Confused By Your New SAT Score 2 Controversies, Explained

Confused By Your New SAT Score 2 Controversies, Explained SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips With the launch of the redesigned SAT in March of 2016, a new era was born in standardized testing. While the College Board was hopeful that there would be no issues with the new test or its familiar scoring system (maximum score of 800 per section), unfortunately there have been scoring issues that are confusing and upsetting students. Furthermore, the College Board has managed to irk its arch nemesis, the ACT. In this article, I’ll break down these controversies and explain what they mean for you. The New Scores Are Inflated The biggest issue with the new scores seems to be that scores on the redesigned SAT are slightly higher compared to those from the old SAT. For example, a 1300 on the new SAT corresponds to a 1230 on the Math and Critical Reading sections of the old test. A 730 on the new Math section is equivalent to a 700 on the old one. Here’s a chart comparing the old combined SAT scores to the new ones. New SAT scores were multiplied by 3/2, so all scores could be out of 2400. Basically, this chart reveals what the new SAT scores equate to on the same scale as the old SAT. At almost every point along the curve, the new SAT score is roughly 80 points higher than you would expect from the old SAT. After students got back their scores from the first administration of the new SAT, many were very happy with their scores until they learned that their scores were not as good as they thought. His score wasn't as good as he thought. Why Are the Scores Higher? We believe that the scores on the new test are higher because of the elimination of the penalty for wrong answers. The College Board didn’t compensate for the higher raw scores that inevitably result from no guessing penalty and one fewer answer choice. Other than at the lowest score levels, the same percentage score equates to roughly the same scaled score. If you got 60% of the questions right on the old SAT Math, you would receive the same scaled score (out of 800) that you would receive if you got 60% of the questions correct on the new SAT Math. For example, from the chart you'll be able to see that getting 40% of right answers on the new and old SAT would get you a score of a little less than 500. However, because there’s no penalty for guessing and one fewer answer choice, students will get a greater percentage of questions right on the new test, if the tests are equally difficult. Most likely, this was a deliberate decision by the College Board. But why? There are a few possible reasons. The College Board may have wanted scores to be higher to raise satisfaction with the test. The redesign was motivated in part because the SAT was losing market share to the ACT. If students start to get higher scores on the SAT, that could motivate more students to opt to take the SAT vs. the ACT. Also, more states are adopting the SAT as a mandatory state test. Because all students in certain states will be taking the SAT as opposed to just college-bound students, scores from the old test and new test may become more equal over time. In addition to inflated scores, there's another scoring controversy that involves converting new SAT scores to ACT scores. Are the Concordance Tables Accurate? In early May, the College Board released concordance tables that allow students to convert old SAT scores to new SAT scores. These tables also allow you to convert old and new SAT scores to ACT scores. You can use our conversion tools that are based on these tables. While the ACT and College Board previously collaborated in 2006 to create a concordance table so students could convert old SAT scores to ACT scores and vice versa, the two groups didn’t work together on the recently released table that enables conversion of the new SAT scores to ACT scores. The CEO of the ACT, Marten Roorda, claimed that because the College Board didn’t collaborate with ACT on the table that the College Board’s table can’t be accurate. Furthermore, he stated that these tables are likely not to be accurate because they were released after only one test, and the old tables were created after a year’s worth of tests. Concordance tables are created using equipercentiling, which means that a 75th percentile score on one test is equivalent to a 75th percentile score on another. A 90th percentile score on the ACT is equivalent to a 90th percentile score on the new SAT. Roorda argued that there can’t be accurate percentile scores on the new SAT because there had only been one administration of the test when the tables were released, and the students who took the first test may not be representative of students as a whole. He claimed that a year’s worth of tests and data was needed before the College Board could effectively equipercentile. The College Board’s senior vice president for research, Jack Buckley, responded by stating that the concordance tables aren’t only based on the March 2016 SAT. There were â€Å"two large-scale national concordance studies in December 2014 and December 2015.† The College Board stands by its concordance tables. He also said that they had reached out to ACT to collaborate on the new concordance tables and that the College Board looks forward to working with ACT in the future. What Do These Controversies Mean for You? The squabbles between the ACT and the College Board won’t have much impact on you, but you should be aware that the new SAT scores are slightly inflated. Because there’s no better alternative, college admissions officers will likely use the College Board’s concordance tables, and you should do the same. If you take the SAT and the ACT, or if you’ve taken the old SAT and new SAT, you should send your best scores based on the concordance tables to colleges, if you have the option of selecting which scores to send. Also, if you’re trying to determine your target score for the SAT, use the concordance tables to convert old SAT scores to new ones. Colleges haven’t released their standardized test scores for the new SAT yet. We recommend that you strive to get a 75th percentile score for any college you want to attend. Use the concordance table to convert a school’s 75th percentile score on the old test to an equivalent score on the new one. What's Next? Are you planning on taking the new SAT? Find out what students who've taken the test thought about it. Did you know the essay on the new SAT is optional? Learn if you should take the essay. Did you get a high score on the old SAT? Read this post to find out if you should take the new SAT. Disappointed with your scores? Want to improve your SAT score by 160 points?We've written a guide about the top 5 strategies you must be using to have a shot at improving your score. Download it for free now:

Types of Columns and Architectures Classical Order

Types of Columns and Architectures Classical Order If your architect suggests a Classical order for your new porch columns, theres no need to return a blank stare. Its a good idea. An Order of Architecture is a set of rules or principles for designing buildings - similar to todays building code. Five Classical orders, three Greek and two Roman, comprise the types of columns we use even in todays architecture. In Western-based architecture, anything called classical means its from the civilizations of ancient Greece and Rome. A Classical order of architecture is the approach to building design established in Greece and Rome during what we now call the Classical period of architecture, from roughly 500 B.C. to 500 A.D. Greece became a province of Rome in 146 B.C. which is why these two Western civilizations are grouped together as Classical. During this time period, temples and important public buildings were constructed according to five distinct orders, each using a defined pedestal, type of column (base, shaft, and capital), and a different style entablature above the column. The Classical orders grew in popularity during the Renaissance era when architects such as Giacomo barozzi of Vignola wrote about them and used the design. In Architecture the word Order signifies a composition (in the same style) of a pedestal, a column, and an entablature, together with their ornamentation. Order means a perfect and regular disposition of all the parts of a beautiful composition; in a word, order is the opposite of confusion. - Giacomo da Vignola, 1563 Heres a brief overview of what the orders are and how they came to be written down. The Greek Orders of Architecture When studying an era-by-era timeline of ancient Greece, the height of Greek civilization was known as Classical Greece, from about 500 B.C. The inventive ancient Greeks developed three architecture orders using three distinct column styles. The earliest known stone column is from the Doric order, named for architecture first seen in the Dorian area of western Greece. Not to be outdone, the builders in the eastern Greece area of Ionia developed their own column style, which is known as the Ionic order. Classical orders are not unique to each area, but they were named for the part of Greece where they were first observed. The most ornate Grecian order, the latest developed and perhaps the most well-known by todays observer is the Corinthian order, first seen in the central area of Greece called Corinth. The Roman Orders of Architecture The Classical architecture of ancient Greece influenced the building designs of the Roman Empire. The Greek orders of architecture were continued in Italian architecture, and Roman architects also added their own variations by imitating two Greek column styles. The Tuscan order, first seen in the Tuscany area of Italy, is characterized by its grand simplicity - even more streamlined than the Grecian Doric. The capital and shaft of the Composite order of Roman architecture can be easily confused with the Greek Corinthean column, but the top entablature is much different. Rediscovering the Classical Orders The Classical orders of architecture might have become lost to history if it were not for the writings of early scholars and architects. The Roman architect Marcus Vitruvius, who lived during the first century B.C., documented the three Greek orders and the Tuscan order in his famous treatise De Architectura, or Ten Books on Architecture. Architecture depends on what Vitruvius calls propriety - that perfection of style which comes when a work is authoritatively constructed on approved principles. That perfection can be prescribed, and the Greeks prescribed certain architectural orders to honor the different Greek gods and goddesses. The temples of Minerva, Mars, and Hercules, will be Doric, since the virile strength of these gods makes daintiness entirely inappropriate to their houses. In temples to Venus, Flora, Proserpine, Spring-Water, and the Nymphs, the Corinthian order will be found to have peculiar significance, because these are delicate divinities and so its rather slender outlines, its flowers, leaves, and ornamental volutes will lend propriety where it is due. The construction of temples of the Ionic order to Juno, Diana, Father Bacchus, and the other gods of that kind, will be in keeping with the middle position which they hold; for the building of such will be an appropriate combination of the severity of the Doric and the delicacy of the Corinthian. - Vitruvius, Book I In Book III, Vitruvius writes prescriptively about symmetry and proportion  - how thick the column shafts should be and the proportional heights of columns when arranged for a temple. All the members which are to be above the capitals of the columns, that is, architraves, friezes, coronae, tympana, gables, and acroteria, should be inclined to the front a twelfth part of their own height...Each column should have twenty-four flutes... After the specifications, Vitruvius explains why - the visual impact of the specification. Writing specifications for his Emperor to enforce, Vitruvius wrote what many consider the first architecture textbook. The High Renaissance of the 15th and 16th centuries renewed interest in Greek and Roman architecture, and this is when Vitruvian beauty was translated - literally and figuratively. More than 1,500 years after Vitruvius wrote De Architectura, it was translated from Latin and Greek into Italian. More importantly, perhaps, the Italian Renaissance architect Giacomo da Vignola wrote an important treatise in which he more thoroughly described all five classical orders of architecture. Published in 1563, Vignolas treatise, The Five Orders of Architecture, became a guide for builders throughout western Europe. The Renaissance masters translated Classical architecture into a new type of architecture, in the manner of Classical designs, just as todays new classical or neoclassical styles are not strictly Classical orders of architecture. Even if the dimensions and proportions are not exactly followed, Classical orders make an architectural statement whenever they are used. How we design our temples is not far off from ancient times. Knowing how Vitruvius used columns can inform what columns we use today  - even on our porches.   Sources The Ten Books on Architecture by Vitruvius Pollio, Translated by Morris Hicky Morgan, Harvard University Press, 1914, Book I, Chapter II, Paragraph 5; Book III, Chapter V, paragraphs 13-14 The Five Orders of Architecture by Giacomo barozzi of Vignola, translated by Tommaso Juglaris and Warren Locke, 1889, p. 5