PSAT score-199 (ANY chance of making commeded scholar?

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
21

<p>Thanks Clapuma; you and I seem to be tracking the same info and I couldn’t find 2007 either. My gut is that last years jump in all states was a fluke and the harsh curve this year was a correction in the PSAT to get back to the usual statistical norms. FYI: if you want to make sure that you can access those reports again, make sure you save them to your desktop or to a google docs account. </p>

<p>Another piece of the puzzle for those trying to figure out if their state may go up and down will be the state PSAT reports. Luckily College Board archives those so you can go back and look at your state trends. The date on the 2010 reports is 12/22/10 so I would expect the 2011 reports to be up in the next few weeks: [College-Bound</a> Juniors & Sophomores 2010 - PSAT/NMSQT](<a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/data-reports-research/psat/cb-jr-soph]College-Bound”>SAT Suite of Assessments – Reports | College Board) </p>

<p>Another poster (Descartesz) believes that another piece of this puzzle is that the state percentile of NMSF’s allocated is connected to that states percentage of HS graduates compared to the national number of HS graduates. He talks about it on the 2010 PSAT results thread. I find the data in the National Merit Corporation annual report interesting; it lists the # of NMSFs from each state. But I can’t find any archived versions of those reports. The 09/10 report is on the website & I anticipate the 10/11 to be up soon: <a href=“http://nationalmerit.org/annual_report.pdf[/url]”>http://nationalmerit.org/annual_report.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

22

<p>199 I doubt it…sorry</p>

23

<p>What does commended cutoff mean?</p>

24

<p>Damond3: because Nevada is such a small state, it is more difficult to predict cutoffs by looking to the National Percentile ranges. Last year NV had only 85 semi-finalists (compared to over 2000 in CA). NV’s scores have been much more volatile from year to year than the larger states. </p>

<p>The good news is that Nevada’s cutoff for the 2010 test was the highest it has ever been (209). Here’s how NV compares to the National Percentile trends:</p>

<p>Year . . NV . . 98%. . 99% . . 99+%
06 . . 208 . . 206 . . 212 . . 223
07 . . 206 . . 206 . . 212 . . 222
08 . . 202 . . 206 . . 212 . . 223
09 . . 208 . . 206 . . 212 . . 222
10 . . 209 . . 207 . . 214 . . 224
11 . . ??? . . 205 . . 211 . . 222</p>

<p>If you look at the above chart you can see that ’08 and ’09 diverged substantially from the national trends. (Though less so if you ignore the strange drop in 2008.) Nevertheless, the one good piece of data for you is that over the last 5 years the cutoff for NV has never been more than 2 points above the cutoff for the 98th percentile nationally. So I would say there is a chance that the NV cutoff will drop to 207 (2 points above the 2011 98th percentile cutoff). Again, there’s no certainty of that, but there is a chance.</p>

<p>Josh05: Commended is the score needed to receive a commendation from the National Merit foundation. It is a single cutoff that applies to the nation as a whole. The more restrictive semi-finalist cutoff differs from state to state. Only semi-finalists are eligible to compete for the National Merit scholarship. [National</a> Merit Scholarship Corporation - NMSP](<a href=“http://www.nationalmerit.org/nmsp.php]National”>http://www.nationalmerit.org/nmsp.php)</p>

25

<p>RobD: you are right on point. If you could track the state-level info, an actual projection might be possible. But the limited state info available is of little help. </p>

<p>First, as you mention, the NMC’s 9/10 annual report is online, but not earlier years. Second, NMC doesn’t release state-level percentiles for selection indexes (only subscores). You can track subscores over time, but to be really accurate you’d need to track state-level selection index percentiles, which are not released. If students posted their selection indexes and state percentiles for 2011 we could perhaps figure this out, but, even then, we wouldn’t have prior years for comparison.</p>

<p>That said, the NMC’s 09/10 annual report is helpful in that it allows you to compute the % of entrants from each state earning NMSF. For example:</p>

<p>State . . Entrants . . #_NMSF. . % _NMSF
CA . . 166,786 . . 2,086 . . 1.25%
NJ . . 68,535 . . 521 . . 0.76%
NV . . 7,335 . . 85 . . 1.16%
UT . . 4,618 . . 157 . . 3.40%</p>

<p>That suggests you would need to be at least in the following STATE-LEVEL percentile ranges to be in the running for NMSF:</p>

<p>CA 98%
NJ 99%
NV 98%
UT 96%</p>

<p>However, I don’t know how consistent those percentages are from year to year. Also, there’s no way to know what the actual cutoff is within a percentile range.</p>

<p>By the way, I believe the % of test-takers that make NMSF varies from state to state because the # of NMSF spots for each state is based on HS graduates (not PSAT test-takers). Thus, a state with a LOWER % of HS graduates taking the PSAT would have a HIGHER % of PSAT test-takers earning NMSF. </p>

<p>For example, in NJ 70% or so of HS graduates take the junior PSAT, while in Utah it may be less than 20%. The result is that the odds of a test-taker making NMSF are more than three times greater in Utah (3.4%) than NJ (.76%). </p>

<p>If I were the NMC I would allocate NMSF based on % of test takers (not % of HS grads). That would encourage states’ use of PSAT, which should better identify the top students in each state for NMSF designation.</p>

26

<p>Clapuma and RobD: I can’t thank you enough for the data that would take me a LONG time to find. I guess we will just have to cross our fingers and hope for the best!</p>

<p>P.S. I will be very excited when collegeboard releases 2011 state based data!!</p>

27

<p>I got a 200. Any chance of being commended? </p>

<p>Thanks :)</p>

28

<p>The state level data is now up! Any suggestions on how to interpret it (best way to predict cutoff). thanks for any help</p>

29

<p>damond3: for my state, I looked at the two top levels of test scores for each category (i.e. 75-80 & 70-74) to see the total # of students who scored at those levels and compared it to the past few years. I also looked at the state mean for all three sections & compared to past years’ state mean’s as well as the national mean for the year.</p>

<p>Since they don’t publish the percentiles for the selection index percentiles by state, there’s really no way to figure out where the cutoff for your state is going to be until August when NMSC sends out letters. BUT you can look for trends up or down to get a feel for what the cutoff MAY do. </p>

<p>Using my state as an example: the 99th national selection index is down from 214 to 211 so I felt pretty good saying that cutoffs wouldn’t go up. Now that I have state data, I can see that the # of students in the top level category (75-80) in CR went from 192 in 2010 to 127 in 2011 and the mean went down from 51.7 to 50.4; the # of students in the top level category (75-80) in M went from 257 in 2010 to 161 in 2011 and the mean went down from 50.7 to 49.6; the # of students in the top level category (75-80) in W went from 301 in 2010 to 227 in 2011 and the mean went down from 50.7 to 49.1. Total TN mean in 2010 was 153.1 and in 2011 was 149.1. The national total mean this year is 141.5. AND my state had about 1800 more kids take the PSAT this year compared to last. </p>

<p>Means don’t mean a thing when you’re talking about the 1% or so in each state, but really I’m just looking for confirmation that my state trended down as well. The fact that the # of kids in the 3 top tiers in my state dropped along with the national 99th% selection index and all the means gives me more confidence that our state cutoff will drop a point or two. I can’t imagine that it would go up, which is really all that anybody in my house is worrying about anyway ;)</p>

30

<p>RobD: For your state the decrease in # for the top 3 tiers may be more dramatic than a smaller state (less NM semi finalists). That being said, is comparing the national percent to the state percent and reviewing the comparison between the last few years a reasonable approach? For example I took the top 2 scoring ranges for each of the three categories and compared those to previous years. It seems to me that the top 2-3 scoring ranges for each of the three categories may be more useful when working to predict a smaller state cutoff (rather than simply looking at only the top scoring range for each of the 3 categories.
I took a look at a few states including Tennessee and it is interesting to observe huge drops in the # of people in the top scoring range for each of the 3 categories. I observed that smaller states needed a deeper examination to determine the trend. Instead of using only the top scoring range, I used the top 3 for some states and looked through previous years and cutoff scores to see it directly correlated. Interestingly enough, some states did better when more people scored in the top scoring range but less in the 2nd and 3rd scoring ranges. Just wanted to point out an interesting observation. Thanks for your advice as well! (of course the #of people in a scoring range and the national percent vs. State percent is the exact same thing. Just a different way of seeing things.)</p>

31

<p>Sorry to clarify when I said states did better: I meant the cutoff scores were LOWER . Sorry for the poor wording</p>

32

<p>Interesting fact for those of you trying to predict: the 2010-2011 annual report disagrees with data presented in the 2010 archived PSAT data. Strange and maybe an error they will correct?</p>

33

<p>^^^What was the difference in data?</p>

<p>Damond: Alas I am just a mom. A mom who is a data dork, who would love to reassure a friend of D2’s that she’s going to make the cutoff :wink: Since National Merit doesn’t share their methodology, the only thing that all of us can do is speculate based on data. </p>

<p>One other way to get a feel for how you think that the cutoffs may trend is to look at where your state’s historical cutoff sits compared to the historical national 99th PSAT percentile (I think Descartez has also looked compared to the lowest 99+ percentile.) Again not perfect; TN has an obvious connection to the number, but when looking at TX for a friend, TX has started to deviate by a few points higher over the past few years. </p>

<p>Lowest 99% N’tl Selection Index #
2011: 211
2010: 214
2009: 212
2008: 212
2007: 212
2006: 212
2005: 215
2004: 213
2003: 214</p>

<p>To find your states historical cutoffs follow the links in the first post of this thread: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/national-merit-scholarships/1199607-national-merit-semifinalist-qualify-scores-class-2012-a.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/national-merit-scholarships/1199607-national-merit-semifinalist-qualify-scores-class-2012-a.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

34

<p>RobD: We think alike. I am also speculating as to the best way to deal with the data we have. Now for the 2010-2011 annual report the number of students entering the “competition” differs from the amount of students shown on the state reports that were just released. This may not be the case in all states but this did occur in the few I observed. For example: in a certain state 7,881 juniors took the PSAT. BUT on the annual report for that same state 6,977 took it. Maybe something I’m forgetting or misreading?</p>

35

<p>Also robD: I’d like to point out that this year, the nation saw a 25% decrease in the number of scorers in the top scoring range. Tennessee saw about a 31% decrease in the number of scorers in the top scoring range. The nation saw a 8% INCREASE in the 2nd highest scoring range. Since we already know that the national index dropped quite a bit, we can assume that only the top scoring range can be used as a real indicator for index cutoff scores. I’d say that is safe to say tennessees cutoff will drop according to how it has compared to national percentiles in the past. Therefore just glancing at Tennessee it looks like the cutoff will decrease by a point or two. If tennessee would have decreased 25% (the same decrease as the national decrease) you would probably be able to pinpoint the cutoff based on Tennessees scores vs national scores. Congratulations on your D awesome score:barring an incredible mistake your friend should be fine as well</p>

36

<p>RobD: perhaps the key here is to figure out if there is data in a state report that can give a clue to an aberration from the national trend. In 2010, the cutoff for Texas rose 4 points, while the top national selection index ranges rose by only 2. Is there anything in the Texas report for 2010 that you saw that might have given a clue that Texas was about to rise more than the nation as a whole?</p>

37

<p>I took at quick look at the Texas report. One factor could be the number of test takers in the state. It jumped by 20 thousand from 2009 to 2010. When I have time, I’ll look to see if that same factor is present in other states that had jumps that were higher than the national scores alone would predict.</p>

38

<p>Very good point clapuma : my theory would be wiped out by an error or inconsistency such as the number of people taking the test. The more students taking the test, the less percentage of students taking the test become NM semi-finalists</p>

<p>Another interesting fact is that the number of juniors taking the PSAT this year was at one of the lowest points in the past few years. This is a good thing for those hoping for national merit, as the 16,000 semifinalists remain set, regardless of the total number of juniors taking the test.</p>

39

<p>For TX: anecdotally, I thought there was a change in whether TX paid for/didn’t pay for junior PSATs around the time of the big jump. Another TX parent would have to confirm that, as I have no first hand knowledge. </p>

<p>Looking at all the data (state means, # of students in the top 2 tiers of scores by state, national 99th %, prior relationship of state cutoff to national 99th %) I think TN has to drop by a point or two. From what I can find the lowest the TN cutoff has been in the past 10-12 years has been 212, but the national 99% had never been lower than 212 either; this year it’s 211. </p>

<p>I haven’t had time to really look at other states to the same extent but I need to look at OH and TX closer for friends.</p>

40

<p>More patterns found. I looked at the state-level data for 4 high performing states that had aberrations vs. the national trend in either 2009 or 2010 to see if the state level data foretold the aberrations. </p>

<p>Here’s the national trend data:</p>

<p>Year…99+cutoff nationally (change from prior year):
2010 224 (+2)
2009 222 (-1)
2008 223</p>

<p>Here’s what happened in the states that had aberrations from the above trend:</p>

<p>State…Year… avg # in top scoring range for the 3 test sections…state cutoff (change from prior year)
TX…2010…1683…219 (+4)*
TX…2009…1141…215 (-1)
TX…2008…1059…216</p>

<p>FL…2010…626…214 (+4)*
FL…2009…480…210 (-1)
FL…2008…426…211</p>

<p>MA…2010…719…223 (+0)**
MA…2009…905… 223 (+2)*
MA…2008…710…221</p>

<p>CA…2010…2838…221 (+0)**
CA…2009…2818…221 (+2)*
CA…2008…2307…219</p>

<p><em>too high based on national trend
*</em>too low based on national trend</p>

<p>So, what do we see here?</p>

<ul>
<li><p>California: The 99+ cutoff dropped a point nationally in 2009, but CA’s NMSF cutoff rose two points (a 3 point aberration). But this was not a surprise given CA’s 23% increase in students in the top scoring range from ’08 to ‘09. In 2010, the 99+ cutoff went up 2 points, but CA stayed the same (as did the # of CA students in the top scoring range, so again, no surprise). </p></li>
<li><p>Massachusetts: virtually the same trends as CA</p></li>
<li><p>Florida: # of students in the top scoring range was similar between 2008 and 2009, so FL followed the national trend and went down a point. But FL had a 59% increase in students in the top scoring range in 2010. It’s not a surprise then that the FL cutoff had a 4 point jump in 2010 (even though the 99+ cutoff rose only 2 points).</p></li>
<li><p>Texas: virtually the same trends as Florida.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>So, what do we see for these 4 states in 2011? Good news I think for those hoping for equal or perhaps lower cutoffs in these states.</p>

<p>Florida 472 (30.1% drop of students in the top scoring range from 2010)
Texas 1165 (30.7% drop from 2010)
Massachusetts 656 (8.7% drop from 2010)
California 2439 (14.1% drop from 2010)</p>

<p>(Note: the # of students in the top scoring range at the national level dropped by 25% from 2010 to 2011.)</p>