Official webpage
Current official exam format
Confirm current section structure and exam information.
Format information does not supply a universal AP 1–5 cutoff.
CLEAR INPUTS · EXPLAINED RESULTS
A complete rubric point contributes five weighted practice points. The video and program requirements are only two of the six categories; the other four depend on the written responses.
Enter the raw points requested by each field to calculate a weighted practice total out of 100. This current-format model does not convert the result to an AP score of 1 to 5.
Use each resource for the purpose and format shown. A released question set is different from a complete timed test.
Official webpage
Confirm current section structure and exam information.
Format information does not supply a universal AP 1–5 cutoff.
A complete rubric point contributes five weighted practice points. The video and program requirements are only two of the six categories; the other four depend on the written responses.
| Current format | Timing | Weights |
|---|---|---|
| 70 multiple-choice questions plus six Create/written-response rubric categories | 120 minutes MCQ;60 minutes written responses | 70% MCQ /30% Create and written responses |
Start with raw points awarded by the matching answer key and rubric. Convert each component to its share of the published total. Keep the full calculation precision until the final displayed result.
mcq + 5*(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6)
The example gives 74.0000/100 before display rounding. It does not establish an AP 1–5 result; a score conversion requires a matched test form and conversion table.
| Input | Example points | Maximum |
|---|---|---|
| Multiple choice correct | 49 | 70 |
| Video | 1 | 1 |
| Program requirements | 1 | 1 |
| Written response1: Program design, function and purpose | 1 | 1 |
| Written response2a: Algorithm development | 1 | 1 |
| Written response2b: Errors and testing | 1 | 1 |
| Written response2c: Data and procedural abstraction | 0 | 1 |
Compare where your unearned raw points occur before choosing a review task. A lower written contribution can point to missing rubric evidence, while a lower MCQ contribution can come from knowledge gaps, misreading or pacing. The total alone cannot identify the cause.
Re-score one missed written response against its actual rubric, name the missing claim or calculation, and redo that part without looking. Then take a new matched practice set to check whether the correction transfers.
The weighted value describes performance on the questions you entered. Different forms can have different difficulty and different raw-to-AP conversions. A score distribution says how many students received each grade; it does not reveal the raw cutoff for your test.
Only a mode that names a supported practice form uses its published1–5 conversion. Match the form, question maxima and scoring rules before using that result.
COMMON QUESTIONS
No. The 2026 scoring guidelines use six0 or 1 categories. Award a category only when all required criteria for that category are satisfied, using the specific response and scoring guide.
No. This is an independent practice tool. Official sources establish the format and any specifically identified released-form rules; the tool does not assign an official AP score.
Enter the raw integer counts requested by each field. Use the answer key for MCQ and the specific scoring rubric for written responses. A classroom percentage cannot safely replace a rubric score without knowing its denominator.
Check the question counts, point limits and scoring directions first. This model uses the stated current structure; an older form with different limits needs its own calculation. A weighted practice total does not establish the AP score boundaries for either form.
Sources checked . Model: 2027-format-research-2026-10-19. Check the resource descriptions above for the exam year or practice form each method supports.
Prepared for ScoreDino with AI assistance. Original explanations and practice items are independent learning material. College Board does not endorse this resource.
Scoring methodology · Editorial policy · Report a correction