@marvin100 Were the questions more vague back then? Was the Verbal Section before 1994 comparable to the Verbal Section post 1995? I’ve heard that the Verbal Section was a Vocabulary test, but the same could be said for all tests up to 2015. Were the words in the Verbal Section harder in 1994 than in 2015 (i.e. grandiloquence, recalcitrant)?
The 1995 recentering may have been only a change in the conversion of raw scores to scaled scores, as opposed to a change in the test itself. The 2004 and 2016 changes were changes in the test itself.
I took the SAT in 1975. I did very little prep and wound up with a 690 Verbal and 600 Math. I scored 99th%ile on math ability tests, but struggled in actual math classes because I skipped 5th grade and never learned a lot of basic concepts. At the time that I took the test, I was still enrolled in geometry. My middle son, born in 1994, and possessed of the same IQ score that I have, scored a 1410 in 2011 with no studying whatsoever.
You might glean some information as to how SAT testing has evolved by viewing historical averages for various schools: https://books.google.com/books?id=ykQEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA100&lpg=PA100&dq=life+magazine+1960+college+admission+tufts+bowdoin&source=bl&ots=5BKi5WV8SQ&sig=GFl_LycVnJV8AGIXLX2P9kW97I0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=sO1TT4uPK-jm0QG8ifC3DQ#v=onepage&q&f=false.
I took the SAT circa 1980 and IIRC Math was 760 and English was 570 or something like that. There was a whole section devoted to vocabulary which is partially why my English score was so low - back then I was too poor to consider prep classes (if they existed). That plus poor English teachers. Back then anything over 1000 was considered good. Nowadays my scores would probably be inverted.
Prep didn’t exist in my community circa 1980. Nor my husband’s and he lived in one of the most affluent areas of the country with a top public school. Both of us compared narratives at one point and they were equivalent: you can’t improve your score by practicing so don’t bother. Those were more than likely talking points from the testing service, fed to the school administrators who passed them on to us. The smart maverick who broke that “rule” birthed a lucrative industry.
No, yes, no. And imo it’s still a vocab test first and foremost, although I know that’s a very unpopular opinion.
IIRC the verbal section from the old SAT had a “reasoning” component to it. I found the subtleties of the analogies section to be quite challenging even having been an extensive reader enrolled in advanced English and History courses, etc. The current test doesn’t “pull out” vocab for logical comparison but rather asks you about it more in context (of the sentence or the passage). However, that doesn’t eliminate the need to have a relatively better vocab in order to score well. The current questions on the writing section remind me of the old GMAT which I took in late 80’s. I had found that particular exam to be easier than the SAT and, on a scaled-score basis, did notably better. However, I was also one of the few (at the time) who did systematic prep to ensure a maximum score. Perhaps that sort of approach to the SAT would have cracked open its mysteries for me. Or maybe the current format is one that I would simply have done better on because I have a more intuitive than logical approach to language. My son blew away the EBRW section last spring, but I suspect he would have found the analogies section a bit frustrating as well.
Yes, I think so, @JBStillFlying – analogies were very, very teachable. iirc there were 7 major categories, stuff like person/tool, part/whole & whole/part, etc. As a prep teacher, I miss them 
Hmm, this is an interesting thread. I got an 1160 on my PSAT in 1989 and my counselor told me I could not get into a 4 year college and could try community or a junior college, then transfer. She was a little sunnier when my SAT was a 1280. I remember the old SAT being much more about correct grammatical usage and vocabulary. I don’t remember anything about the math. I got 600M/680V. My daughter recently got a 720 easily on CR at the beginning of her sophomore year of HS. It seems like it’s gotten easier in that respect but maybe the math has gotten harder because she is a math whiz and only got a 590M. Who knows?
You may be thinking of the TSWE–the SAT Verbal section in the 1980s didn’t include grammar.
There is a nice chart converting SAT scores from all eras (expect from before 1995). The only thing is that the 2016 match-ups are out of date (new concordances were provided this year), since they estimate a 1470 today to be a 32 ACT, 1420 CR+M, and a 1410-1450 fro before 2005 (when there were analogies and QC questions).
Chart: https://getsmarterprep.com/sat/colleges-and-new-sat-scores/
I just saw this thread and had to jump in. My Mother-in-law retired from 37 years of teaching and had a 1990 SAT Official Prep book, unmarked in, in her collection. I have it as part of my “History of SAT” shelf in my tutoring office. What it says about the test, circa 1990 (when I took it, incidentally… but my ACT was the score I sent to colleges)…
Verbal section - 25 antonyms/ 20 analogies/ 15 sentence completions/ 25 reading comp questions spread over 2 30-minute sections
Math - 1 30-minute section, 25 multiple choice… then another 30 minute section consisting of 7 MC, then 20 Quantitative comparison, then 8 More MC (35 Q, 30 Min). For you young whipper-snappers out there, this was math with NO CALCULATOR 
TSWE - 30 minutes, 50 questions, with 23 Error ID, 17 Improving Sentences, then 10 Error ID. These two types of questions would become the backbone of the SAT English section circa 2005-2014.
There was also an additional 30-minute “equating” section that didn’t count. This tradition died with the current SAT but has been resurrected by the ACT on their post-science 20-minute mandatory “Tryout” Section. I love how the tests come up with every term except “unpaid guinea pig” for these experimental sections.
I also have, from her archive, a 1985 “Preparing for the ACT” paper booklet.
Here’s the 1985 ACT Test breakdown:
- English - 75 questions, 40 minutes (same format as today) but almost entirely grammar and little, if any, writing skills.
- Math - 40 questions, 50 minutes, NO CALCULATOR,
- Social Studies Reading Test - 35 minutes, 52 questions. It had a 9-question reading quiz, two 9-question “debate” passages (like today’s Conflicting Viewpoint/Fighting Scientist questions in Science Reasoning), then… and this would never fly in today’s environment, 15 social studies general knowledge questions, both U.S. and World History, and still another 9-question “debate” passage.
- Natural Sciences Reading Test - 35 Minutes, 52 questions. It starts with a 9-question “Conflicting Viewpoints” passage… then a 9-question Reading Comprehension passage… then 15 general knowledge questions (topics from physics, chemistry, biology, geology… then 2 more science-based reading comp passages.
ACT moved away from its roots as an “achievement” test in 1989… to become the standardized test it is today.
Sorry for the long-winded response… but I hope the young’uns enjoyed this history lesson and Marvin and the rest of us old-timers enjoyed this trip down memory lane. I’m going to go play my Atari Flashback console and listen to Michael Jackson’s “Thriller” now…
As to questions of, is the test “Easier” now… three observations…
- Eliminating penalties for wrong guesses is going to artificially increase scores. Students on the SAT can now not only not be worried about guessing but can get extra random points for having the right letter at the right time.
- We collectively know so much more about the tests now than we did back in the dark ages of the 20th Century. While there were some early test prep programs in the major cities, anyone in a rural area (such as where I grew up) had no real way of prepping beyond the lone practice test and scattered tips in the paper registration booklets we got from our guidance counselors. Now there are an abundance of prep books and options, and they are readily available to anyone with the internet and an account for an online book retailer.
- I do wish people would stop obsessing about their IQ numbers. I'm on my 47th trip around the Sun, and what I know is that a high IQ has NOTHING to do with one's success in life or, for that matter, one's actual, functional, intelligence. Likewise, a 1600/36 is no guarantee of success in life, but a strong work ethic, a willingness to learn, and a truly positive demeanor and outlook on life will make a person successful!
The tradition lives. Currently, students who don’t take the essay get a section 5 instead.
@evergreen5 ALL ACT takers now have to take the “Section 5” effective last September. I fully expect the SAT to re-introduce such a section in the near future, because if the ACT is doing something, the SAT has to do it as well. Dare I say it… :(|) see… :(|) do…
@midtntutor Just to be clear, I was referring to the current SAT. SAT takers who do not take the essay do get a section 5. Only the essay takers don’t get it (and there will be fewer and fewer of those as most colleges have dropped the SAT essay requirement).
@evergreen5 1, @midtntutor 0. We got a new coffeemaker and Thursday was our first full day with it… and I was wired last night and should’ve fact-checked my post better before posting #-o ~O)
I don’t know exact numbers which I’m sure you can look up. In the 1980’s when I took it I got a 680 in math and 780 in English. I applied and was accepted to multiple Ivies (big and little) and also recruited by many other schools (one of whom gave me a nearly full scholarship for which I did not apply). This was a major university with an excellent reputation. My SATs were considered amazing at that time. The people who had similar scores were nearly all national merit ( in a high number state) and most went to amazing colleges. The ONLY person I knew ( and I went to a college prep school and knew many other kids at other college prep schools) who got an 800 went to MIT. A good score then was about 1000-1100, 1200-1300+ was Ivy or very top tier. 600 was more than solid and 700s were probably top 1-2%. There were no study groups that I know of, perhaps Kaplan existed but it wasn’t something anyone I knew did. They did have study guides, it was just a big book. They did not share old tests. They did not do SAT problems in the classroom.
I think they dumbed down the SAT a lot. You can look at old charts and see the differences. I guess the only thing which matters is the raw %. The % tells you more since it weighs against everyone taking the test.
“Proving my point above that pretty much nobody got 700 or above.”
I took the SAT in 1969. When I was in high school, there was only one student in the entire school who got above 700 on the English SAT. He got a 710. He was exceptional in English, fluently bilingual (English and French), and was the top student in the high school both overall and in Latin. I am almost certain that no one in the high school got even close to 1500 overall on the SAT. No one did any SAT preparation back then, at least where I was from.
I was very good at math. For me back then there wasn’t any question on the math SAT that was even remotely hard. There was one multiple choice question (that I still remember) that was ill-formed, so that I had to guess at which not-quite-correct answer they were looking for. I went off to university at MIT, where there were a lot of students, about half, who had gotten 800 on the math SAT. I was shocked to find a few students there (less than half) who had gotten over 700 on the English SAT.