D27 just took a practice SAT and ACT to see if she should study to take either next year. Her ACT score was higher at 29. With average scores so high these days due to test optional, I’m not even sure it’s worth her time to study for only a 29-31 (assuming this is how much scores could go up with studying - not sure on this). It seems like that time could be better used focusing on school or fun extracurriculars. We are in CA and right now her top school is UCD - she loves the big school with connected small city. For the UCs she doesn’t need a test, but UCs are also such a wild card for admissions. I am going to also take her to see the Claremont colleges because I think if she likes Davis (the city), she might like that area as well. All those schools have higher test scores so she wouldn’t be sending a 29-31. So long explanation for short question - is it worth the time to study for a standardized test if expected outcome is not sendable to most schools? I feel like I am answering my own question… but am I not thinking of possible negatives to not having a test score?
There may be more schools requiring tests by the time a 27 applies, but you’d have plenty of time to know that and adjust if necessary. The important thing is to have targets and safeties on your list as well - the Claremont colleges are not easy admits either.
My kids had tutors and increased scores. Some colleges still require tests, many use the scores to determine merit, some might not require scores but a decent score will help. My kids knew that if they wanted to go to an oos public, merit was necessary. They met with a tutor once a week, and took a practice test once a week.
Objectively, a 29 is pretty good.
She could take the test and send it to OOS colleges where a 29-30 would be more than sufficient - Whitman, Willamette, Lewis&Clark, UPuget Sound, SOU, ASU, AU, UO.. - or for majors where that’d be good.
No need to devote much time to it beside making sure she knows what the test is about - no prepping, no prep classes, no worrying about scores. And she’d still have solid choices if all falls through.
Then she has UCD and CSUs (more residential campuses like Chico, Sonoma, or Humboldt; or whatever CSU she can commute to). None of these would need a test score, decreasing the pressure to spend time on the tests.
Yes, definitely know the Claremont Colleges would be a reach. I was just saying a score like her current score (29) wouldn’t help her case. She’d have better luck test optional.
Thanks for sharing your experience. May I ask how much their scores improved with tutoring? It’s something I was thinking about, but it’s a big financial decision so in this case not sure if it’s worth it just to improve a point or two.
My kids did better on the ACT, I think they improved 2 to 4 points (final scores ranged from 30 - 34). One needed to improve his score because his gpa was 3.4, two had 3.95 gpa’s and wanted to go oos so needed merit, to be honest one got tutored only because his twin did, 3.7, inconsistent grades, even with merit he wasn’t going oos because I was afraid he’d lose it, and he was going to get into Rutgers.
One of my kids went up by four points with six weeks of tutoring. For context, he is a very strong test taker and had one area that was dragging down his composite score, but he still went up in every area.
My other kid hated standardized tests, and we knew that no amount of tutoring would get his score where it needed to be to make the cut at the schools he was looking at, and he was a very strong candidate without scores; he went TO.
So, go with what you know about your kid (and what she prefers). Most schools will still be TO in 2027 (the vast majority are TO today), so I don’t think it’s a huge risk not to have scores. That said, if she has her heart set on a UC and they revisit their test-free policy (given the current political environment…feels like anything is possible) then having a score would probably give her some peace of mind.
Basically everything in CA, including the Claremonts, is going to be test optional, especially since her first choice is Davis.
UCs wouldn’t implement any test requirement or change so quickly.
So, I wouldn’t spend money on tutoring, unless she changes her mind later on and wants to go OOS thus needs merit aid (or if she absolutely wants a test required college where you’d qualify for need based aid - keeping in mind lots of meet need colleges remain test optional, and colleges like Bates have been test optional for decades so you can be sure they won’t suddenly require tests.)
Time and money seem to be better allocated to more useful pursuits.
My D19 (tests required back then) did regular tutoring and… her overall score stayed the same (30) though her superscore went up 1 point. Honestly, it felt like a lot of work for not much return. I know some people do raise it significantly. Hard to always know what works in advance - the tutor was the same who raised one of her friends by 2 or 3 points, but from a lower starting point.
(Her second attempt however got her a 35 and 36 on the two English sections (math same, science down 
) which was good enough for humanities/social sciences at her reach back then. )
S23 was salutatorian, had great ECs, great work experience, leadership awards, …and crapped the bed on his preACT. Luckily, only one college on his list required test scores, and it was an afterthought college. We knew he’d get into the colleges he liked more, so it was easy to drop. We probably would have dropped it anyway.
For us, it was a matter of his application being great in so many other ways that unless he had a stellar ACT (34+) score, it wasn’t going to be any kind of boost. His top 3 schools were safeties/low targets and he already qualified for top merit, so I’m not sure even a 35+ would have made a difference. It was almost a relief when it came back so low (S23 has an LD and vision issues and is a horrible standardized test taker as a result), as the question of trying again with tutoring became moot. If it had been predicted that he would be above a 30, I know his competitiveness would have taken over.
I think if you have a list that is already fairly established, you can evaluate if a higher score would have any impact based on the rest of her application, and if that number is obtainable.
Both my (CA) kiddos ('23, '25) got into UCD and other TO schools with no ACT/SAT. Neither were good testers (for different reasons) and neither were interested in any colleges where it would matter. If, all things being equal, they are a strong candidate in their other qualifications, personally I would not invest the time/$. Good luck!
You don’t have to choose between one or the other. If she follows an organized study/tutoring plan this summer and takes the test in August and/or early fall, it wouldn’t interfere with the other work and she may possibly be done with testing by then.
My child improved from 27 to 34 with 12 weeks studying. Don’t write off a high score just yet. 
Mine had a 28 pre ACT and got to a 33 just by using an act prep book over the summer.
What was the practice SAT score?
Agreed. ACT-m includes trig, so depending on where your D is in her HS math sequence, that score should naturally increase with more HS math. (And in the trig, they love questions requiring the pythagorean theorem to solve.)
Not a fan of tutoring for teh ACT which is more of a time test. Just practice at home against the kitchen timer.
There are a few test taking strategies that can improve a score a bit even without much studying. Not sure how different the digital versions are but some common recommended strategies used to be:
Complete the easy questions first, then go back to the harder ones,
Eliminate obvious wrong answers which improves odds when guessing,
If there are still paired passages, read both, but then complete the questions regarding only one passage first (for both), then go back to complete the questions that compare/contrast both passages
Learn the basic punctuation and grammar rules,
Practice timing. My daughter spent about 15 minutes a night completing a couple of timed sections. The time per section was about 7.5 minutes at the time. She wasn’t keen on spending hours doing practice exams, so just working on timing with a section or two a night helped her with the pace needed. She improved enough (100 pts) to meet her goal. With two more tests.
There are many others if you do some googling.
S22 went from 29 on his first practice test to 35 about a month later. He worked on some knowledge and lots of small things, like which questions to do first, timing on the reading section, bubbling in answers in groups, etc. We went over the questions he missed until he understood them. It may be worth a try to study and see how a real test goes.
Thanks all for the great feedback. It gave us a lot to think about.
Responding to.a few questions… Re: summer studying, she is not able to study in the summer because she is fortunate to be at sleep-away camp with no technology. I don’t think she would be so keen on bringing a study book.
Re: being a good test taker. That is not a great strength of hers - but she is a great reader. I think that’s why the ACT felt better since it’s really three reading sections since the science section is not really testing science knowledge (although sounds like the science section will no longer be factored into the score?). Re: Math for next year - she will be in Honors Pre-Calc (maybe it will help? math was the lowest subscore by far).
All the great personal experiences were very helpful to read about and sounds like it really comes down to each individual kid. I’m thinking since the score won’t be helpful for the UCs and I don’t want to have to battle her about tutoring/studying for the test on top her junior year schedule, I think we’re just going to leave it up to her. As of now, she says she wants to study for it - she actually enjoyed the practice test especially compared to the SAT practice test. If she follows through and does some studying on her own, we will see if we can afford to add a tutor. Thanks again for sharing your experiences!