NBDE Part 1 Standardization

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

DREDAY

Senior Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
619
Reaction score
16
I called ADA myself and spoke to a NBDE coordinator to find out what is going on with the scoring on the new format. So here are the points they told me:

#1. The scoring of the exam is based on a SCALE and not a CURVE. Therefore, your score does not depend on how other students do. The scale for this exam was determined by the test makers, based on pilot exams and previous board exams. So essentially we are using a scale based on the curve of previous exams. That explains why people are scoring lower.

#2. Each question is worth a different amount of points. Questions that are considered "harder" are worth more points than "easier" questions. That is how two raw scores of 83 can each amount to a 92 overall or a 89 over all.

#3. The coordinator assured me that a score of 90 on the new exam is equivalent to a 90 in the old exam.

#4. A score of 90 is considered to be around the top 20%.

#5. Scores from each different exam format can be compared to each other because each format has an equal number of easy, medium, and hard questions.

#6. There will be a recalibration of the scale in september/october of this year.

Members don't see this ad.
 
About this possibility of having 2 exams (an "old" easier one and a "new" more difficult one):
There is a person in my dental class that has done just as well if not better on all exams/didactic course work during our first 2 years. We studied approximately equally for the part 1 using mostly the same resources, after each taking the exam on the same day we discussed questions and determined that we didn't have the same exam, mine was quite straightforward, ~20-25% repeats questions (or a slight variation) and he said his exam was pretty tough and he said there were not a lot of repeats (we BOTH went thru nearly all the old exams), I scored two points higher, i think if we would have had the same exam he would have matched or beaten me so I think there may be "harder" versions the ADA may be testing out, just my 2 cents...
 
About this possibility of having 2 exams (an "old" easier one and a "new" more difficult one):
There is a person in my dental class that has done just as well if not better on all exams/didactic course work during our first 2 years. We studied approximately equally for the part 1 using mostly the same resources, after each taking the exam on the same day we discussed questions and determined that we didn't have the same exam, mine was quite straightforward, ~20-25% repeats questions (or a slight variation) and he said his exam was pretty tough and he said there were not a lot of repeats (we BOTH went thru nearly all the old exams), I scored two points higher, i think if we would have had the same exam he would have matched or beaten me so I think there may be "harder" versions the ADA may be testing out, just my 2 cents...


the difficulty level or the easy level of questions is the same,its the scoring pattern which is changed.the raw score which was converted to a percentile is changed,that is why students are scoring lower in the new pattern
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Ay plaqueattack, what is your score on part 1.... and how do you know yours was easier? maybe it is just because they test different things.... and some you know and some you dont.
 
When I spoke to Dr. Tsai, he told me tat there were different forms of the exam with different difficulties but that they have accounted for that with their statistics.
 
This was just forwarded to the students at UCSF from our administration...


Date: June 7, 2007
To: Dental School Deans and Academic Deans
From: Gene A. Kramer, Ph.D.
Secretary, Joint Commission on National Dental Examinations
Re: Part I of the National Board Dental Examinations

I am writing to respond to recent phone calls about rumors regarding Part I of the National Board Dental Examinations. Preliminary analyses show that the overall passing rate for student candidates on the comprehensive examination is comparable to the overall rate on the traditional examination. With regard to the distribution of scores, an audit of the scores has shown that the range of the average comprehensive scores on the restructured Part I examination is comparable to the range of the average standard scores on the traditional examination. For the new comprehensive Part I examination, we continue to use consistent methods including equating across examination versions and standard setting in processing examination results. As usual, we will publish trend information for 2007 in March 2008.

Please inform students that it is not possible to compare the standard scores in the disciplines that were provided on the traditional examination score report with the raw scores in the disciplines provided on the comprehensive examination report.
 
This was just forwarded to the students at UCSF from our administration...


Date: June 7, 2007
To: Dental School Deans and Academic Deans
From: Gene A. Kramer, Ph.D.
Secretary, Joint Commission on National Dental Examinations
Re: Part I of the National Board Dental Examinations

I am writing to respond to recent phone calls about rumors regarding Part I of the National Board Dental Examinations. Preliminary analyses show that the overall passing rate for student candidates on the comprehensive examination is comparable to the overall rate on the traditional examination. With regard to the distribution of scores, an audit of the scores has shown that the range of the average comprehensive scores on the restructured Part I examination is comparable to the range of the average standard scores on the traditional examination. For the new comprehensive Part I examination, we continue to use consistent methods including equating across examination versions and standard setting in processing examination results. As usual, we will publish trend information for 2007 in March 2008.

Please inform students that it is not possible to compare the standard scores in the disciplines that were provided on the traditional examination score report with the raw scores in the disciplines provided on the comprehensive examination report.

This email seems to make sense, but my only problem with this whole situation is that it seems like in the past it was easier to predict how difficult the test was going to be (because they are all pretty much the same) and what percentage of questions you need to get right to get your score goal. Based on the '98 score guide I was thinking that 80+% total would be enough to score 90+ but now it's a bit of a crap-shoot. I'm also a bit concerned about trying to master the itty-bitty details versus being 100% on the basic concepts since it sounds like some people are getting tests full of random factoids and others are reporting the test had straightforward questions. I know I'm probably going to get someone replying saying "well, just know everything and you'll be fine" - this is easier said than done considering that the scope of the test is not well defined. Lots of stuff I've seen on old exams are not in my textbooks or lecture notes, especially a lot of the nit-picky stuff about embryology.

Another point...they say the pass rate and average scores are on par with what they had with the previous version but it doens't mention anything about scores above the average really representing concrete differences in knowledge and therefore having validity as a screening tool for residency programs. Grrr...

Not trying to whine...more just trying to vent. Studying sucks :mad:
 
This email seems to make sense, but my only problem with this whole situation is that it seems like in the past it was easier to predict how difficult the test was going to be (because they are all pretty much the same) and what percentage of questions you need to get right to get your score goal. Based on the '98 score guide I was thinking that 80+% total would be enough to score 90+ but now it's a bit of a crap-shoot. I'm also a bit concerned about trying to master the itty-bitty details versus being 100% on the basic concepts since it sounds like some people are getting tests full of random factoids and others are reporting the test had straightforward questions. I know I'm probably going to get someone replying saying "well, just know everything and you'll be fine" - this is easier said than done considering that the scope of the test is not well defined. Lots of stuff I've seen on old exams are not in my textbooks or lecture notes, especially a lot of the nit-picky stuff about embryology.

Another point...they say the pass rate and average scores are on par with what they had with the previous version but it doens't mention anything about scores above the average really representing concrete differences in knowledge and therefore having validity as a screening tool for residency programs. Grrr...

Not trying to whine...more just trying to vent. Studying sucks :mad:

That is exactly what I was going to say. In his email, Dr. Kramer mentions that the score average is the same and the number of peple passing is the same, but he makes no mention of the number of people scoring above 90. 2 different curves can have the same mean and same range but completely different distribution of scores above 90.
 
Hi there,
Is there anything going to happen with the score curve?I got 83 and don't know what to do.please tell me what shall i do?shall I repeat the exam or apply with this score.
did anyone talk to ADA people?are they aware of this discussion,And about the impact of this new pattern on us?If we ll apply this year ,are there any chances to get in the school?
I am pretty mad at them,they don't Ans our Que and if we ask they will I am sure,they will definitely say, you got to improve yourself.
What everyone is planning now?
Please let us know,
Thanks
tulaja.
 
Hi Tulaja,

You should read the forum again coz your questions have already been answered numerous times , though not adressed to you.Regarding what you have to do......i know its a tough call but ,you really have to figure it out your self. My opinion is that with 83% you should take a chance to improve on your score.Hope this helps.Good luck.:thumbup:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
so what's the decision? are we going to sue ADA over new exam?

i agree with the idea of sueing ADA
they are playing with our careers
do u guys realize whats gonna be ur future if we dont do anthing about it

ADA has sent these letters to all the academic deans and handled the matter officially in a very diplomatiac way
they know what they are doing and still dont agree to it
 
i agree with the idea of sueing ADA
they are playing with our careers
do u guys realize whats gonna be ur future if we dont do anthing about it

ADA has sent these letters to all the academic deans and handled the matter officially in a very diplomatiac way
they know what they are doing and still dont agree to it

You are all exactly what is wrong with america. A lawsuit over the NBDE? Just study hard.
 
Would anyone who got his score tell us about score interpretation on the back of the score card.! from there we can tell if its changed or not.
usually, on the back you have :

Score,,,,, Percent,,, Cumulative percent
99 ,,,,,,,,,,0.7,,,,,,,,,, 1OO
96-98,,,,,, 2.2,,,,,,,,,,, 99.3
93-95,,,,,,, 5.9,,,,,,,,,, 97.1

From here we can know the percentage of 90s, because you cant take the famous 1998 score chart as standard.
was just an idea ...I dont really care :rolleyes:
 
That is exactly what I was going to say. In his email, Dr. Kramer mentions that the score average is the same and the number of peple passing is the same, but he makes no mention of the number of people scoring above 90. 2 different curves can have the same mean and same range but completely different distribution of scores above 90.

Dre is exactly right. The distribution of scores in the 90s is far less than from previous years. That is a FACT. Ask the dean of student affairs at your school, or whomever receives NBDE scores. Does this have implications for people applying to residency w the new scores? Absolutely does, because the majority of people applying this year have old format scores.
The ADA knows that theyve messed up. This statement they have made was to cover their butts. The statement they made was also 100% correct....except they didnt mention distribution.
Think of a normal standard bell curve. Now take both tails of the curve, and "push" the ends toward the center. Now, you have a standard curve which has a smaller distribution of numbers at both ends, and a larger distribution of numbers in the center portion. All along, the mean and range are still the same. This is the issue which has occurred... (see attached picture)
 

Attachments

  • curve.bmp
    125.2 KB · Views: 290
Here is my communication with Dr. Tsai from the ADA.


My first email:


Dr. Tsai,

There is a current concern among many students over the new format of
the NBDE part 1. Particularly, over the way the exam is being scored.
How should faculty compare students that are applying to specialty if
they have scores from 2 different format exams. If a faculty comes
accross 2 applications, one with a NEW format score of 88 and another
with an OLD format score of 92, which one is better? The new format
seems to make it harder to achieve scores higher than 90. That is a
concern to students who will be applying to specialties in the following
years because their exam scores will be compared to that of students who
have taken the older format. How should faculty evaluate scores from
the 2 different formats?


His Reply:

A review of the available data has shown that the performance on the
comprehensive Part I is consistent with the performance on the
traditional Part I. The scores for the comprehensive Part I are
comparable to those on the traditional Part I. The procedures used by
the Joint Commission on National Dental Examinations help to guarantee
that candidates are not disadvantaged by the scaling used to assess
performance on the comprehensive Part I examination.



My Re-reply:

Dr. Tsai,

Can you then please guarantee that an equal percentage of students will
be scoring above 90 on the new formate as the old format? In other words
can you guarantee that by the end of the year there will be an equal
number of students that scored above 90 on the new format as in the old
format?


Dr. Tsai's Re-Reply:

My response below in my previous e-mail should be clear to you. Our
analyses have shown that the scores for both traditional and
comprehensive Part I examinations are comparable. Also, I want to let
you know that we have already sent an e-mail to dental school deans and
academic deans to clarify students' concerns regarding the scaling on
comprehensive Part I examination.


I didnt feel very confident that his replies directly answered my questions.
 
Here is my communication with Dr. Tsai from the ADA.


My first email:


Dr. Tsai,

There is a current concern among many students over the new format of
the NBDE part 1. Particularly, over the way the exam is being scored.
How should faculty compare students that are applying to specialty if
they have scores from 2 different format exams. If a faculty comes
accross 2 applications, one with a NEW format score of 88 and another
with an OLD format score of 92, which one is better? The new format
seems to make it harder to achieve scores higher than 90. That is a
concern to students who will be applying to specialties in the following
years because their exam scores will be compared to that of students who
have taken the older format. How should faculty evaluate scores from
the 2 different formats?


His Reply:

A review of the available data has shown that the performance on the
comprehensive Part I is consistent with the performance on the
traditional Part I. The scores for the comprehensive Part I are
comparable to those on the traditional Part I. The procedures used by
the Joint Commission on National Dental Examinations help to guarantee
that candidates are not disadvantaged by the scaling used to assess
performance on the comprehensive Part I examination.



My Re-reply:

Dr. Tsai,

Can you then please guarantee that an equal percentage of students will
be scoring above 90 on the new formate as the old format? In other words
can you guarantee that by the end of the year there will be an equal
number of students that scored above 90 on the new format as in the old
format?


Dr. Tsai's Re-Reply:

My response below in my previous e-mail should be clear to you. Our
analyses have shown that the scores for both traditional and
comprehensive Part I examinations are comparable. Also, I want to let
you know that we have already sent an e-mail to dental school deans and
academic deans to clarify students' concerns regarding the scaling on
comprehensive Part I examination.


I didnt feel very confident that his replies directly answered my questions.


sounds they'll be comparing scores after all. :(. Maybe you should've asked the distribution of scores, on why people are scoring lower with almost the same amount of raw scores made before.
 
I don't get it. I think they are full of crap.

Our school gave us some information regarding their correspondence with Dr. Kramer. Dr. Kramer states that only a "trickle" of students have taken the new exam and that they cannot make any conclusions. In the SAME exact email, he made the conclusion that the passing rate is higher. How can you say 'we don't have enough data', yet make a statement like that? And if you can say that, why not just look at the number of people who have scored higher than 90 and compare those stats too.

So to recap with all of the information:

Dr. Tsai: "Our data shows that the two tests are comparable"
Dr. Kramer: "We don't have enough data to tell you anything"

Can somebody get their shi/t straight here.

ALL WE WANT TO KNOW IS IF THE SAME AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ARE GETTING SCORES OF 90 or HIGHER!!
 
I don't get it. I think they are full of crap.

Our school gave us some information regarding their correspondence with Dr. Kramer. Dr. Kramer states that only a "trickle" of students have taken the new exam and that they cannot make any conclusions. In the SAME exact email, he made the conclusion that the passing rate is higher. How can you say 'we don't have enough data', yet make a statement like that? And if you can say that, why not just look at the number of people who have scored higher than 90 and compare those stats too.

So to recap with all of the information:

Dr. Tsai: "Our data shows that the two tests are comparable"
Dr. Kramer: "We don't have enough data to tell you anything"

Can somebody get their shi/t straight here.

ALL WE WANT TO KNOW IS IF THE SAME AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ARE GETTING SCORES OF 90 or HIGHER!!


It seems like thats the question that is being avoided like the plague. We cannot get a straight answer on that question.
 
Well, if they don't intend to tell us anything, I officially upgrade this "rumor" to a fact:

It is much more difficult to receive a score of 90 or higher on the new format.
 
Well, if they don't intend to tell us anything, I officially upgrade this "rumor" to a fact:

It is much more difficult to receive a score of 90 or higher on the new format.

We do have some questions that need answering, but I wouldn't be comfortable calling it a fact. We don't know that. For all we know it could all be a coincidence that everyone is scoring lower, and that the higher scores (94+) will come later in the year. We just need to be objective about this and demande that our questions be answered.
 
We do have some questions that need answering, but I wouldn't be comfortable calling it a fact. We don't know that. For all we know it could all be a coincidence that everyone is scoring lower, and that the higher scores (94+) will come later in the year. We just need to be objective about this and demande that our questions be answered.

the majority of students haven't taken part 1 this year.. most i assume will take it later in july.. so no you probably can't make an conclusive anything from it..
 
We do have some questions that need answering, but I wouldn't be comfortable calling it a fact. We don't know that. For all we know it could all be a coincidence that everyone is scoring lower, and that the higher scores (94+) will come later in the year. We just need to be objective about this and demande that our questions be answered.

quite true. nothing is fact...yet. fact requires statistical analysis, which requires a large enough sample size. this is what is not available. what we can see is a trend, which is quite obvious and consistent at numerous dental schools nationwide. the trend is that average scores are 5-6% lower at each of these individual schools, relative to years and years of CONSISTENT board scores at this time of year. its difficult to avoid this trend. It seems counterintuitive to state that average part 1 scores would drop so greatly over one year when you take into account great increase in competitiveness for post-doc and advanced standing positions, and how everyone who is competing knows the importance of a solid board score..
 
When I spoke with Dr. Tsai this last time over the phone I received a clarification. When I had spoken to him the first time, either I missunderstood him or he miss-spoke when I heard him say each question is worth a different amount of points. The second time I spoke with him, he said each question is on both exams is worth the same amount of points. The different versions of the exam can have different difficulties meaning one exam can be more difficult than another. They account for this difference by the "harder" exam having a larger standard deviation than the "easier" exam. ***HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION, NOT ACTUAL CONVERSION: if a person scored a raw score of 83 on the "harder" exam it will translate to a 92 where as a 83 on the "easier" exam translates to an 89.*** Therefore raw scores from the old format exams cannot be compared to raw scores from the new format because they "mean" different things.

sounds to me like a good way to avoid people converting new exam raw scores to old exam standardized scores...thus, maintaing the mystery of how these new exams are scored. how you can rank a question as "easy" or "difficult" on a new exam format with no baseline is beyond me. i could see this on old exams, as from year to year many repeats showed up ("easy"), many concepts were the same ("medium"), and there were concepts that were not on old released exams ("difficult"). considering the new format exam had no duplicate questions and the concepts differed from past ada released exams, i dont know how else this distinction is made? suggestions? seems far too subjective to me, considering there seems to be no true baseline for the new format.
 
I spoke to Dr Tsai in person at the ADA office today. He had nothing substantial to offer by way of explainations except "we do a lot of analysis before changing the format and scoring methods,which is based on data gathered over many years, there is no plans of re-calibration and Im not sure who is spreading these rumours" However when I asked him to guarantee that our scores wud not be affected by this new system and would not hurt our speciality dreams, he said that they have been in constant touch with university deans ..but otherwise he simply didn't committ..instead asked me to email him or DR Kramer(he is the director of department of training services at ADA) at [email protected] or fax 312.587.4105, his direct phone no is 312.440.2684. He did not guarantee a direct response from DR Kramer but said that he would show him my email for sure.
It would be helpful if we all could post our respective queries/concerns to him than suffer later when perhaps not much can be done!
 
Thank you DR TOOTH for taking the time to speak to Dr. Tsai and taking all of our concerns to him.
 
I spoke to Dr Tsai in person at the ADA office today. He had nothing substantial to offer by way of explainations except "we do a lot of analysis before changing the format and scoring methods,which is based on data gathered over many years, there is no plans of re-calibration and Im not sure who is spreading these rumours" However when I asked him to guarantee that our scores wud not be affected by this new system and would not hurt our speciality dreams, he said that they have been in constant touch with university deans ..but otherwise he simply didn't committ..instead asked me to email him or DR Kramer(he is the director of department of training services at ADA) at [email protected] or fax 312.587.4105, his direct phone no is 312.440.2684. He did not guarantee a direct response from DR Kramer but said that he would show him my email for sure.
It would be helpful if we all could post our respective queries/concerns to him than suffer later when perhaps not much can be done!


Thanks for taking time in going to speak to him. Did you ask him if the same number of students would be getting scores above 90 in the new format as the old format?
 
Thanks for taking time in going to speak to him. Did you ask him if the same number of students would be getting scores above 90 in the new format as the old format?

He said in principle he isnt the person to answer these questions and should be directed to DR Kramer via email. I still am formatting an email to him. He was very vague..frankly, I thought it was a serious waste of my time except that now he knows he has students knocking his office doors regarding this issue!!!
 
He said in principle he isnt the person to answer these questions and should be directed to DR Kramer via email. I still am formatting an email to him. He was very vague..frankly, I thought it was a serious waste of my time except that now he knows he has students knocking his office doors regarding this issue!!!

Did he give you Dr. Kramer's email? I googled for it and could not find it.
 
Isn't it possible that less people are scoring above 90 because there aren't any unreleased exams in the new format? I mean, wasn't that part of the reason for making a new test? Maybe when you remove the added edge less people can score above 90. I hope it stays that way.
 
Isn't it possible that less people are scoring above 90 because there aren't any unreleased exams in the new format? I mean, wasn't that part of the reason for making a new test? Maybe when you remove the added edge less people can score above 90. I hope it stays that way.

I hope it stays that way also. If the higher scores were due to access to unreleased exams, it was an unfair advantage... That makes it even more unfair for us taking the new format to be compared to those taking the old format... But we dont know anything at this point, so we cant point fingers.
 
I hope it stays that way also. If the higher scores were due to access to unreleased exams, it was an unfair advantage... That makes it even more unfair for us taking the new format to be compared to those taking the old format... But we dont know anything at this point, so we cant point fingers.
Nah...didnt give me Dr Kramer's email/direct phone no..nor did the receptionist at front desk...is he scared???
Are u actually speculating that lower scores are due to unreleased exams not being asked? Is that the ONLY contributing factor,then?
 
Nah...didnt give me Dr Kramer's email/direct phone no..nor did the receptionist at front desk...is he scared???
Are u actually speculating that lower scores are due to unreleased exams not being asked? Is that the ONLY contributing factor,then?

no. I'm not speculating anything. I was just replying to an earlier post that speculated the reason for lower board scores was the availability of unreleased exams.
 
Isn't it possible that less people are scoring above 90 because there aren't any unreleased exams in the new format? I mean, wasn't that part of the reason for making a new test? Maybe when you remove the added edge less people can score above 90. I hope it stays that way.

If that were true (all the questions are new), shouldn't they have released all the old questions? Also, the major flaw would be that the "added edge" would be taken away only for those who take the test early, while those who take it in June or July could have access to unreleased questions, and as time goes on more and more questions get out so taking the test in September would be just like taking it last year.

I think the only way to fix what you're talking about would be to offer the exam only once or twice a year and have it be all new questions. Sure it would be inconvenient, but it would be fair.
 
[B said:
I think the only way to fix what you're talking about would be to offer the exam only once or twice a year and have it be all new questions. Sure it would be inconvenient, but it would be fair.
[/B]

right on w that comment. not too sure why that isnt the case. anyway, i spoke w dr. kramer via email, and here is his reply today:


Thank you for your e-mail below regarding the scoring of the
comprehensive Part I examination. As you observed below, we have found
that the overall passing rates, average standard scores, and ranges for
the traditional and comprehensive Part I are consistent. We have also
reviewed the actual scores across the ranges, and we have found that all
scores, including those in the 90s, are represented in similar numbers.

Please note, however, that we have only a very limited sample of student
candidates on which to conduct our analyses. Further, this sample may
not be representative of the student candidate population. Typically,
the bulk of the student candidates take Part I during the Summer months,
especially during July. Once we have a larger representative sample, we
will be better able to determine the performance characteristics of the
comprehensive Part I.

In your e-mail, you also mention the scoring conversions between the
1998 raw/standard scores and the 2007 raw/standard scores. As you
correctly point out, it is inappropriate to compare performance across
sets of examination items based in whole or in part on raw score
information. Because of this, it is not feasible to conduct a useful
analysis. As I mention in my e-mail to the dental school deans and
academic deans, we continue to use consistent methods in processing
examination results to guarantee that scores accurately and fairly
reflect the knowledge and problem solving skills assessed by the
examination. For further information on the Part I examination, I would
like to refer you to the Technical Report that appears on the American
Dental Association's website. The Technical Report can be retrieved at:
http://www.ada.org/prof/ed/testing/technical_report_complete.pdf. This
report does not include information on the comprehensive Part I,
however. We will publish trend information for 2007 in March of 2008.

Regards,

Gene A. Kramer, Ph.D.
Secretary, Joint Commission on National Dental Examinations
211 East Chicago Avenue, Suite 600
Chicago, Illinois 60611-2678
[email protected] (e)
 
....so, folks...i dont know what is the case right now? theyve basically covered ALL bases w that statement. yes, the scores may have different meaning...which will not be known until next march. very difficult situation for us applying right now for residency. truly, i still think that the scores have different meaning than the old exam. how to prove that at this point in the game, i am nearly out of ideas....
 
....so, folks...i dont know what is the case right now? theyve basically covered ALL bases w that statement. yes, the scores may have different meaning...which will not be known until next march. very difficult situation for us applying right now for residency. truly, i still think that the scores have different meaning than the old exam. how to prove that at this point in the game, i am nearly out of ideas....

Yes they've covered all their bases. We just have to take their word for it. At least we have it in writing now.
 
bump

this thread is a good read for all the hoards of people (including myself) taking part1 this summer. here's to hoping that they'll have the scoring mess figured out by fall, and hopefully they won't shortchange us guinea pigs.
 
For those of us who just want to pass, this attachment is very good info extracted from the Technical Data Document that Dr. Kramer mentioned in his email above. It may even be helpful for those who want 90's because you can see the the 98 score converter cannot be used to accurately determine scores for other years. So just because some people are scoring 5 points lower it may not have anything to do with the new format - it appears it very normal for scores to fluctuate from year to year. Some years the minimum passing score fluctuated by almost 20 questions.
 

Attachments

  • NBDE Score Data.pdf
    46 KB · Views: 340
For those of us who just want to pass, this attachment is very good info extracted from the Technical Data Document that Dr. Kramer mentioned in his email above. It may even be helpful for those who want 90's because you can see the the 98 score converter cannot be used to accurately determine scores for other years. So just because some people are scoring 5 points lower it may not have anything to do with the new format - it appears it very normal for scores to fluctuate from year to year. Some years the minimum passing score fluctuated by almost 20 questions.

this is interesting, I guess people should stop this "5 point thing"
 
this is interesting, I guess people should stop this "5 point thing"

I've asked this in other threads and gotten no reply, might as well ask it here - Has anybody actually taken the 98 exam, saw how they scored, and then taken this one and compared the two scaled scores? I know the scale changed 5 points, but until somebody says "I got a 93 on the '98 exam and a 88 on the '07 exam" I don't know if we really need to be that worried.

Personally, I took the 98 exam and I got 86.75. This was going through it quickly (I missed an extra 5 or 10 because I misread them) and not having reviewed any old tests, so I would expect to get a point or two higher on the real deal - which I took Monday. There were maybe 30 repeat questions from released exams (I reviewed '96, '98, '05 and the pilot). I'll let you all know how the two compare when I get my scores in a few weeks.
 
I've asked this in other threads and gotten no reply, might as well ask it here - Has anybody actually taken the 98 exam, saw how they scored, and then taken this one and compared the two scaled scores? I know the scale changed 5 points, but until somebody says "I got a 93 on the '98 exam and a 88 on the '07 exam" I don't know if we really need to be that worried.

Personally, I took the 98 exam and I got 86.75. This was going through it quickly (I missed an extra 5 or 10 because I misread them) and not having reviewed any old tests, so I would expect to get a point or two higher on the real deal - which I took Monday. There were maybe 30 repeat questions from released exams (I reviewed '96, '98, '05 and the pilot). I'll let you all know how the two compare when I get my scores in a few weeks.

Sure, that would really help, just a quick question by 2005 paper do you mean the i-m set?

Considering you scored 91 instead of 86.75 (when you took the '98 exam and excluding all your misread/wrong answers) and comparing it to the score that you will receive, I guess we will have a better comparison :thumbup:or at least a basic idea about the so called "difference" in both the exam scoring pattern.

Ct
 
Sure, that would really help, just a quick question by 2005 paper do you mean the i-m set?

Considering you scored 91 instead of 86.75 (when you took the '98 exam and excluding all your misread/wrong answers) and comparing it to the score that you will receive, I guess we will have a better comparison :thumbup:or at least a basic idea about the so called "difference" in both the exam scoring pattern.

Ct

Yeah, I mean the I-M set - it was only 200 questions but it's worth looking at. I think a 91 might be a little high. I would estimate that I maybe would have gotten another 5 or 10 questions total between reading more carefully and then a few more from repeat questions I wouldn't have otherwise known. This would probably only translate to another 2 points when it's scaled. If the tests really are comparable, I'd be happy with an 89.
 
Top