<p>I do not understand what all the angst is about, it is just one scholarship program. It seems like some are complaining that there are too many qualified students. If I am reading the information correctly, it is something like 55,000 out of 1.3M that are commended and 16,000 become semi-finalists and 15,000 become finalists. That is still a small percentage.</p>
<p>Further, why is it an issue if it is granted on a state by state basis. One of hte posters argued that there was not much differentiating on the high end of the scores. As someone else pointed out, these cuts are often made in class rank between students with similar GPAs. I would also point out that those GPAs are often acheived in a widely differing set of classes, one may be in science the other in the arts or humanities. How is this fair and how do you normalize?</p>
<p>Do people have an issue with the AMC tests? Or the Mandelbrot tests? Or the Siemens-Westignhouse competitions? Perhaps it is something that all or almost all HS students take but I do not have a problem with it. It is just another avenue for certain students to show a certain aptitude that is separate and distinct from their school record.</p>
<p>It's NOT laughable. I don't understand how you can even make that arguement. </p>
<p>I'm a little bit offended by your comment about "being happy with my test pool". Let me make clear that I'm NOT a National Merit Scholar. In fact, my PSATs were horrible compared to my SATs. I'm not, however, going to decide that because I didn't perform well on my PSATs, no one else should be commended for their good performances.</p>
<p>FYI, the 3 NM Scholars from my school all scored above 1550 on their SATs. You make it sound like we're all pathetic test takers up here.</p>
<p>I agree with marite about the geographical affirmative action...its an unfortunate (for those of us in california) aspect of the admissions process, however, since colleges do this already (and are aware of the different cutoffs I'm sure), I don't see the harm in giving money for it.</p>
<p>Besides, this is a ridiculous way to balance the budget. Like placing the burden on education is really going to help us Californians out...</p>
<p>"The NM Scholars are not only great test takers, but also great writers and great students and are involved in their communities. They submit essays, transcripts, and activity sheets AFTER they qualify by their PSAT score. These kids have it all. You also have to realize that the vast majority of kids who score well on the test are also great students in other respects. Not all of them, certainly, but a huge majority."</p>
<p>Yes, but the same is true of many kids who are not NM finalists. The PSAT is just not a good tool for selecting such candidates. </p>
<p>We talk about "merit" awards but use a tool that probably doesn't even identify those that deserve the "merit".</p>
<p>And eliz22, please put your statistic in perspective. How many non NM folks also did well on the SAT? (or, for more fun, tell me what the relevance of a 1550 SAT score is? Is a kid with a 1550 somehow better than a kid with a 1500? but that's another story)</p>
<p>I agree that different states have different cut-offs but if they want to normalize the data they can use the commended cut-off or set a different cut-off entirely.</p>
<p>My son's school also told the students that the test was just a prep for the SATs. Personally, I think it would have been better if they added that those who do extremely well there are scholarship posibilities.</p>
<p>So, newmassdad, if the PSAT is not a good tool, what makes the SAT a good tool? The UCs are completely numbers-driven anyway, why not give out money in addition to choosing people with high scores? Oh...because the California school system sucks like that.</p>
<p>I just hate how so much stuff is based on your PSAT. I did relatively poorly on it (204), but much better on my SATs (2270). However whenever a school calls or writes me it's because of my "great performance on the PSATs". If that test was a "preliminary", why is it given so much weight?</p>
<p>Hey there Elizabeth22.....I am in no way saying that Maine has miserable test takers. As for laughing.......I choose to laugh and I don't recall forwarding laughable as an argument. I am for merit recognition and financial awards as a result of achievement. We clearly have differing opines on NM and that is okay with me.....hey, I love Maine, the Portland SeaDogs and the lobster.....I love it all. Have a blueberry pie and think of me.</p>
<p>Yes, they can normalize the data, but they don't. I think, too, that 1.3 million students who qualify for Commended would strain scholarship resources anywhere.</p>
<p>A 204 is not poor on that test, in fact it is quite good, something like the top 2%. Further, the scores are used to produce mailing lists for the colleges. They ask for a particular cut of the database, say PSAT scores of 180-210 identified as female with an interest in math, and an engineering school would send a nice form letter to the recipient.</p>
<p>You will get similar mailings if you fill out similar information in taking the ACT.</p>
<p>The PSAT was designed for juniors. It was designed to be preliminary. Just like the SAT was designed for the end of junior year/beginning of senior year. Its not given a lot of weight...colleges just get your mailing address from the info you put on the PSAT</p>
<p>Carefully fill out the SAT and avoid the junk mail.....at my HS in the mailroom we had giant rolling bins for depositing the "college mail" directly into the trash can....don't open just ash can immediately. It is all such a waste of trees.</p>
<p>it is actually 55,000 that qualify for commended out of 1.3M test takers. I understand that they do not normalize the data it is just a thought on what they could do.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Its not given a lot of weight...colleges just get your mailing address from the info you put on the PSAT
[/quote]
That's why tying it to NSM is so strange. In some cases NSM finalists get full rides.
The fairly haphazard way NSM scholarships are awarded is another issue: it depends not only one a student's score but also what state the student resides in (geographical AA); it depends on whether the college the student applies to gives scholarships to NSM finalists (and in what amount); or, it depends on whether the student has parents who work for a company that sponsors NSM.</p>
<p>What is/does the UC system do for the "National Hispanic Recognition Program". Do they provide merit aid to these students? If the do currently, is this being cut also?</p>
<p>Yeah poor wasn't the right word, 204 is pretty good. However, this is CC, a place where 3/4 of the people get NMSF.</p>
<p>Why would you not want the junk mail?? That's the best part of my day! I come home from school and check the mail to see what colleges sent stuff that day. I feel sad when no one sends me anything.</p>
<p>Funny thing is that my second son is receiving less college mail than his older brother did but he scored a few points higher on the PSAT. Perhaps it is just that he filled out that he was interested in math and economics where his older brother indicated that he was interested in engineering. Additionally, I think a number of the schools are contacting my second son via email instead of via USMail but I do not know for sure.</p>
<p>Hope you have fun reading all your mail from colleges!</p>
<p>Who said the SAT is a good too? Not me. CB research shows that HS GPA and SAT score are equally good at predicting first year college grades, but neither is very good. More interestingly, the SAT on top of the HS GPA explains only an additional 5-10% of the variance.</p>
<p>I think the real reasons the SAT is used so much are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>It's convenient - all the cost is borne by the applicant. It involves no work on the part of the HS, and the results are nicely packaged for the college.</p></li>
<li><p>it gives an impression of uniformity, objectivity, and impartiality.</p></li>
<li><p>it's easy for the adcoms to use.</p></li>
<li><p>there's a big PR machine behind the SAT. (which includes, in a perverse way, USNWR and the guidebooks that report the score ranges and averages. If they report it, it must mean something, right?)</p></li>
</ul>
<p>the SAT does not work very well, but so what? Nothing else works very well either, at least not in isolation. Now, the truth is that colleges that junked the SAT requirement saw no significant change in their student bodies, but that's another story.</p>