Exam Feedback - October 4, 2025


Read our analysis of the October 4, 2025 SAT exam, including student and tutor reactions, section-by-section breakdowns, and what to expect from score reports.



The October 4th, 2025 SAT administration elicited overwhelmingly negative feedback from test-takers, with widespread reports of exceptional difficulty compared to both official practice materials and recent test administrations.

Students consistently characterized this exam as significantly more challenging than expected, with particular concern expressed about the second modules of both Reading/Writing and Mathematics sections. The difficulty level has prompted many students to register for the November administration, and there are widespread concerns about how scoring will accommodate the increased challenge.


Overall Student Sentiment

Student reactions to this SAT administration were notably uniform in their negativity. The prevailing sentiment can be characterized as frustration, disappointment, and genuine shock at the difficulty level encountered.

Multiple students expressed that this was the hardest SAT they had experienced, with some describing it as their final opportunity for college admissions, adding emotional weight to their concerns.

The psychological impact on test-takers was evident, with students reporting feelings of being "cooked," experiencing test anxiety that affected performance, and expressing dark humor about their perceived poor performance.

For senior students taking their last SAT before college application deadlines, the difficulty level was particularly distressing. The consensus suggested this was not merely perceived difficulty but an objective increase in challenge that caught both students and tutoring professionals off-guard.


Section-Specific Feedback

Reading and Writing

The Reading and Writing section displayed a stark difficulty differential between modules. Module 1 was consistently described as "light," "easy," and "free," with students expressing confidence and even enjoyment during this portion.

However, Module 2 represented a dramatic escalation that many students were unprepared for. Module 2 of Reading and Writing generated the most negative feedback across the entire exam.

Students reported:

  • Unusually long and dense reading passages that consumed excessive time
  • Heavy scientific content that was difficult to comprehend and analyze
  • Vocabulary questions featuring obscure or challenging words
  • Questions requiring deep analysis beyond typical standardized test expectations
  • Time management challenges, with multiple students unable to complete the section

The vocabulary difficulty was particularly notable, with students requesting definitions for words they encountered and expressing that the vocabulary was harder than typical practice tests.

The reading comprehension passages were described as exceptionally time-consuming, with scientific and technical content that required multiple readings to understand.

Several students noted they had to guess on five to seven questions in Module 2, which is highly unusual for prepared test-takers. The difficulty was not limited to struggling students—tutoring professionals also reported finding Module 2 challenging, which underscores the exceptional nature of this administration.

Mathematics

The Mathematics section followed a similar pattern to Reading and Writing. Module 1 was generally considered manageable and comparable to expected difficulty levels.

Students who typically perform well on mathematics reported feeling confident after the first module. Module 2 of Mathematics, however, presented significant challenges:

  • Questions became progressively harder after the initial problems
  • Complex algebraic manipulations and advanced concepts appeared with greater frequency
  • Geometry problems required multi-step reasoning
  • Time constraints prevented many students from attempting all questions
  • The final several questions were described as exceptionally difficult

Students reported that questions beyond approximately number 17 in Module 2 represented a substantial increase in difficulty. Multiple test-takers ran out of time and were forced to either rush through or completely skip final questions.

This time pressure was notable because it affected students who typically complete sections with time to spare. The mathematics difficulty was characterized not just by computational complexity but by the conceptual sophistication required.

Students encountered problems requiring creative problem-solving approaches and integration of multiple mathematical concepts.


Comparisons to Practice Tests

Perhaps the most consistent theme in student feedback was the substantial gap between this exam and official practice materials. Students who had prepared extensively using College Board practice tests expressed shock at the difficulty differential.

The practice tests had apparently not prepared them for the level of challenge encountered on October 4th. Specific comparisons included:

  • Reading passages were longer and more complex than practice test passages
  • Vocabulary was significantly more challenging than practice materials
  • Mathematics problems required more steps and conceptual understanding
  • Time pressure was greater than practice test timing would suggest
  • Scientific and technical content was more prevalent and sophisticated

Many students questioned why the practice tests did not reflect the actual difficulty level, as this gap undermined their preparation efforts.

Students who felt well-prepared based on practice test performance found themselves struggling on the actual exam, creating frustration and questioning the validity of practice materials as preparation tools.


Comparisons to Recent SAT Administrations

Students who had taken previous SAT administrations offered valuable comparative perspective. The October 2025 exam was consistently described as harder than:

  • The September 2025 administration
  • The August 2025 administration
  • The March 2025 administration

Some students noted that August 2025 had been considered difficult, followed by an easier September exam, which led to expectations that October might also be more moderate.

Instead, October appeared to represent a significant increase in difficulty even compared to August. Tutoring professionals echoed these comparisons, stating this was the hardest exam they had encountered in their professional experience.

This professional validation of student concerns suggests the difficulty increase was not merely subjective perception.


Test Form Variation

An interesting finding was that different test forms appeared to have varying difficulty levels, even within the "hard" module designations. Some students reported relatively straightforward vocabulary questions but exceptionally challenging passage-based questions.

Others experienced the opposite pattern. This variation meant that direct comparisons between students were complicated, and experiences of the "same" exam were actually quite different.

This variation extended to specific content areas, with some forms emphasizing certain topics (geometry, data analysis, specific literary devices) while other forms focused on different areas.


Scoring and Curve Concerns

Students expressed significant anxiety about how this exam would be scored. The standard question was whether the increased difficulty would be reflected in a more generous "curve" (score conversion table).

Many students expressed hope that the scoring would account for the difficulty, while others worried that their scores would not reflect their actual abilities.

There was widespread speculation about whether certain questions might be experimental or whether the difficulty was intentional. Some students questioned whether College Board was "trolling" test-takers with this administration.


Recommendations and Student Actions

The immediate response from many students was to register for the November SAT administration. Even students who had intended October to be their final attempt decided to take the exam again.

This decision was particularly significant for seniors facing college application deadlines, who now faced additional stress and expense.

Students also expressed interest in reporting testing irregularities when appropriate, such as proctoring issues that created additional distractions during the exam.