@intparent
“I don’t see the point of this thread – can someone explain why this matters?”
I explained this in my earlier posts in this thread. There also was an extended discussion about it in December on the main PSAT thread. However, I will try to put all the information from the two threads together again.
In September, College Board published a schedule according to which it would release the 2015 PSAT scores to students and their schools by December. In the past, this had meant mid-December, prior to the winter break. CB also said students would have the materials to study over the break.
Some students (including some of my students) made study plans to use the 2015 PSAT scores and/or exam booklets to prepare for the new SAT over the holiday break.
Many students (and their parents) were in a state of anticipation/anxiety about the 2015 PSAT scores, especially those hoping for NMSF status and the consequent potentially substantial benefits.
Students and/or their schools paid College Board to take the PSAT. I am not a lawyer, but perhaps it could be held that College Board entered into a contractual obligation with the students/parents and schools to deliver the scores within the timeframe specified by College Board in September.
When December rolled around, College Board announced that the scores would not be given to students and their schools until January 6/7.
Those students who had made study plans based on the possibly contractual terms with CB were damaged by the failure of CB to deliver the scores before the vacation. It is conceivable that their 2016 SAT scores will be lower because they did not have their PSAT booklets to study over the vacation.
Other students may have been damaged in a lesser sense of the psychological stress of expecting the scores within a specific timeframe, and then not receiving them until 3 weeks later.
On or around December 17, some students received TASP invitations. According to College Board, it provides Telluride the PSAT scores of all students who do not opt out by writing a letter to a P.O. Box in Princeton N.J.
If College Board sent the 2015 PSAT scores to Telluride prior to the TASP emails, then the 2015 PSAT scores were ready to be sent out in mid-December, but they were not sent out to the people who had paid for them, needed them, and were damaged by the delay in receiving them. That is, CB honored its schedule with Telluride, and protected Telluride from a damaging delay, but it did not protect students and their families from a damaging delay. This would be evidence that the delay was not the result of force majeure.
Both College Board and Telluride have denied that the 2015 PSAT scores were sent to Telluride before they were released to the students who had taken the test and paid to take the test. Therefore another reason for this thread is to raise the question of truthfulness. As I said in my initial post, to me it matters whether an organization such as College Board is truthful. To a lesser extent, I am interested in what is happening with present-day Telluride since I went to TASP many years ago. Others may not care.
Yup – a tempest in a teapot, just as I thought. Did anyone expect the first year of s new scoring system would go without glitches? Poor students, no booklets to study over break… as I mentioned before, my kids’ school didn’t give scores or booklets out until January anyway – and one of my kids had a 2380 on her SAT. Since everyone’s was delayed, I just don’t see the issue. Probably less than 1% of students would have done any work with them anyway.
And so what if TASP did get preliminary scores or something from Collegeboard?Or had to use a funky algorithm this year? Because of their application deadlines they had to send out to some group. I don’t really know again why it matters much – an invite isn’t an acceptance. Honestly, odds are so low for s kid getting an invite to get in (worse than getting into Hsrvard percentage wise if I recall right) thst I don’t even see it as any big deal if some kids with high scores didn’t get a mailing this year. TASP is a very good program, but most of the world struggles along without having attended. One year of poor communication/glitching between Collegeboard and TASP is not unexpected or cause for an uproar.
You are an adult – although I honestly thought you were a TASP obsessed 17 year old at first. Why spin the TASP hype up higher by making such s big deal out of what was clearly a logistical problem related to the new test format this year?
@intparent
“And so what if TASP did get preliminary scores or something from Collegeboard?”
Is this what you think happened?
And College Board lied on its Twitter page and to the people who called?
Do you also think that Telluride lied to the people who called in December?
“TASP is a very good program”
It looks to me like there have been major changes in the program of late. I am not so convinced that it is as good as it was.
“One year of poor communication/glitching between Collegeboard and TASP is not unexpected or cause for an uproar.”
I would not call my few posts on College Confidential an “uproar”. I wrote a few posts with some collected information and some personal observations and reactions. You are welcome to disagree. You are welcome to ignore the whole discussion. If your child was not affected by the delay, good for him or her. Other students expected to get their booklets in December and made plans on that basis. They were damaged.
“Probably less than 1% of students would have done any work with them anyway.”
I don’t see what data you could have to quantify the number of students who would have used the booklets. My students would have worked intensively with the booklets, especially since there is so little official practice material available.
However, the main reason for my posts is not the fact that College Board released information to outside institutions prior to releasing the information to the students and their schools, but a growing series of unprofessional and possibly unethical behaviors on the part of College Board, several of which I have discussed elsewhere on this site.
As an educator, I think it is important to speak out so that perhaps College Board will serve the interests of students more responsibly in the future.
“You are an adult – although I honestly thought you were a TASP obsessed 17 year old at first.”
I don’t see how anyone who actually read any of my posts could have thought that.
@intparent - you may not care about this topic, but clearly many other people do. Why do you have an issue if others wish to discuss this here? Why are you trying to silence this discussion? If you don’t understand the relevance, but others consider it relevant, isn’t it ok for them to discuss it? Are comments like the one below, against the rules of this forum?
" Did anyone expect the first year of s new scoring system would go without glitches?"
This is exactly why many tutors are suggesting that their kids not take the 1600 SAT–either take the 2400 or the ACT. Let College Board work out the kinks first.
@gusmahler
I agree, the way College Board has handled the October 2015 PSAT roll-out does not bode well for the Spring 2016 SAT roll-out. I think more students will move to the ACT.
One College Board strategy to stem the ACT tide is the new “School Day SAT/PSAT” testing program, in which loads of people who would not usually have taken the tests will be “offered the opportunity” (or forced) to take them without having to register, travel to a test center, or pay an additional fee. Given this large influx of lower-performing students, to avoid dragging down median SAT/PSAT scores even further, the tests will have to be made much easier.
With each successive revision, the SAT has become more and more a low-bar, minimum college readiness test, and less a test than can differentiate reliably among talented students at the top of the curve. There are only a few ten thousand students at the top, but millions in the middle, so it looks like College Board is following the money. It’s ridiculous to have a selection test in which thousands and thousands of people at the top are differentiated only by a few questions right or wrong, likely just careless mistakes. In the old days, the test was hard enough so that almost no one could get a perfect score, and only very few could even get close. 65/80 per section was over 99th percentile for juniors on the PSAT. It’s time for a separate test that reliably measures excellence, not just readiness.
" It’s ridiculous to have a selection test in which thousands and thousands of people at the top are differentiated only by a few questions right or wrong, likely just careless mistakes. It’s time for a separate test that reliably measures excellence, not just readiness." Well here is something I can agree with you about.
But I think you are mistaken about the changes: "From information gathered in CC so far, the lowest PSAT score with 99%ile is around 1390 (if the user %ile in the score report is not a random number CB pulled out of air. That is still a possibility.) OK, that’s higher than roughly 1300, but you have to keep in mind that today’s top students are prepping a lot for this exam–many are taking it once or even several times before they test for real, which I was surprised to learn about because I had always thought/assumed that wasn’t allowed since it was unheard of in my rather competitive high school for anyone to take the PSAT before junior year–and they have far better materials to prepare, ever since truth in testing forced the college board to release actual exams. For a timed test like this, to put in a perfect performance is going to be a lot easier if you prepare and can study with actual exams.
The number of students scoring at every level from 80 down was much, much lower prior to the 1990s.
The number of places at top universities, like the number of NMSF awards, is fixed. What count are the numbers, not the percentiles. If the top 1% has 20,000 people, it is 4 times less selective a group than the top 1% containing 5,000 people.
I agree that QAS’s, multiple testings, score choice, and other test prep methods have raised scores. But it would still be very easy to make a harder test for people at the top.
Here is one easy way: make a test of the same length, but containing ONLY level 4 and level 5 difficulty questions, possibly some level 6 questions as well. Adjust the mix of 4,5,6 level difficulty questions until virtually no one gets a perfect score. Hey, you could make your own test of this kind just recycling old SAT questions and adding a few head-scratchers.
CB is not going to do this because it would be politically incorrect and not financially profitable. US elite universities don’t want to do it either, probably for the same reasons. However, elite universities outside the US frequently have their own really, really selective entrance procedures. The US is falling behind here.
Many schools have been letting sophomores to take PSAT already for several years. Our school has had freshmen take PSAT and sophomores PLAN for several years. Many high scoring juniors had already taken SAT and ACT (some multiple times) when they arrived to take this year’s PSAT. With new PSAT or old PSAT, they still score high.
For those millions of “typical” students currently considering a spring test with a summer retake, the score delay did not help matters. A typical study plan would involve taking an initial practice test to get a base-line, then prepping for the next 8-10 weeks (YMMV, of course). For the April ACT that indicates a prep beginning Feb. 1 (or Mid-Jan if you need 12 weeks); for the March SAT that means beginning Jan. 1 (or Mid Dec/Winter Break if you need 12 weeks). Base-line test results should be known before prep begins so that the latter can be tailored to weak areas.
Given the recent historical score delays experienced both by ACT and CB, there isn’t too much flexibility in that schedule. A spring/summer test will ensure that scores be sent to universities in time for EA and ED; fall tests should be reserved for last-resort or, in the case of SAT, for those students who find they are NMSF. Any delay in this schedule compromises student preparation and/or adds uncertainty as to which test to focus on until a few weeks into the new semester (when GPA is going to be the main focus). While the new PSAT was supposed to function as an even better indicator of SAT performance (thus serving as an accurate “base-line”), the delay mucked up the schedule for the March SAT by eliminating the opportunity for three additional weeks of prep. That doesn’t serve students well, to say the least.
Our D3 took her ACT as a sophomore and scored high enough on the PSAT that she feels she doesn’t need a ton of prep to do well on the SAT. But her experience is not the “typical” experience for her class - the schedule I mentioned above is way more representative, even for those kids attending good suburban public schools or private HS. For a test that is supposed to have been redesigned to appeal to a wider range of student than historically, CB missed a major opportunity to keep momentum going and garner mass appeal. And it’s surprising, too. This has been in the planning for several years now, and it’s not like they couldn’t hire good systems people to execute the online score reporting accurately and on time. The internet is not a new thing - there are PLENTY of best practices available. It didn’t need to become a mini-version of the Federal Health Insurance Exchange rollout fiasco LOL.
@Plotinus, more to the point of your thread: I’m actually thinking that CB didn’t share data before D3 got her scores. We believe that she scored high enough to qualify for a bunch of invitations which I’m sure I’ll be seeing over the next few months. Other than the Stanford letter, however, she received nothing (no TASP, etc.). And we have some evidence to suggest that the Stanford precollege people have access to ACT scores so her letter may well be sourced to that. The PSAT was her very first CB test (no SAT, no prior PSAT, no AP, etc.). This seems convincing evidence (at least to me).
CB has two distinct categories of institutional recipients of PSAT information:
“Other Scholarship Organizations” (Telluride, etc.). These receive the actual scores.
Student Search Service (Universities). These receive student contact information only.
As reported on the main PSAT thread, CB stated to a parent over the phone that Student Search Service information based on 2015 PSAT scores was sent out to colleges in mid-December. My recollection from the main PSAT thread is that several people who hadn’t taken the PSAT as sophomores or who had scored badly on it had received December emails and also a letter from Columbia with the note “contact information received from College Board”.
I don’t know why your daughter hasn’t received more emails or letters, but I think there is a lot of evidence, including a statement from CB, that the Student Search Service information went out on time. The uncertainty is only about if and when the category 1 information went out.
@Plotinus I do recall someone reported that information regarding student search service on the other thread.
What’s great about D3’s data here is that she scored well within top 1% on everything (representative and user, each of the three tests, etc.) AND she hasn’t taken a single CB test before. So anything early on would HAVE to have been released because of the current scores - especially if there isn’t another reason. Stanford isn’t clear one way or the other because they don’t indicate where they got her name. My D1 got the same communication 6 weeks after taking her ACT (she was top 8%, not top 5%, on PSAT). I, personally, can’t rule out that Stanford didn’t arrive due to D3’s ACT. Though if it were via CB it’s not as egregious as if they had received her scores directly (such as TASP etc. would have).
Regarding TASP specifically (as well as other organizations falling into that “other scholarship” category), It’s really hard to pin down a reasonable understanding of the timing because you need to find a student in which all of the following occurred: 1) the student scored really well on the PSAT; 2) the student didn’t take any prior CB test; and 3) the student received TASP info. before scores were released to students. With all of the posters on CC, have we found such a student yet?
@Mamelot that student has not been found because that student does not exist. CB denied sending the scores to TASP and TASP has repeatedly indicated that the invites were based on the 2014 PSAT (due to the 2015 delays). Some folks just can’t let it go and continue to accuse CB and TASP of lying despite the lack of evidence to support that conclusion.
My son opted out of all mailings (and this was his first CB test and he scored 221 SI on PSAT).
Just TODAY we received mailings from Oberlin, Rhodes College, Carleton, and “Private colleges & Universities” (which went gmail sent straight to spam). Nothing from TASP.
So it appears that the CB has sold our email to colleges when we specifically asked not to. I will update this board if we get a TASP invitation.
I’m going to call CB (later in the week) to complain about the mailings.
@suzyQ7 First of all congrats on your son’s score. Daughter received same email which contained this language:
You received this information from the member colleges of the CONSORTIUM OF PRIVATE COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES. Your name was made available by either the Student Search Service of The College Board after you took one or more of the PSAT, SAT, or AP exams.
Very sad if CB sold your email when you instructed them not to. I really don’t have any love lost for CB. But I do repect Telluride and I object to the allegation that they are lying. Especially based on the weak evidence that has been presented.
Let us know what CB says about the mailings. And again, congrats on a great score.
D3 just got the Rhodes College and Oberlin e-mails this morning (they come to my inbox). Rhodes doesn’t say where they got her info. from but Oberlin definitely says Student Search Service and College Board.
She didn’t get the Private Colleges and Universities one nor Carlton. Her SI = 220 so either Carlton is looking at 220+ or it went to spam.
Edit/Update: Sorry, she DID get Carlton and I tossed it because she’s on their list anyway (visited last summer). I’m still not counting it because it doesn’t specify where they got her info. from. It does say “You are an excellent student, (NAME)” - just assumed they say that to everyone LOL.
My D got the Rhodes, Oberlin and Carleton this morning. She created a new email account just for the PSAT and did not give it to anyone else.
Oberlin email said this:
BUT, she does not have scores or an access code. I question the business ethnics of a company that would share (sell) this information with others, who they know will act on it in an email, without making sure the test taker got their scores first.
And yes, I am obsessed. Not expecting NMSF, but she needs feedback to create a study plan for the March SAT.
I wouldn’t hold your breath on some amazing feedback from college board. After my daughter took the practice test, it was clear she was short on time. After she took the real test, it was clear she was short on time. College board feedback–she needs to work on “Passport to advanced mathematics” whatever the heck that is. She is in calculus, she doesn’t need any “passport” to advanced mathematics. She knows how to answer the questions. What she needs is enough time so that she doesn’t misread questions or have to rush through multiple steps in her head.
@mathyone I’m not sure if Kahn is going to be of use on that, but she should be able to upload her PSAT to her Kahn account for a “tailored” study plan. Though I’m guessing it’ll cover subject areas and not timing issues. Still there may be some good advice there. It’s not like a real tutor but it’s still pretty good from what D3 was telling me.
Also, it sounds like you two might have nailed the central issue anyway so it’s just a matter of devising strategies. Practice helps with timing. Too bad there are only 4 practice tests for SAT (we’ve already used two of them for the PSAT).
I actually found the cross section scores to be very helpful in understanding what part of what section the student needs to work on. D3 nailed all of them with the exception of “Passport to Advanced Math” and (this is actually hard to believe) “Standard English Conventions”. She’s in Honors Pre-Calc. and AP English so these were probably just dumb mistakes (esp. the English ones). She and I plan to go over these - I don’t want her reviewing Algebra when she aced that part of the Math component. She’s short on time as it is.
All these extra %iles are hilarious.
If you click “Show details,” you get gazillion percentiles on all the categories.
DS mastered Heart of Algebra, Passport to Advanced Math, and Problem Solving/Data Analysis, but needs to work on
Words in Context and “Command of Evidence.”