What's the deal with the recent math curves?

Test Preparation
1

<p>On old SATs, -1 was usually 800 and -2 was uusally a 770-790. What gives? On the new, post-March 2005, the curves are brutal (-1 = 760 in November '08? Come on!), yet I've found the problems are significantly more difficult. It's not just the addition of algebra 2 and whatnot -- the problems just are a good deal harder. </p>

<p>Could it be that since we now have marginally more time per question that more people can get a perfect raw score? Or is the student population just getting a heck of a lot better at math? </p>

<p>Input appreciated!</p>

2

<p>-1 on Jan. 2008 was a 790... and I also took March or something with -1 and got a 780, but a -1 on the PSAT was a 76. I don't know what's with that, but I don't really like it since it's really easy to misread a question or something no matter how well you know the material. If the curve's getting that harsh, I wish they'd put in a few harder problems and make the curve easier.</p>

3

<p>More people are actually studying for the SATs?</p>

4

<p>The SAT for each testing month has various versions that have some questions the same but many quite different. For example, a test you receive may have a fairly difficult CR, a very easy M, and a very difficult Wr. In this case, you will be penalized most for questions missed or left blank in the math section and least for those missed or left blank in the writing section.</p>

5

<p>Here's my theory: Fall SATs are harder because more Seniors are taking them for a second time. In the spring, you have a higher concentration of Juniors taking them for the first time.</p>

6

<p>The curve isn't based on the results of the people taking it that day. The questions themselves are pretested years in advance before they become real test questions.</p>

7

<p>Yeah, I actually thought that the Oct SAT was easier than I expected</p>

8

<p>You know the easiest solution is to just stop missing problems. For the past 137 tests, -0 was a 800.</p>

9

<p>^
Wow, I never though of that!</p>

10

<p>Good to know, Arachnotron. You clearly know more about the inner workings of the Evil Empire (CollegeBoard) than I do.</p>

11

<p>


</p>

<p>You're making me hate myself again.</p>

12

<p>I think the curve also depends on the difficulty of the questions. on the october 08 test, -1 was a 780, which was what i got! :( disappointed i couldn't get the 800 (it was my third try), but i improved math by 40, writing by 170, and CR by 30, so I was quite pleased :).</p>

13

<p>
[QUOTE]
You know the easiest solution is to just stop missing problems. For the past 137 tests, -0 was a 800.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Ha Ha. My whole point, though, is that the old exams were sufficiently hard so that people who were sharp but just made a careless error could still walk away with an 800, just like what happens with the CR/Writing sections.</p>

14

<p>In my opinion, if you make a careless error, you don't deserve the 800. There is so much time for each section that you should have time to work through the questions carefully and still be able to look over your work at the end.</p>

15

<p>@hell-spider: by old exams, do you mean pre-March 2005? The maximum math raw score was higher (60 instead of 54) so you can't just compare -2 on both curves. In fact you would expect -2 in general to be a better scaled score on the old test compared to the new.</p>

<p>I put the QAS math curves in this</a> thread for reference ... it is true that the US math curves in Oct and Nov (especially) were harsh.</p>