2015 NNAT results

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
DD took 2 full-length paper "prep" tests to gauge her timing plus a short comp-based sample the school had sent out the link to. Both paper tests were 45/48, ~45 and 25 min each.
The formal test score is 47/48, 160, 99%

The school sent out a link to a sample? I don't think anyone at our school did

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DD took 2 full-length paper "prep" tests to gauge her timing plus a short comp-based sample the school had sent out the link to. Both paper tests were 45/48, ~45 and 25 min each.
The formal test score is 47/48, 160, 99%

48/48 is 160 without any mistake, 47/48 couldn't be 160, should be 150s according to B-day.

are you basing this on the statistics for this year's exam, or just making your own calculations? I have seen tests by ETS where students could miss several questions and still receive the maximum score

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DD took 2 full-length paper "prep" tests to gauge her timing plus a short comp-based sample the school had sent out the link to. Both paper tests were 45/48, ~45 and 25 min each.
The formal test score is 47/48, 160, 99%

48/48 is 160 without any mistake, 47/48 couldn't be 160, should be 150s according to B-day.

My son got 47/48. His score was 157, 99%
There is no way 47/48, 160. my son's friend got 48/48, 160.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DD took 2 full-length paper "prep" tests to gauge her timing plus a short comp-based sample the school had sent out the link to. Both paper tests were 45/48, ~45 and 25 min each.
The formal test score is 47/48, 160, 99%

48/48 is 160 without any mistake, 47/48 couldn't be 160, should be 150s according to B-day.

My son got 47/48. His score was 157, 99%
There is no way 47/48, 160. my son's friend got 48/48, 160.

No Way ??? Lets bet, What if I provide a screenshot image ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DD took 2 full-length paper "prep" tests to gauge her timing plus a short comp-based sample the school had sent out the link to. Both paper tests were 45/48, ~45 and 25 min each.
The formal test score is 47/48, 160, 99%

48/48 is 160 without any mistake, 47/48 couldn't be 160, should be 150s according to B-day.

My son got 47/48. His score was 157, 99%
There is no way 47/48, 160. my son's friend got 48/48, 160.

no way ??

Wise men should know when to speak and when to shut up ... he he he..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DD took 2 full-length paper "prep" tests to gauge her timing plus a short comp-based sample the school had sent out the link to. Both paper tests were 45/48, ~45 and 25 min each.
The formal test score is 47/48, 160, 99%

48/48 is 160 without any mistake, 47/48 couldn't be 160, should be 150s according to B-day.

My son got 47/48. His score was 157, 99%
There is no way 47/48, 160. my son's friend got 48/48, 160.

Yes, I believe it can be 160 if the child is born a few months after school cutoff dates (and they went to private which allows them to start school a lot earlier.) So the child would be over a year younger than the oldest kids and two years younger than the ones who were redshirted. So a 47/48 should put the child at 160 easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DD took 2 full-length paper "prep" tests to gauge her timing plus a short comp-based sample the school had sent out the link to. Both paper tests were 45/48, ~45 and 25 min each.
The formal test score is 47/48, 160, 99%

48/48 is 160 without any mistake, 47/48 couldn't be 160, should be 150s according to B-day.

My son got 47/48. His score was 157, 99%
There is no way 47/48, 160. my son's friend got 48/48, 160.

Yes, I believe it can be 160 if the child is born a few months after school cutoff dates (and they went to private which allows them to start school a lot earlier.) So the child would be over a year younger than the oldest kids and two years younger than the ones who were redshirted. So a 47/48 should put the child at 160 easily.

Yes it is possible based on kids score. My kid got 44/48 which equated to 143 and 99%. I am pretty sure if other people got the same number wrong they might have a different score/percentile. My kid is the youngest in the class with an October birthday.

[Anonymous]

47/48, 160, July BD.