Are SAT scores just higher now than the mid/late 90s?

[Anonymous]

I remember being upset that I took it before they added the essay section because I always did better with essays than the verbal section of the PSAT/SAT.

But at some point they decided to remove that and go back to just math and verbal.

I also remember wishing I could use my Achievement Test (I think they were called SAT II at some point) scores as my SAT scores because I got scores in the 700s for those.

FWIW, I think those scores placed me into high level comp, math and foreign language classes my freshman year, so it wasn't all bad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The renormalizing in 1995 was huge and a mistake as there is now way too much compression. I got a 1560 in 1989 and that was considered outstanding. My kid just got the same and it is a solid “ehh….I guess report it.”

Agreed. There was a time when a 1400 or 1500+ meant something and really separated you from the back (and no I didn't get those scores and I took it in 1998). Now it's just another data point and the only way you stand out is if you're NOT in that tightly compressed range. Which means now schools look to all kinds of other things that are harder to come by - national level ECs etc. - bc it's hard to stand out at those levels by yourself, if you don't have parents shuttling you all over for tournaments and competitions and dropping $$ of camps. There was a time when a 1560+ and ECs at your local school - with no involvement from mommy and daddy - were perfectly sufficient to get you a really high level school.

But it's like everything else - when everyone gets a trophy, how much is that trophy really worth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The renormalizing in 1995 was huge and a mistake as there is now way too much compression. I got a 1560 in 1989 and that was considered outstanding. My kid just got the same and it is a solid “ehh….I guess report it.”

Agreed. There was a time when a 1400 or 1500+ meant something and really separated you from the back (and no I didn't get those scores and I took it in 1998). Now it's just another data point and the only way you stand out is if you're NOT in that tightly compressed range. Which means now schools look to all kinds of other things that are harder to come by - national level ECs etc. - bc it's hard to stand out at those levels by yourself, if you don't have parents shuttling you all over for tournaments and competitions and dropping $$ of camps. There was a time when a 1560+ and ECs at your local school - with no involvement from mommy and daddy - were perfectly sufficient to get you a really high level school.

But it's like everything else - when everyone gets a trophy, how much is that trophy really worth?

Yeah, that’s my post you’re responding to. I would still be stuck in my hometown if it wasn’t for that 1560 sat. My parents didn’t pay for or drive me to much of anything for extracurriculars so my ECs were all the stupid HS club stuff. I went to waldenbpoks and bought an SAT prep book for like $8 because I knew it was my ticket out. I think we’ve lost those kids. But maybe that’s good for their hometowns?

[Anonymous]

Easier now. The don’t have those dumb questions that go like this:

Apple is to airplane as brain surgery is to ___.

I never understood how answering puzzle questions was supposed to show my worth as a potential college student. Very funny they took that test seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes things have changed.

Looking at that wiki referenced above, a 1350 in 1984 put you in the 98th percentile.

In 2022 a 1350 puts you at the 90th percentile; 98th percentile is now 1500.

I really wish a SAT percentile chart existed for the late 90s.

This link has the mean for the 90s in case you’re any to see:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_SAT#Origins_and_overview


What is the wiki link you used to get the info you mentioned? I googled and there are a LOT of Wikipedia entries for the SAT.

[Anonymous]

I've wondered this as well. I took the SAT in 1992 and scored 750 math, 650 verbal, for a 1400.

I was surprised 30 years later when my kid took it and knew so many who scored 1400 or higher.

Here is what I can find:
1992 score report: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED351352.pdf
Average: verbal 423 math 476 = 899

In 1992, verbal 700+ was top 1% and 600+ was top 4%.

In 1992, math 700+ was top 3% and 600+ was top 8%.

1060 was the 75th percentile.

In 2022 (see https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2022-total-group-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report.pdf)

Average: verbal 529 math 521 = 1050

In 2022, verbal 700+ was top 8% and 600+ was top 20%.

In 2022, math 700+ was top 10% and 600+ was top 16%.

1200 was the 74th percentile (they don't get 75th, but that's close).

I remember (but can't find) that my 1992 1400 put me in the 99th percentile. That same score in 2022 is the 92nd percentile.

So, yes, the scores are very different today.

[Anonymous]

I blame the internet for making it so much easier to prep for the SAT. Or maybe I blame the internet for exposing it and showing us all it isn't very good at measuring aptitude?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've wondered this as well. I took the SAT in 1992 and scored 750 math, 650 verbal, for a 1400.

I was surprised 30 years later when my kid took it and knew so many who scored 1400 or higher.

Here is what I can find:
1992 score report: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED351352.pdf
Average: verbal 423 math 476 = 899

In 1992, verbal 700+ was top 1% and 600+ was top 4%.

In 1992, math 700+ was top 3% and 600+ was top 8%.

1060 was the 75th percentile.

In 2022 (see https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2022-total-group-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report.pdf)

Average: verbal 529 math 521 = 1050

In 2022, verbal 700+ was top 8% and 600+ was top 20%.

In 2022, math 700+ was top 10% and 600+ was top 16%.

1200 was the 74th percentile (they don't get 75th, but that's close).

I remember (but can't find) that my 1992 1400 put me in the 99th percentile. That same score in 2022 is the 92nd percentile.

So, yes, the scores are very different today.

You can add 70-80 to your verbal and perhaps 10-20 to your math. So you'd have a 1490/1500 now. They really changed the verbal in the 1995 normalization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just starting this journey with a soon to be 9th grader, so we're just starting to figure out the basics. DH and I both realize that college admissions has gotten a lot tougher than when we graduated high school in the mid/late 90s so we are definitely not pressuring our kid for any particular type of school or anything. Honestly he still needs the first few years in HS to figure out what he needs whether that's a small supportive environment or a big flagship with the football scene or whatever.

But as I'm looking at posts here, CC, and just anecdotally, are there just far more kids getting 1400 and 1500+ SAT scores than their used to be? I'm sure the data distribution exists someplace but I haven't run across it yet.

I mean I went to a good public HS in NJ - though no where near the top in NJ; yet DS's Va HS current day is supposed to be MUCH better than the current day standing of my NJ HS. When I was there, my NJ HS usually sent about 15 out of 400 graduates to the Ivys every year and then probably another 15 or so to Duke, Northwestern, NYU, Gtown etc. And even there, it really seemed like a handful of the top super stars would have a 1450+ type of score; certainly not all 30 kids going to the Ivys + top 10 schools had 1500s. It SHOCKS me now that I got into Penn - Wharton undergrad with just a 1360, as nowadays that score would be a - don't even apply; and no I didn't have any superior ECs, they were just all in school type clubs.

Has something changed with the SATs? Do all upper middle class kids do years of SAT prep classes now? Or just smarter kids/the game got more competitive in the last 2 decades where I obviously wasn't paying attention to it?

Don't know but the percentiles today are comparable to scores from the late 70s that were 250 points lower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I blame the internet for making it so much easier to prep for the SAT. Or maybe I blame the internet for exposing it and showing us all it isn't very good at measuring aptitude?

The current SAT is not designed to measure aptitude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I took the SAT in 1987. It was harder then.

For example:

1. Each question had five choices - now it's four. Easier now to narrow down to two answers & guess.

2. No longer deducts points for incorrect answers.

3. You can superscore & use score choice.

Huge difference between 1987 and mid o late 90s, as the test was recentered in 1994 or 1995. Anyone taking the test before that recentering would need to add around 100 points to get their equivalent current score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The renormalizing in 1995 was huge and a mistake as there is now way too much compression. I got a 1560 in 1989 and that was considered outstanding. My kid just got the same and it is a solid “ehh….I guess report it.”

Sorry, this is silly. A 1560 is still an excellent score, above 99th percentile, and will help your kid gain admission to any school, even MIT. Why bother taking it at all if a 1560 is a solid “ehh….I guess report it”?

What you are getting at is that a) there is a lot more competition (more competition in EVERYTHING... look at every sport) and b) there are a lot more factors that are considered in admissions.

But yes, the SATs were changed (before some of the PPs took them and benefited as well) AND many more kids prep. The fact that more kids prep may make the scores higher but it actually does not make the SAT itself easier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Easier now. The don’t have those dumb questions that go like this:

Apple is to airplane as brain surgery is to ___.

I never understood how answering puzzle questions was supposed to show my worth as a potential college student. Very funny they took that test seriously.

It does. And those are LSAT questions.

[Anonymous]

There are a lot more Chinese and Indian-ancestry kids graduating from high school now than there were in the 80s and 90s. They make up half (or more) of the kids scoring 1400+ on the SAT.

Most ethnic groups are doing worse on the SAT these days, but Asian-ancestry kids are still doing really well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The renormalizing in 1995 was huge and a mistake as there is now way too much compression. I got a 1560 in 1989 and that was considered outstanding. My kid just got the same and it is a solid “ehh….I guess report it.”

Sorry, this is silly. A 1560 is still an excellent score, above 99th percentile, and will help your kid gain admission to any school, even MIT. Why bother taking it at all if a 1560 is a solid “ehh….I guess report it”?

What you are getting at is that a) there is a lot more competition (more competition in EVERYTHING... look at every sport) and b) there are a lot more factors that are considered in admissions.

But yes, the SATs were changed (before some of the PPs took them and benefited as well) AND many more kids prep. The fact that more kids prep may make the scores higher but it actually does not make the SAT itself easier.

+1 this is a truly terrible and egotistical attitude for you and your child. Isn't even a humble brag, it s just awful. When you say your 99th percentile score is meh, you are literally crapping on 99% of the students in the country.