^Did you take the same form of the exam?
There must have been different forms of the exam, but I don’t feel a different form would constitute a 50 point difference for two questions.
Well, regardless of what you “feel”, this is direct evidence… 
Exams are curved. It’s nothing new.
Yes, you likely took a different test than did your friend, but it is possible that you took the same SAT. Let’s focus on the positive: you’re lucky to get 6 questions wrong and be in the 700s on math. On the old SAT, you could only get 4-5 question wrong, maximum, if you wanted to stay in the 700s. Unfortunately, the margin for error on the math section is razor slim, as opposed to the verbal sections, where you can usually get a couple wrong and maintain a perfect score.
When the curve is crowded at the top, a lot of unlucky test-takers are going to get forced down into the lower 700 scores. Let’s say, for example, that only 1% of students got 4 or fewer wrong, but 5% of students got 6 or fewer wrong. This type of disparity helps explain how a difference of only 2 correctly answered questions can sometimes result in a 50-point SAT score differential.
My daughter got 5 wrong and has a 760 so if it was the exact same test that would be a 40 point drop on one question. Most likely it’s not the same test, though. Weren’t different versions administered at the test sites to minimize the risk of cheating?
So I was taking another look at the concordance tables and I came across anomaly with the different methods of of converting from rSAT to Old SAT.
If I concord my D’s total rSAT to Old SAT it is a 1990
If I concord her rSAT math and EBRW scores separately and then add them together it is a 2100.
That is a big different. How much effort are universities going to make to understand the scoring differences when moving from a three part exam to a two part exam? Are they going to attempt to look at the new scores holistically by breaking down the total score into section scores, cross-test scores and sub-section scores or just do the single calculation of converting the total score? The CB has provided a ton of information, but I imagine that most universities will simply look no farther than the 1600 to 2400 chart.
I’m glad you mentioned that, @CaucAsianDad. My converted composite is nearly 150 points lower than the cumulative score obtained by adding the three converted section scores.
Why are some people saying that a 1600 on the SAT is a 34 on the ACT, according to ACT? According to this table it’s a 36, which makes way more sense: https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/ACT-SAT-Concordance-Tables-Report.pdf
New SAT to New ACT conversions from ACT:
1600 = 36
1560 = 35
1510 = 34
1460 = 33
1420 = 32
1380 = 31
1340 = 30
1300 = 29
1260 = 28
1220 = 27
1190 = 26
1150 = 25
1110 = 24
1070 = 23
1030 = 22
etc.
@ivysource What is the date of that document?
^ June 2008. So, nothing to do with the new, new SAT.
Yes, the concordance doc from ACT is outdated (it’s in comparison to the old 1600-point SAT), but as far as I know it’s the best we have thus far from ACT. However, a perfect 1600 on the SAT is still equivalent to a perfect 36 on the ACT, even adjusting for score inflation.
It is true that you will have to take that doc and cross-reference with the “Old 1600 SAT” to “New 1600 SAT” score converter from College Board to get the exact conversions to the new 1600-point SAT.
Heck, I’ll go ahead and do it for you.
Old 1600-Point SAT = ACT = New-1600 Point SAT (adjusted to reflect the recent SAT score inflation)
1600 = 36 = 1600
1560 = 35 = 1570
1510 = 34 = 1540
1460 = 33 = 1500
1420 = 32 = 1470
1380 = 31 = 1430
1340 = 30 = 1400
1300 = 29 = 1360
1260 = 28 = 1320
1220 = 27 = 1290
1190 = 26 = 1260
1150 = 25 = 1220
1110 = 24 = 1180
1070 = 23 = 1140
1030 = 22 = 1110
etc.
p.s. May SAT scores are due tomorrow.
Counselors got them today
Also, here are your true SAT percentiles (not the bogus, inflated percentile that the College Board gives you, but the actual percentile of test-takers) and your true ACT percentiles.
New SAT:
1600 = 99.9%
1570 = 99.8%
1540 = 99.3%
1500 = 98.3%
1470 = 97%
1430 = 95.3%
1400 = 93%
1360 = 90%
1320 = 86.3%
1290 = 81.7%
1260 = 77.8%
1220 = 72%
1180 = 65.4%
1140 = 58.5%
1110 = 51.1%
ACT:
36 = 99.9%
35 = 99.9%
34 = 99.8%
33 = 99.4%
32 = 98.7%
31 = 97.7%
30 = 96.2%
29 = 94.3%
28 = 91.6%
27 = 88.2%
26 = 84.1%
25 = 80.4%
24 = 75%
23 = 68.8%
22 = 62%
21 = 54.8%
Keep in mind that these percentiles should not be directly compared due to the different groups of students taking each test–hence the need for concordance tables from both ACT and the College Board to help round out the picture.
@ivysource How did you arrive at these percentiles?
-
I took the percentile tables from the old 1600-point SAT and the ACT.
-
I converted the old 1600-point scores to new 1600-point scores by using the College Board’s recently published “old SAT scores to new SAT scores” concordance tables: https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/educators/higher-ed/scoring-changes/concordance
-
I applied the percentiles from the old 1600-point SAT to their equivalent scores on the new 1600-point SAT.
I imagine that most colleges will be doing the same, as a way to reverse-engineer the recent inflation of SAT scores and percentiles.
Here is everything in one place:
Old SAT / New SAT / ACT / True Percentile
1600…1600…36…99.95%
1590…1590…99.92%
1580…1590…35…99.89%
1570…1580…99.83%
1560…1570…34…99.78%
1550…1560…99.69%
1540…1560…99.61%
1530…1550…99.51%
1520…1540…33…99.39%
1510…1540…99.25%
1500…1530…99.08%
1490…1520…98.92%
1480…1510…32…98.73%
1470…1510…98.52%
1460…1500…98.28%
1450…1490…98.01%
1440…1480…31…97.72%
1430…1480…97.39%
1420…1470…97.03%
1410…1460…96.63%
1400…1450…30…96.21%
I’m having some formatting issues, so I’ll post the rest of them later.
Thanks @ivysource That looks right and is helpful.