IL average is 948. So fell below national average this year. In the past we’ve been above the average.
I think it happened to DS too. He got 1510 last two years but 1480 this year. He is super disappointed today. It seems like in general kids are getting better scores this year though. Hopefully the cutoff won’t go up too much.
Yes, kindasorta?
It’s certainly aligned with what used to be the norm, and up until very recently. But so many school districts are trying different things with math sequencing these days that it’s questionable whether there’s really a single norm now.
And there’s still the problem of accelerated students—for a kid who took geometry in 7th grade, having a high-stakes test that has a decided focus on that set for 11th grade is not going to capture their mathematical skills. (Or similarly for a kid who’s advanced enough in 10th grade to be taking college-level writing/literature classes—and I’ve had some of those in my classes the past couple years—because they’re not being taught how to follow arbitrary grammatical “rules” at that point, they’re learning how to manipulate them to greater rhetorical effect.)
Despite the impression CC gives us, the number of kids in those positions is miniscule. I don’t buy the “I’m so smart I can’t handle the menial SAT content.” Take a couple of practice tests.
5 Likes
I hear you…to a point. But mine took Algebra 1 in 6th and was in calculus in 10th: missed one math Q as a careless error with no prep at all on the 10th grade psat, and got a perfect math psat in 11th(and by that point already had the 800 SAT math with minimal prep, just her own practice on a couple math sections). Many of her highly accelerated peers also felt SAT math was simple. I am not convinced acceleration is associated with decreased performance unless that acceleration skipped over essential math skills these tests favor.
1 Like
I mean, there’s decreased performance and then there’s decreased performance.
When you’re dealing with the high end, the difference of one or two questions answered correctly or not makes a huge difference—and if one of those questions is, say, the sum of the internal angles of a regular octagon, that’s going to be top of mind for a kid who’s just taken geometry, but not for someone who’s well past that, because why the heck would you ever need to have that in memory? (They can derive it straightforwardly enough, sure, but these tests—particularly the ACT—are built to reward speed as well as accuracy.)
So yeah, I agree that “I’m so smart I can’t handle (P)SAT/ACT content” is wrong. But I also submit that while some people use that excuse, for this conversation it is a strawman.
(But whether y’all agree with me or not on this, can we all at least agree that having so much hinge off of individual high-stakes tests is not just wrong but also stupid?)
4 Likes
Uggh! Why do I still have that formula in my head 30+ years later? 
1 Like
That’s one of the reasons they spend time in the summer and in class working on PSAT prep in 11th grade here. My S25 and S28 both have a certain number of Khan academy minutes they have to complete each week, and they get deep grammatical learning for the R/W section.
Both mine do math competitions and it really helps keep up those Algebra and Geometry skills, even though they finished pre-cal in middle school.
do you have evidence this is really the case? A couple local private schools I know that have many very accelerated math students all have super high median SAT scores. I don’t get the impression they are studying a lot… a short refresher of basic geometry doesn’t seem a big deal…
This and other replies make the assumption that such refreshers/summer workshops/the like are the norm for test-takers.
1 Like
sure, I agree that most people study some for SATs (or ACTs) if they are taking them - if nothing else, even if one is super smart, getting used to the style of question and range of questions would be hugely helpful on a timed test. I am just dubious that kids that are advanced in sequence are harmed in some way by being advanced…or have to take it a bunch of times…
And, truthfully, most kids that are far advanced of typical math (or other) sequence are going to be, by and large, preparers and pretty diligent students who care about their scores.
I wonder if the state averages will change when the next set of results come out on the 16th?
1 Like
Was wondering about that as well. I screen shot our report in case it changes.
I would think it would have to? Or maybe it’s the average for each test? That would make more sense.
But also pointless?
1 Like
Sure!
“Compare your score to the average scores of other 11th grade test takers who tested when you did.”
But isn’t that always how the percentages work for SATs? A 1350 might be the 92% for one test and 90% for the next one. (I made those up btw) While it should stay in the same realm, I think the SAT percentages change with every test don’t they?
It’s likely even more variable with the inclusion of the state averages.
1 Like
The percentages don’t have anything to do with this testing group. They are in relation to the past 3 testing years. “Compare your score percentile among the following groups of 11th grade test takers from the past three years.”
3 Likes
So bizarre that NJ could be below the national average since they typically have the highest cut-off. I was confused as to why my state (CT) is below the national average too when we typically have a high cut-off and excellent schools. We also test everyone, no cherrypicking. (Correction, I looked up participation rates from the pdf link TonyGrace provided above. 78% of 11th graders took PSAT. 93% of 12th graders took SAT)
Do states with low participation adjust cut-offs accordingly so that it’s somehow representative of expected scores should everyone participate? Compass Prep predicts AK to have a cut-off of 210 (low!) and NJ with 223 (high!) So why are we seeing average PSAT scores by state like this?
PSAT average by state:
US = 987
AK = 1054
CT = 952
NJ = 959
MO = 1104
TN =
WA = 1024