Why are the scores so high this year?

[Anonymous]

I've seen this comment on several threads and I'm wondering why the scores are so much higher this year?

Anyone want to share their thoughts?

[Anonymous]

More parents are test prepping.

[Anonymous]

Plus they changed to a new "Form 7" of the CogAT exam.

[Anonymous]

I'm not so sure that scores are that much higher this year. A couple parents posted scores in the 150's, someone said that scores are higher this year because of the new test format, and everyone ran with it. I think we'll have to wait and see what the test scores of those admitted and those denied are to evaluate whether scores were higher this year than in past years.

[Anonymous]

The new cogat test form 7 requires no reading or vocabulary skills. This may have accounted for a larger pool of high scoring kids. I would think that the committee will look at DRA scores to get a more complete picture of a child's verbal ability this year.

[Anonymous]

But where is the evidence that scores are indeed on average higher this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But where is the evidence that scores are indeed on average higher this year?

There is no evidence. It's just an assumption that people on this board seem to be making.

[Anonymous]

Its all an urban legend. Even if this year's test was easier (or harder), the scores are all scaled. (Nobody compares raw scores, only scaled scores).

So nationally, there would be the same % of kids who get 120's and 150's as any other year.

[Anonymous]

My son's cogat composite and NNAT were within 3 points of each other, so I would guess that they're a pretty accurate portrait of his abilities.

[Anonymous]

Didn't the raising of the benchmark to 132 this year help keep the pool around the same size as in prior years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn't the raising of the benchmark to 132 this year help keep the pool around the same size as in prior years?

Exactly. They pick the benchmark to get roughly 2000 kids in the pool each year.

[Anonymous]

The scores vary depending on where 98% is that year. It was 132 in DD's year, 130 in DS's - 3 years apart. I have no idea if they updated the test during that time - I kind of doubt it if they did it this year since DS took the tests 2 years ago.

[Anonymous]

The benchmark scores vary each year to result in about 2,000 students in the pool. When the NNAT2 (vs. the NNAT) was first given, the number of kids in the pool dropped when they kept the benchmark at 132 so they lowered it to 130. With the Cogat Form 7 this year, if they had left the benchmark at 130, they would have over 5,000 kids in the pool. (That's 5,000 screening files to prepare and review.) So they adjusted the benchmark score to 132 to include a 132 on any CogAT subtest. They were still over 3,000 kids in the pool. So they contacted the author of the test, who suggested they use the CogAT composite of 132. That results in a little over 2,500 students in the pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The benchmark scores vary each year to result in about 2,000 students in the pool. When the NNAT2 (vs. the NNAT) was first given, the number of kids in the pool dropped when they kept the benchmark at 132 so they lowered it to 130. With the Cogat Form 7 this year, if they had left the benchmark at 130, they would have over 5,000 kids in the pool. (That's 5,000 screening files to prepare and review.) So they adjusted the benchmark score to 132 to include a 132 on any CogAT subtest. They were still over 3,000 kids in the pool. So they contacted the author of the test, who suggested they use the CogAT composite of 132. That results in a little over 2,500 students in the pool.

source?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The benchmark scores vary each year to result in about 2,000 students in the pool. When the NNAT2 (vs. the NNAT) was first given, the number of kids in the pool dropped when they kept the benchmark at 132 so they lowered it to 130. With the Cogat Form 7 this year, if they had left the benchmark at 130, they would have over 5,000 kids in the pool. (That's 5,000 screening files to prepare and review.) So they adjusted the benchmark score to 132 to include a 132 on any CogAT subtest. They were still over 3,000 kids in the pool. So they contacted the author of the test, who suggested they use the CogAT composite of 132. That results in a little over 2,500 students in the pool.

source?

Carol Horn at tonight's AAPAC meeting.