<p>That brings me to this question:
Why does the College Board put students in a quandary 
when trying to figure out their raw scores.</p>
<p>Why not this?:
Total Possible points = 54
Missed = 4
Omitted = 3</p>
<p>54</p>
<h2>- (4 * 1.25)</h2>
<p>49</p>
<h2>- (3 * 1)</h2>
<p>46 = Raw Score</p>
<p>What is the point of counting the 
number of correctly answered questions since
most students usually have a greater
number of correctly answered questions
than they do for incorrectly answered 
quesions?</p>
<p>Here is the truth:
Correct Answer = +1 point
Incorrect Answer = -1.25 points
Omit = -1 points</p>
<p>Doesn't my method make more sense than CollegeBoard's method?</p>
             
            
              
              
              
            
           
          
            
            
              <p>I dont want to attack CollegeBoard, but there probably is a reason why they dont publicly release much of the research that helped them develop the SAT.  Remember some years back that the cell phone companies decided to finally release brain cancer data?  Well it turns out that the data completly absolved them of any responsibility, since there was absolutely no evidence of an association.  </p>
<p>If CollegeBoards scoring method was trully equitable and justified, they would probably release their evidence as well, but wait that research has never been released.</p>
<p>I agree that your schedule is basically correct, but I think there is something psychologically defeating about losing a point for guessing, so that probably is why they dont state the point schedule that way.</p>
<p>I mean CollegeBoard has never done anything for political reasons, right?
(someone whispers "New SAT" in the background)</p>
             
            
              
              
              
            
           
          
            
            
              <p>I think ShadowRider was wondering about the step-by-step instructions or worksheet they give for calculating your own score from a practice test, not how they actually score the test or how they release the scoring method.</p>
<p>Shadow, where are you getting the "true" method you give?  It's not accurate.  Using that method, you incur a 1-point penalty for a omission and a 1.25-point penalty for an incorrect answer; really it is 0 and .25.  </p>
<p>The practice booklet says:
Correct answers = A
Incorrect answers * .25 = B
A - B = raw score</p>
<p>I think they assume that you will figure A however is convenient for you, whether that is by counting up the correct answers or counting the incorrect or omitted ones and subtracting.</p>
             
            
              
              
              
            
           
          
            
            
              <p>Mrs. Ferguson, I made up that method just to increase the celerity of scoring my practice tests.</p>
<p>How is my method inaccurate?</p>
<h1>Let us compare the two methods:</h1>
<p>SAT's method:</p>
<p>Correct answer = +1 point
Incorrect answer = -.25 of a point
Omitted question = 0 points</p>
<p>Using this key, CollegeBoard can then say that 1 correct answer compensates for 4 incorrect answers.</p>
<p>A = 50 correct answers
B = 3 incorrect answers * .25
C = 1 omitted question</p>
<p>49.25 = A-B
49.25 = Raw score</p>
<p>================================================
My method:</p>
<p>Correct answer = +1 point
Incorrect answer = -1.25 points
Omitted question = -1 point</p>
<p>Using this key, you can then see that 5 correct answers compensates for 4 incorrect answers, and that 5 correct answers compensates for 5 omitted questions.
Can you now see from where the negative raw score comes?</p>
<p>A = 3 incorrect answers * 1.25
B = 1 omitted question * 1
C = 54(Total number of possible points)</p>
<p>D = C - A = 50.25
E = D - B = 49.25 
49.25 = Raw Score</p>
<p>================================================
These two methods end up with the same score, but what Chris_CEEAE said about losing a point for guessing might be a reason why the SAT says that 0 points are gained or lost for guessing.</p>