How TaraPrep Estimates TARA Scores

Convert your raw mark

Use this first. Choose Critical Thinking or Problem Solving, then enter your score out of 22.

The number above is an Estimated TARA-style score, not an official TARA result. Official scores are produced by UAT-UK using the live candidate cohort and the official scoring process. TaraPrep uses the published score distributions to make mock scores easier to interpret.

The short version

TaraPrep estimates a score in three steps.

First, we start with the raw mark from a 22-question Critical Thinking or Problem Solving module.

Second, we assign that raw mark a plotting position across the 23 possible marks from 0 to 22. This is a modelling assumption, not an observed candidate percentile, because UAT-UK does not publish the raw-mark distribution.

Third, we map that plotting position onto the published 2025/26 TARA score distribution. That gives a score estimate on the familiar 1.0 to 9.0 scale.

The visual model

The left chart below shows the published score distribution we extracted from the official results PDF. The right chart shows how each raw mark from 0 out of 22 to 22 out of 22 maps onto the estimated 1.0 to 9.0 score scale.

This is the key idea: the raw mark does not become a score by simple percentage. The model gives it a position across the possible raw marks, then maps that position onto the published TARA score distribution.

Why raw marks need context

A score like 14 out of 22 is honest, but it is hard to interpret on its own. It might feel strong because it is above half marks. It might feel weak because eight questions were missed. Neither instinct tells you where the mark sits in the TARA score distribution.

The real TARA result is reported on a 1.0 to 9.0 scale, to one decimal place. The official explanation of results says typical candidates score around 4.5, with only about 10% scoring higher than 7.0. That is why the estimate is shown as both a scaled score and an approximate percentile.

What the official PDF gives us

The official TARA Explanation of Results PDF does not publish a raw-mark-to-score table. It does provide score distribution charts for Critical Thinking and Problem Solving.

For each module, the chart gives the percentage of candidates in score bins from 1.0 to 9.0. The bins are spaced by half-points: 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, and so on up to 9.0.

Those charts are enough to reconstruct the shape of the reported score distribution. They are not enough, by themselves, to reconstruct the official raw-mark conversion. That distinction is why TaraPrep labels the output as an estimate.

How we extracted the charts

The official TARA Explanation of Results PDF stores the two distribution charts as embedded images. That lets us work from the image data directly instead of reading bar heights by eye.

The extraction script:

1. extracts the embedded chart images from the PDF
2. detects the x-axis baseline and the top of the y-axis
3. finds the orange bar shapes
4. measures each bar height in pixels
5. converts pixel height into percentage points using the chart's 0% to 14% y-axis
6. normalises the measured bins so the distribution sums to 100%

Extraction checks

The measured chart totals are within 0.2% of 100%

Critical Thinking raw extracted total

100.1044%

Normalised to 100.0000%

Problem Solving raw extracted total

100.1628%

Normalised to 100.0000%

The raw totals are deliberately shown because they are a sanity check. If the script missed a bar, included axis text, or used the wrong scale, the totals would not land so close to 100%.

From score to the published distribution

Once we have the extracted distribution, a reported score can be located approximately within that published candidate distribution.

For a Problem Solving score around 6.0, we add the candidate percentages in the lower score bins, then interpolate within the 6.0 bin. The result is an estimated position in the published score distribution.

This is what turns a scaled score into a statement about relative performance.

From raw mark to score estimate

The official PDF does not tell us how many questions candidates answered correctly for each reported score. TaraPrep therefore uses a transparent launch model.

The raw mark is assigned a plotting position, then mapped onto the extracted official distribution. The plotting position spreads the 23 possible raw marks across the scale; it does not claim that raw marks are equally common in the live candidate cohort. It also avoids treating 0 out of 22 as the literal bottom of the distribution or 22 out of 22 as the literal top.

In formula form, the launch raw-mark percentile is:

raw-mark plotting position = (correct answers + 0.5) / (22 + 1)

That is intentionally conservative. A perfect mock score is excellent, but it is not automatically called a guaranteed official 9.0 because UAT-UK uses live response data, item difficulty and equating that the model cannot observe.

Why CT and PS differ

Critical Thinking and Problem Solving use different published distributions. That means the same raw mark can map to a different estimated score depending on the module.

The converter preserves that difference instead of using one generic percentage scale for both modules.

Why this is not an official score

UAT-UK controls the official scoring process. The public PDF gives score distributions, not raw marks, and the real conversion can account for test difficulty and candidate performance in ways that are not published.

So the output is labelled Estimated TARA-style score. It is useful for preparation, but it is not an official result.

How the model stays current

TaraPrep actively monitors the official ESAT-TMUA / UAT-UK website for new TARA results guidance and score-distribution data.

When new official data is published, we recalibrate the estimate model so the converter stays anchored to the best available public evidence.

How to interpret the estimate

Use the estimated score as a preparation guide, not as a prediction guarantee.

A score around 4.5 is close to the typical candidate area described by the official explanation. Scores above 7.0 sit in the upper part of the published distribution. Lower scores are not a verdict; they are a signal that accuracy, timing or a specific question type needs work.

The most useful next step is question review. A student who scores 5.3 because they ran out of time needs a different plan from a student who scores 5.3 because they repeatedly missed assumptions questions or multi-step Problem Solving procedures.

Official sources

• UAT-UK TARA Explanation of Results: October 2025 and January 2026