Skip to content

Integrated Geometry Regents – the cut score pools

June 17, 2009 pm30 7:06 pm

Update 6/25:  The correct answers were 41 and 71. I was (happily) way off.   
Congratulations to all those students who did well, and good luck to those who need to give it another shot next year!

One pool for 65. One pool for 85.

Out of 86, how many points will you need for a 65? How many for an 85?

Last January, on Integrated Algebra, 31 and 68 (scales down to 67). On Math B 49 and 71 (scale down to 48 and 69).

Smart money says to roughly cut the difference, say 40 for a pass and 68 for the 85.

My money’s not smart… Algebra is a graduation requirement, Geometry’s not. So I think we can ignore the Algebra scale. Also, as this is the first (almost) content-based math exam in a decade, raw scores will be up. Not only do I think the scale will be more like Math B’s, I think the number of high scores will lead them to set a relatively high pass. My guess stays at 51 for the pass, 67 for the high pass.

Why would Geometry have a higher cut than Math B? Slightly more students take it, and do better than on B (B is an awful grabbag, Geometry looks like a fairly focused course). The big thinkers will see the high scores and assume that the test was easy (rather than understanding that the course is better organized), and set a higher cut score to compensate. That’s my guess:  51;  67.

What’s yours?

Advertisements
20 Comments leave one →
  1. long island teacher permalink
    June 17, 2009 pm30 9:29 pm 9:29 pm

    43 raw score to convert to a 65
    70 raw score to convert to a 85

  2. doug permalink
    June 17, 2009 pm30 10:17 pm 10:17 pm

    50 raw score for a 65.
    71 raw score for an 85.

    • Anonymous permalink
      June 18, 2009 pm30 4:00 pm 4:00 pm

      shut up Doug, you dont know nothing about Geometry Regents, so just shut up. 43 raw score for the 65. ight.

  3. a retired and very experienced math teacher permalink
    June 20, 2009 pm30 11:20 pm 11:20 pm

    Isn’t anyone out there the least bit concerned that the so-called NEW geometry regents was poorly written? And that it might have a raw score of ONLY 45-50 to get a 65? Why not make these regents out of 100 points (the way they used to be) and then see what percentage of students pass them each year? Is the State so worried that there would be enormous failures???
    The test was poorly constructed for many reasons —there were 3 questions on the equation of a circle in a course that was chockful of concepts, a short answer question on locus that was on the intersection of 2 loci as well as a Part II question on locus, and the VERY FIRST question was so convoluted and difficult (anyone out there hear of making the first question on any exam the easiest one to build confidence for the students?), etc. There were so many ill-advised and poorly worded concepts, none of which were contextualized (which is easy to do on a geometry regents); for example, the measure of an arc didn’t even have the arc symbol above the two letters. In addition, in all my years of very successful teaching of geometry, I never saw such a bad regents exam. There was also 2 short answers on writing the equation of a line which is perpendicular to a given line (same concept twice again!. Additionally, in question #34, how does a student determine that the angles at C and G are corresponding angles when there are NO markings of any type on the triangles (did anyone out there ever hear that “one should never reason from the diagram without the given facts”?) And there were 2 questions on the composition of two transformations on the regents?
    Surely, the writers of these regents can do a better job — please let me know if you agree.

    • Anonymous permalink
      June 21, 2009 pm30 2:29 pm 2:29 pm

      For question 34, you determine the corresponding angles from the similarity statement given in the question.

  4. a retired and very experienced math teacher permalink
    June 21, 2009 pm30 5:01 pm 5:01 pm

    Of course, the triangles are given similar in #34, but that does NOT imply that angles C and G correspond to each other and are therefore congruent. What if angle C corresponds to either angle F or E? I grant you that the diagram LOOKS like those two angles are congruent, but the only way for the students to make the correct information without more given information (either other pairs of corresponding angles or corresponding sides)is to ASSUME that from the diagram; we always taught students NOT to assume/reason from a diagram alone without given information. The question was very poorly worded and ill-conceived. A better question would be to make the markings on a pair of CONGRUENT triangles (given information of congruent sides and angles to make for example SAS congruent to SAS), and then have them identify and make an additional pair of corresponding angles (or sides) congruent by setting up the correct equation which would have them solve for x.

  5. Another veteran math teacher permalink
    June 21, 2009 pm30 5:21 pm 5:21 pm

    I’m with you, “experienced”. The test was very poorly written – and the fact that anonymous said “they should know from the similarity statement” in the given means that others are NOT aware of your very important, mathematical point. What are we testing the students on in this question and others? Is this a guessing game in which they are supposed to look at diagrams and make angles congruent because they appear that way in a diagram or are we teaching them to think and reason out and make valid conclusions from facts???
    Also, the fact that the exams are based on a “curve” is a sham – passing the regents by getting 50 out of 87 points or worse 30 out of 86 on IA is outrageous! Why bother to give students a state-wide exam at all if you are going to allow such a low passing grade?

    • Anonymous permalink
      June 22, 2009 pm30 3:34 pm 3:34 pm

      do you all just wonder about what the passing raw scor e is the new york state sens everyone a reference sheet so unless you actually have knowledge of regent curses/scales, dont talk out of your ass

  6. June 21, 2009 pm30 5:38 pm 5:38 pm

    I’ll disagree on the similarity question. If ABC ~ DEF, there’s a clear implication that A maps to D, B to E, and C to F (ie, the correspondence occurs in the same order the points are listed),

    But no, I don’t think we should be giving these exams. I don’t think NYSED is competent to write them.

  7. a retired and very experienced math teacher permalink
    June 21, 2009 pm30 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

    Many, many math texts do not use that notation as strictly as you described -and more importantly, isn’t it more worthwhile to have students understand the concept of “corresponding angles” instead of blindly following a notation order? I suggest that many students (if not all of the students) just guessed the relationship using the diagram to conclude that the measures of angles C and G would have to be set equal to find the value of x; what else could they do with the expressions in terms of x? With so many more important concepts from major topics to test on the regents(trigonometry, area of quadrilaterals, properties of special quadrilaterals, more interesting angle measurement in circles, contextualized problems using geometry, etc.), why use a question such as this one?
    And what about my comments about curving the exam and making such a low percentage be the minimum passing grade on IA and Geometry regents…what do we think out there? Is this not ridiculous?

    • bill permalink
      June 22, 2009 pm30 5:48 pm 5:48 pm

      the massive curve is insulting to the teachers and degrading to the student. It sets them up to fail moving forward as we pass them on without the requisite skills needed to succeed

  8. G-Unit permalink
    June 22, 2009 pm30 1:10 pm 1:10 pm

    Painful to say but: 35 is going to be passing

    • a.r.&v.e.m.t. permalink
      June 22, 2009 pm30 9:13 pm 9:13 pm

      Do you know something definitive, g-unit? Or is the 35 a guess?

    • a.r & v.e.m.t. permalink
      June 22, 2009 pm30 9:14 pm 9:14 pm

      To g- unit: do you know something definite or is that a guess?

  9. bill permalink
    June 22, 2009 pm30 5:47 pm 5:47 pm

    I am hoping for 43 to become 65… I think that you are being overly optimistic if you think the grades will be so good. I am in a struggling district and we only had about 15 % pass without the curve. If not enough pass geometry then the
    Alg 2 becomes totally irrelevant… how many math regents needed for an advanced regents diploma ???

    • weapon of math destruction permalink
      June 23, 2009 pm30 2:00 pm 2:00 pm

      This year’s current sophomores (2011 cohort) who already passed the Math A only need to pass the Math B or Alg. 2/Trig. to earn the advanced Regents diploma. Current freshman (2012) need all 3. But yes, failing the Geometry makes the Alg. 2/Trig. irrelevant in the future.

  10. guest permalink
    June 25, 2009 am30 8:54 am 8:54 am

    Cut scores are in: 41 for a 65 and 71 for mastery!

Trackbacks

  1. 1st Integrated Geometry regents – initial reaction « JD2718
  2. Math Regents Update – Sunday night « JD2718

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: