reinforce his other good scores. Just one more test score is all, not the end of the world for him. He is working hard on getting scholarships, but b/c his list of schools doesn’t have any schools that participate in NM in a big way (or at all), he probably wouldn’t get any NM scholarship anyway (no corporate connections, no colleges, all that is left is the small # of NMSC awards, and they are not insignificant but small). All in all, it’s fine to miss by a point for my S. And my S really doesn’t care- -he didn’t study for it and really didn’t try any harder for it - -it wasn’t even on his radar (nor mine - -I didn’t think he would do that well - -not that he couldn’t do well, but it was just “practice” for him.</p>
<p>I wonder if the scores have gone up substantially in MA, MD, and NJ as well</p>
<p>All I did was put the point increase for the ones that have been confirmed. I think I got them right.</p>
<hr>
<p>PLEASE DON’T FREAK OUT! Check the explanation of the notation in the first post. When you see, for instance, AZ <= 219, that means that Arizona’s cutoff is no higher than 219. This comes from a report like, “I live in Arizona, made a 219, and got my letter.” When you see, for instance, TX > 216, that means that Texas’ cutoff is higher than 216. This comes from a report like, “I live in Texas, made a 216, and didn’t make it.”</p>
<hr>
<p>Remaining states that need to be finalized:
AK, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, ID, IN, IA, KY, LA,
ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND,
OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY</p>
<p>Updating CA Increase</p>
<p>AL = 211 (post #281, per NMSC) +1
AK = ?
AZ = 213 (post #126/#132, per GC) +4
AR = ?
CA = 221 (post #321, per GC) +2
CO = ?
CT = ?
DE = ?
DC = ?
FL = 214 (post #107, per GC) +4
GA <= 221 (post #182)
HI = 216 (post #225, per GC)
ID = ?
IL = 216 (post #110, per GC) +2
IN = 214 (post #147, #193, established by score comparison) +2
IA = ?
KS = 214 (post #87, per principal) +3
KY > 211 (post #111)
LA <= 216 (post #101)
ME = ?
MD = ?
MA <= 228 (post #143)
MI = ?
MN = ?
MS = 205 (post #192, NMSC) No change
MO = ?
MT <= 209 (post #90)
NE <= 215 (post #10)
NV <= 211 (post #250)
NH = ?
NJ = ?
NM = 210 (post #302, per GC) +4
NY > 217 (post #265)
NC <= 217 (post #288)
ND = ?
OH = 214 (post #28, established by score comparison) +2
OK = 209 (post #106, NMSC) +3
OR = ?
PA <= 215 (post #224)
RI = ?
SC = ?
SD = ?
TN = ?
TX = 219 (post #46, per principal; post #267, per GC) +4
UT = ?
VT = ?
VA = ?
WA = ?
WV = ?
WI <= 209 (post #166, #191)
WY = ?</p>
<p>10(?) Boarding school regions
No scores reported yet.
These usually are set to be equal to the highest cut-off score among the individual states in the region.</p>
<p>Internationals=?
This usually is set to be equal to the highest cut-off score among all the individual states.</p>
<p>Commended (national cutoff) = 202 (Class of 2012 Notification Letters - College Confidential)
Any person with a score equal to or higher than this cutoff who is not a NMSF receives commended status. This group represents the highest 50,000 scorers.</p>
<p>“I agree, no matter what numbers I look at. Still, for those at the 219, 220 range in CA, my “spin” is that on my son’s resume where he lists scores, he can now list the PSAT and in parens note that it was 99%. Previously, he didn’t list his PSAT score, and just had a placeholder for nat’l merit in the honors list. Now, he can enter “commended” and that additional PSAT score can reinforce his other good scores. Just one more test score is all, not the end of the world for him. He is working hard on getting scholarships, but b/c his list of schools doesn’t have any schools that participate in NM in a big way (or at all), he probably wouldn’t get any NM scholarship anyway (no corporate connections, no colleges, all that is left is the small # of NMSC awards, and they are not insignificant but small). All in all, it’s fine to miss by a point for my S. And my S really doesn’t care- -he didn’t study for it and really didn’t try any harder for it - -it wasn’t even on his radar (nor mine - -I didn’t think he would do that well - -not that he couldn’t do well, but it was just “practice” for him.”</p>
<p>LOL. This is exactly the spin I would expect from a Bruin.</p>
<p>As someone who lives in a “National Merit? What’s that?” part of the country, I think that the allocation-by-state is all about marketing. In states where NM is a big deal, and everyone knows what it is, the company makes lots of money selling the test to every single solitary high school and home school family. In places where not very many people know about it, high schools don’t buy the test and don’t administer the test.</p>
<p>My son is (apparently) either the only NM semi-finalist in the 100+ year history of his HS, or, more likely, any previous SFs were a very long time ago. They will make a big deal about this, and NMSC will sell lots of tests in the next couple of years as every district around will have to start giving the test to their juniors. That will create a small but steady trickle of SF in the broader 8-10 county area, which will cement the test as a “must do” for all of these districts.</p>
<p>The advantage goes to the kids who live in states where NMSC is trying to drum up business and excitement. In MA and NY and CA there is already plenty of excitement, so NMSC doesn’t have to hand out “free samples” in those states.</p>
<p>But don’t think that all of the advantages go to them. My nephew’s high school tossed the semi-finalist notifications in a corner and didn’t notice them until the following December, after the deadline for filling out the paperwork and taking the SAT. So none of their semi-finalists were finalists. (Ever wonder how we get from 16,000 semi-finalists to 15,000 finalists? That is one of the ways.) (Ever wonder why TAKING the SAT is one non-negotiable item for semi-finalist to finalist? That’s all about marketing the SAT. When my son took the SAT last January, there were only 4 students, and 2 of them were 8th and 9th graders taking it for entrance to the state’s Math/Science boarding school.)</p>
<p>I’m bummed here in Indiana. DD had scored a 218 her sophomore year, and goofed up her junior year and missed answering a question, giving her a 211. We had still a thread of hope that she would get National Merit, if the Indiana qualifying score were lower, but instead it appears it was higher than the past several years. </p>
<p>Since we’re homeschooling, the letter would have come here, and it looks like from others, that Indiana cut off at 214 this year. I guess that makes me feel slightly better, that she didn’t miss it by just one point. But it’s still just one question.</p>
<p>The college she wants to attend automatically awards generous scholarships for National Merit Finalists. Now she’ll be put in a huge pot with others, to compete for other scholarships. We really need her to get the highest scholarships possible.</p>
<p>My 2 oldest both got Finalist, so that set the bar high for their younger siblings. Third child was Commended, but still got a decent scholarship from his school, which awarded based more on the SAT score. </p>
<p>So, I guess now the pressure is on this youngest child to score even higher on her SAT this fall. She’s already got something like 2150, but I think she’s going to have to go even higher to get the top scholarships now at the school she wants. </p>
<p>Disappointed here.</p>
<p>Geeked out and wrote a perl script to restore the formatting (bold for finalized states) lost in the previous update (and to make future updates less tedious).</p>
<hr>
<p>PLEASE DON’T FREAK OUT! Check the explanation of the notation in the first post. When you see, for instance, AZ <= 219, that means that Arizona’s cutoff is no higher than 219. This comes from a report like, “I live in Arizona, made a 219, and got my letter.” When you see, for instance, TX > 216, that means that Texas’ cutoff is higher than 216. This comes from a report like, “I live in Texas, made a 216, and didn’t make it.”</p>
<hr>
<p>Remaining states that need to be finalized:
AK, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, ID, IN, IA, KY, LA,
ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND,
OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY</p>
<p>Updating CA Increase</p>
<p>**AL = 211<a href=“post%20#281,%20per%20NMSC”>/b</a> +1
AK = ?
**AZ = 213<a href=“post%20#126/#132,%20per%20GC”>/b</a> +4
AR = ?
**CA = 221<a href=“post%20#321,%20per%20GC”>/b</a> +2
CO = ?
CT = ?
DE = ?
DC = ?
**FL = 214<a href=“post%20#107,%20per%20GC”>/b</a> +4
GA <= 221 (post #182)
**HI = 216<a href=“post%20#225,%20per%20GC”>/b</a>
ID = ?
**IL = 216<a href=“post%20#110,%20per%20GC”>/b</a> +2
**IN = 214<a href=“post%20#147,%20#193,%20established%20by%20score%20comparison”>/b</a> +2
IA = ?
**KS = 214<a href=“post%20#87,%20per%20principal”>/b</a> +3
KY > 211 (post #111)
LA <= 216 (post #101)
ME = ?
MD = ?
MA <= 228 (post #143)
MI = ?
MN = ?
**MS = 205<a href=“post%20#192,%20NMSC”>/b</a> No change
MO = ?
MT <= 209 (post #90)
NE <= 215 (post #10)
NV <= 211 (post #250)
NH = ?
NJ = ?
**NM = 210<a href=“post%20#302,%20per%20GC”>/b</a> +4
NY > 217 (post #265)
NC <= 217 (post #288)
ND = ?
**OH = 214<a href=“post%20#28,%20established%20by%20score%20comparison”>/b</a> +2
**OK = 209<a href=“post%20#106,%20NMSC”>/b</a> +3
OR = ?
PA <= 215 (post #224)
RI = ?
SC = ?
SD = ?
TN = ?
**TX = 219<a href=“post%20#46,%20per%20principal;%20post%20#267,%20per%20GC”>/b</a> +4
UT = ?
VT = ?
VA = ?
WA = ?
WV = ?
WI <= 209 (post #166, #191)
WY = ?</p>
<p>10(?) Boarding school regions
No scores reported yet.
These usually are set to be equal to the highest cut-off score among the individual states in the region.</p>
<p>Internationals=?
This usually is set to be equal to the highest cut-off score among all the individual states.</p>
<p>Commended (national cutoff) = 202 (Class of 2012 Notification Letters - College Confidential)
Any person with a score equal to or higher than this cutoff who is not a NMSF receives commended status. This group represents the highest 50,000 scorers.</p>
<p>Indigo13 - For NY scores call your principal, that is how my son finally found out that he did not qualify with a 217. They had sent the principal a letter saying no one from the school qualified. Good luck!</p>
<p>The number of students scoring in the 70-80 range in Mass seems to have dropped precipitously in 2010. Wonder if the cutoff number will drop.</p>