MSA to drop PAR Conditions for all Multiplication Schools

March 5th, 2023


The Multiplication School Association has announced that moving forward they will be dropping the Pure Accuracy Rating (PAR) as a part of the conditions for Multiplication School Admissions. MSA Commissioner Robert Jean states, "The Sigma score has been the single best measurement for determining admission candidacy. Since the Sigma score already takes into account the accuracy of the applicant, the PAR seems rather redundant and unnecessary, and it ought to be expunged from the admission process entirely."

im not sure how i feel about this. I feel like the par took less weight off the sigma score, but honestly, i guess it really never made a difference anyway.

It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

the odds did not improve for people aiming for vale. and people's chances in general improved for all schools and not just c and w.

I don't really like it, but like  @noland said, it's all the same in the end. The required Sigma can only be achieved one of three ways: 

1. hitting the MSAT requirements exactly, 
   
2. acing with a high enough score, 
   
3. or by doing so well that it doesn't even matter.
   

Since PARS are no longer considered a component of applications, what are they going to be used for exactly?

roman wrote:Since PARS are no longer considered a component of applications, what are they going to be used for exactly?

I think PARS will be beneficial for Aces. Outside of that, I think it's just another neat stat we have! /sarcasm

hannah wrote:

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

the odds did not improve for people aiming for vale. and people's chances in general improved for all schools and not just c and w.

i think the odds did substantially improve for C and W given the removal of the cutoffs. So many people would have MSATs and Sigmas that exceeded the requirements but wouldn't get admitted due to their error amount.

wheezy wrote:

roman wrote:Since PARS are no longer considered a component of applications, what are they going to be used for exactly?

I think PARS will be beneficial for Aces. Outside of that, I think it's just another neat stat we have! /sarcasm

No. The PARs have no value, even for Aces. If I get a 207a, I have the Sigma for Eliz. Period. What good does the PAR do?

faith wrote:

wheezy wrote:

roman wrote:Since PARS are no longer considered a component of applications, what are they going to be used for exactly?

I think PARS will be beneficial for Aces. Outside of that, I think it's just another neat stat we have! /sarcasm

No. The PARs have no value, even for Aces. If I get a 207a, I have the Sigma for Eliz. Period. What good does the PAR do?

A PAR of 4 is rare. Plus, the PAR is a great statistic and another way to differentiate applicants.

guy wrote:

faith wrote:

wheezy wrote:

roman wrote:Since PARS are no longer considered a component of applications, what are they going to be used for exactly?

I think PARS will be beneficial for Aces. Outside of that, I think it's just another neat stat we have! /sarcasm

No. The PARs have no value, even for Aces. If I get a 207a, I have the Sigma for Eliz. Period. What good does the PAR do?

A PAR of 4 is rare. Plus, the PAR is a great statistic and another way to differentiate applicants.

You're overrating a 4PAR. The error average at the worst school is 1 and some change. Many people are acing and/or making one mistake MAX.

sealand wrote:

guy wrote:

faith wrote:

wheezy wrote:

roman wrote:Since PARS are no longer considered a component of applications, what are they going to be used for exactly?

I think PARS will be beneficial for Aces. Outside of that, I think it's just another neat stat we have! /sarcasm

No. The PARs have no value, even for Aces. If I get a 207a, I have the Sigma for Eliz. Period. What good does the PAR do?

A PAR of 4 is rare. Plus, the PAR is a great statistic and another way to differentiate applicants.

You're overrating a 4PAR. The error average at the worst school is 1 and some change. Many people are acing and/or making one mistake MAX.

I think the truth is that a lot of people miss 1. Those -1 people go on to apply to the most schools across the board as well.

faith wrote:

wheezy wrote:

roman wrote:Since PARS are no longer considered a component of applications, what are they going to be used for exactly?

I think PARS will be beneficial for Aces. Outside of that, I think it's just another neat stat we have! /sarcasm

No. The PARs have no value, even for Aces. If I get a 207a, I have the Sigma for Eliz. Period. What good does the PAR do?

Horrible take. The PAR matters because it's the most important (and easiest) number to keep high. Maintaining a PAR of 4 as you practice sets you up for acing the actual exam, and Ace Scores play a different admissions game than the rest of the folks who make mistakes. If you aim for accuracy, you'll always be rewarded. Remember, an optimized Sigma can only be achieved with a PAR of 4, regardless of your MSAT score.

kenny wrote: Remember, an optimized Sigma can only be achieved with a PAR of 4, regardless of your MSAT score.

That's the key.

So an imporant thing to note here is that not only have PARs been removed, Error Margins have now been changed to Error Averages. I think the move here was to be little bit more lenient with mistakes, as we all know some people can get really high MSATs and Sigmas but be shortchanged because of their errors. 

It seems the tide is shifting towards getting as many as you can correct, regardless of the mistakes.

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

how would people have a better chance at VCW now? Vale isn't even affected by this, and C and W still have averages of 0.

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

the odds did not improve for people aiming for vale. and people's chances in general improved for all schools and not just c and w.

i think the odds did substantially improve for C and W given the removal of the cutoffs. So many people would have MSATs and Sigmas that exceeded the requirements but wouldn't get admitted due to their error amount.

i mean, i guess? how many people are exceeding 210/420 and 212/424 yet making 1 mistake or more? That's a minority group, not most people.

hannah wrote:

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

the odds did not improve for people aiming for vale. and people's chances in general improved for all schools and not just c and w.

i think the odds did substantially improve for C and W given the removal of the cutoffs. So many people would have MSATs and Sigmas that exceeded the requirements but wouldn't get admitted due to their error amount.

i mean, i guess? how many people are exceeding 210/420 and 212/424 yet making 1 mistake or more? That's a minority group, not most people.

I didn't say "most people". I said many people had stats at or above those marks yet failed to gain admission due to their errors. Even though the average is 0, it's not the requirement anymore. The odds have now improved overall though, too. You no longer have to worry about 1 mistake costing you at C and W even if your MSAT and Sigma is way higher than their listed requirements.

I get what  @huey and his supporters are saying, but it's missing the point. The PAR provided a kind of quality control, and now that it's gone, applicants are going to be trying to get the highest scores possible without even considering accuracy. These error averages may not remain as low as they are for long.

henderson wrote:I get what  @huey and his supporters are saying, but it's missing the point. The PAR provided a kind of quality control, and now that it's gone, applicants are going to be trying to get the highest scores possible without even considering accuracy. These error averages may not remain as low as they are for long.

What's wrong with this though? It's not like the MSA is throwing accuracy away completely. Aces and accuracy boosts are still a thing at the majority of schools, spare VCW. Even at VCW, PARs never mattered at Vale, and Columbia and Walton have now opened their doors to even more higher scoring applicants. If anything, the error averages may increase a little, but so will the required MSATs/Sigmas.

i think this is going to have interesting effects moving forward. some possibilities:

1. since accuracy boosts essentially tell us how much a 4par is worth at each school, schools may eventually drop accuracy boosts all together (which raises the sigma requirements in turn), or places like C and W, and maybe even V will implement some boosts of their own.

2. error reporting will stop completely. it may be a little far fetch because i think the msa gets off on having information like PARs and error averages. i do wonder if they are thinking about ending error reporting all together though given the direction they've been taking. from awarding accuracy to emphasizing the sigma, it makes you wonder.

3. walton passes columbia in the rankings!

henderson wrote:I get what  @huey and his supporters are saying, but it's missing the point. The PAR provided a kind of quality control, and now that it's gone, applicants are going to be trying to get the highest scores possible without even considering accuracy. These error averages may not remain as low as they are for long.

No it didn't. The Sigma requirement has always been the main statistic used for admission. The PAR and Sigma go hand in hand. They both depend on each other, not one controlling another. I don't know where that weird idea came from.

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

the odds did not improve for people aiming for vale. and people's chances in general improved for all schools and not just c and w.

i think the odds did substantially improve for C and W given the removal of the cutoffs. So many people would have MSATs and Sigmas that exceeded the requirements but wouldn't get admitted due to their error amount.

i mean, i guess? how many people are exceeding 210/420 and 212/424 yet making 1 mistake or more? That's a minority group, not most people.

I didn't say "most people". I said many people had stats at or above those marks yet failed to gain admission due to their errors. Even though the average is 0, it's not the requirement anymore. The odds have now improved overall though, too. You no longer have to worry about 1 mistake costing you at C and W even if your MSAT and Sigma is way higher than their listed requirements.

Many? Do you see the number of 210+ MSAT scores on here? What the hell are some of you talking about?

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

the odds did not improve for people aiming for vale. and people's chances in general improved for all schools and not just c and w.

i think the odds did substantially improve for C and W given the removal of the cutoffs. So many people would have MSATs and Sigmas that exceeded the requirements but wouldn't get admitted due to their error amount.

i mean, i guess? how many people are exceeding 210/420 and 212/424 yet making 1 mistake or more? That's a minority group, not most people.

I didn't say "most people". I said many people had stats at or above those marks yet failed to gain admission due to their errors. Even though the average is 0, it's not the requirement anymore. The odds have now improved overall though, too. You no longer have to worry about 1 mistake costing you at C and W even if your MSAT and Sigma is way higher than their listed requirements.

What you're doing is saying that the error margin/error cutoff is the same thing as the PAR. They are two different things.

hannah wrote:

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

huey wrote:

hannah wrote:

crankything wrote:It's good. Now people have better chances of getting into schools ranked 1-3 (VCW).

the odds did not improve for people aiming for vale. and people's chances in general improved for all schools and not just c and w.

i think the odds did substantially improve for C and W given the removal of the cutoffs. So many people would have MSATs and Sigmas that exceeded the requirements but wouldn't get admitted due to their error amount.

i mean, i guess? how many people are exceeding 210/420 and 212/424 yet making 1 mistake or more? That's a minority group, not most people.

I didn't say "most people". I said many people had stats at or above those marks yet failed to gain admission due to their errors. Even though the average is 0, it's not the requirement anymore. The odds have now improved overall though, too. You no longer have to worry about 1 mistake costing you at C and W even if your MSAT and Sigma is way higher than their listed requirements.

What you're doing is saying that the error margin/error cutoff is the same thing as the PAR. They are two different things.

Oh please. You're right that they are different. I didn't try to say that they are the same. What two things ARE the same is the error cutoff and the PAR requirement. A 200 MSAT with a error margin/cutoff of -1 is literally the same as a 200 MSAT with a PAR requirement of 3.96.