<p>The little reading I've done on the subject would seem to indicate that SAT scores have been declining over the years. In addition, there have been many calls to "reform" the US public school system. </p>
<p>But this forum and the increasingly competive application process for top schools would indicate that there is a larger pool of qualified applicants? What's with all these 1600 SAT scores?</p>
<p>Could someone help me understand this discrepancy?</p>
<p>I do understand that this forum naturally selects the top students, but how do you explain the increased competition for the top schools?</p>
<p>Declining SAT scores seem to be a bunch of propaganda. I knew the college admissions process was competitve just from newspaper and magazine articles, but I never realized the years/months of SAT prepping going on until I came to this board.</p>
<p>Thus today there are more 1600s than there ever were in the 1970s, but they don't mean the same level of performance that a 1600 meant back then. </p>
<p>The group of SAT-takers every year is a self-selected group, and that is why comparisons of groups of SAT-takers may not perfectly reflect national trends, but it is clear that if recentering had not happened, the number of people who score really high on the SAT (you define "high" as you please) would be lower today than in some earlier periods, for an equal number of test-takers. Slogging through the data sets provided by the College Board has caused considerable concern among researchers investigating the issue of the performance level of America's top students.</p>
<p>the most recentering occurred on the verbal portion, however...and, without recentering scores would definitely be lower than they otherwise would be.</p>
<p>For example, old math 500 is now equals new math of 520, whereas old verbal 500 went to new verbal 580. Old math of 640 equals new math of 640 (no change), but old verbal of 640 now equals recentered verbal of 700 (huge change)! Under old math, a kid could miss 1 (I think) and still earn an 800, under new math, kids can miss several problems and still earn an 800 since the old 780 math now equals 800. In contrast, old verbal of 730 now equals an 800. </p>
<p>So, for all those parents who earned a 1500 under the old test without prep (what's that?), consider yourselves the equivalent of 1600's!</p>
<p>With regards to the researchers....the problem that they really face is that the population of kids taking the test has changed significantly over the decades. In the old days, only x% of kids went to college. Now, its x*2 kids that plan to go to college. In addition, we have significantly more kids taking the test who speak a language other than english at home, particularly in Calif, CB's biggest SAT customer.</p>
<p>Do they distinguish between a "true 1600" ie, 2 X 800 taken in one seating, vs combining the best scores which might include an 800 in math the second time student took the SAT combined with an 800 in verbal that was obtained on, say, the sixth taking of the test?</p>
<p>For example, the UC's will only use the highest score pair (now three scores) from one sitting, whereas many private schools will use the highest individual test score regardless of when a kid takes the test, or how many times. Actually, its in a schools interest to use the highest individual scores to keep up their numbers in the all-important stats rankings.</p>
<p>Not sure if they 'mentally' discount a score that is consistently a 600, and then goes to 800 on test #6....interesting question....</p>
<p>you can miss verbal questions and still get an 800... but I haven't seen a math grading scale where you can get an 800 if you miss one. Often it drops right to 780 with the first miss.</p>
<p>To the contrary of post #9, the book 10 Real SATs Third Edition lists several actual SAT I tests on which missing an item on the math section still allowed a score of 800. Those tests are the May 1996 test (page 356), the November 1996 test (page 396) (two wrong gets you a 790), the January 1997 test (page 436), the May 1997 test (page 476), the January 2000 test (page 556), and the May 2002 test (page 685). </p>
<p>More to the point, the curriculum level of the SAT I math section is LOW--about the eighth grade level in many other countries. That's why people who want to impress college admission officers with math scores (or who just want to experience challenge and development of personal abilities) take AMC</a> tests as well as SAT I and SAT II tests in math.</p>
<p>Well, it will be interesting to see what happens to scores after the "New SAT" gets going. I think it is going to be a bumpy ride for a while, especially if scores drop dramatically after the first test is given - will the College Board and ETS then "recenter" again to keep the average at around 500? And, while they say the math is going to be harder, my daughter is consistently scoring within the same range on the practice tests as she did on last year's "old" SAT. Plus, we'll be looking at a 2400 score vs. a 1600. I wonder if that will mean fewer "perfect scorers" out there since they will have to do well on THREE tests instead of two. Should be very interesting to see what happens---Just wish my daughter wasn't in the "guinea pig" class of 2006. :(</p>
<p>It must depend on the test. I know my son failed to answer one math question on the SAT, but got all the ones he answered correct, and he got 780. (We won't even discuss his Verbal. Suffice it to say, it was much lower than his math...)</p>
<p>My real question was why is there so much competition from qualified applicants if SAT scores are declining? </p>
<p>I think I know the answer after reading all the responses...although the average scores may be declining, there are many more people taking the tests. So there are many more people above 1500 SAT now than there were 30 years ago.</p>
<p>I guess college capacity hasn't risen fast enough to keep up with demand</p>
<p>"The little reading I've done on the subject would seem to indicate that SAT scores have been declining over the years. In addition, there have been many calls to "reform" the US public school system. "</p>
<p>Reform the public school system? Of course not...never...(sarcasm)</p>
<p>Yes...let's "reform" the public school system. In my area we are told how good the local schools are and we are told they need more money to make them better. Our schools are really not that good. </p>
<p>I do think that there ARE good public schools in some places. I hear about them on this board. But if our local schools are any indication, things do need fixing. However, I'm not sure they can be fixed. </p>
<p>We home schooled our oldest D (18) since pre-school. She is a NMSF and hopes to major in physics or astrophysics. She is why I am on this board. We put our second daughter in our local HS this year as a freshman after home schooling since pre-school. We chose the school because it offers the IB program. She was bumped into sophomore level classes and got all A's first semester doing less than 6 hours per week of homework. It makes me wonder how good her education will be in this school. This high school, (around 900 students), hasn't had a NM scholar for the last several years.
I think we are going to need to supplement some things at home.</p>
<p>you are correct, each math prob on the PSAT was 35-40 pts. But, don't forget, that the PSAT is a much shorter test than the (marathon) new SAT, so each SAT problem carries less weight since there are more of them, and more opportunities to get tricked by CB's so-called logic. Also, CB assumes that most Juniors are only starting Alg II, so CB does not put any AlgII probs on the PSAT even tho they will be on the new SAT. (There will be 4-5 Alg II probs on the new SAT.)</p>
<p>jvd:</p>
<p>you are spot on -- the college application boomlet will peak around 2009-2011, depending on your demographic source and state. But, tests scores are 'declining' bcos many kids who previously would never consider the taking the test, i.e., perhaps targeting community college or no college, still take the test anyway. particularly in Calif. GC's tell kids to take it, even if they are planning on the community college route just in case they change their mind and decide to go to a Cal State.</p>