<p>Just dont do it</p>
<p>well, I can update tou guys after the ACT and see what happens and if it works. I do have morals but in the end, a 27 could get $8k and a 29 could get $32k at the same school. It is more a question of finance than morals.</p>
<p>omg JUST STUDY FOR THE TEST!!! cheating is never the way to go. doing well ON YOUR OWN in the SAME CONDITIONS AS EVERYONE ELSE will be an award within itself. you know, its people like YOU who make me wish that when they cheat, they get CAUGHT and face the consequences. the ACT isnt hard. GET OVER IT and GET OVER YOURSELF</p>
<p>I wouldn’t because I don’t run out of time in Math anyway</p>
<p>No, I wouldn’t do it. You can rationalize it all you want, but in the end it’s wrong. If you do it, you deserve to get caught.</p>
<p>‘Now guys, please do not start telling me about morals. This is a test and this is an opportunity. Be honest about whether or not you would do it.’</p>
<p>OR MAYBE you can actually learn how to do well on the test, and answer questions in the time allotted like any other person who did well on the exam. Why are you so special that you would be exempt from taking the amount of time given?</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s as much about morals as being a sneaky, lazy jerk</p>
<p>Oh guys stop winning about it…
Its fair, the guy got balls and we dont, making him stand up above us. If we had balls too we wouldnt whine about it and step up to his level. </p>
<p>P.S. I think english sections instead of math should have more time</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>step up? i think that’d be a step down…</p>
<p>i’d say what you are doing isn’t that bad, but 10 minutes will make a big difference…that’s about a 17% increase in time to do the math test…also, these people that are talking about morals are the people that would tell on you if they caught you getting extra time because they wouldn’t want you getting a better score than them…</p>
<p>Morals are usually thrown out the window in instances of survival, and in the eyes of many, this test is all about surival. </p>
<p>A few points can literally mean the difference between a high-rise suite overlooking New York City, and a box overlooking other boxes.</p>
<p>do you think employers care wth you got on your ACTs 10-15 years before? yea…it doesnt matter. they dont give a s***</p>
<p>ARG the conscience~ Otherwise I would think about it. But my brain will probably stop me, then I’d go on to wishing that I didn’t have a conscience, which will take up the 10 minutes.</p>
<p>actually, now that i think about it, Salsabeefsteak does have a VERY valid point…</p>
<p>I hope you get caught. Salsa your rationalizing is disgusting, it is in times of great stress and importance when morals are most important.</p>
<p>“These are the times that try men’s souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” -T. Paine</p>
<p>It is not the survival of the fittest but the fitness of the survived.</p>
<p>Almost all of us will survive and pass the ACT but it matters how well did we pass.</p>
<p>Your scores get sent the schools you listed. If you get caught, are your schools notified of that too? No amount of scholarship $$$ will be given to you if you aren’t admitted at all.</p>
<p>i think that you should do it. Like people said, it is survival of the fittest. Is it fair that kids in connecticut have better teachers who actually give a damn than kids in alabama who only teach because of health insurance? After all it equals out anyway because you are clearly faster in english. And isint act supposed to measure what you know in a given amount of time. How are they supposed to test your full apitude if you are way faster in english and slower in math. Your english score wont benifit really if you finish with 10 or 1 minute to spair. </p>
<p>So either make the english section absurdly long so no one can finish. That way the people who get the furthest have the highest percentile score.</p>
<p>But since they DON’T do that, i think that the only compensation would be you start on the math earlier to fully grade your potential on the ACT</p>
<p>
yes, it is supposed to measure your performance in a given amount of time… that’s why there is a time limit. your second sentence basically answered the <em>question</em> you asked in the 1st sentence-since the sections are timed, and the student finishes the english much more quickly than he/she finishes the math section, it shows that the student is (probably) more competent in language/reading than in math.</p>
<p>yes, it is supposed to measure your performance in a given amount of time… that’s why there is a time limit. your second sentence basically answered the <em>question</em> you asked in the 1st sentence-since the sections are timed, and the student finishes the english much more quickly than he/she finishes the math section, it shows that the student is (probably) more competent in language/reading than in math.</p>
<p>My point exactly. Is it fair to say that i have a 32 on the act by making a 35 and 34 in reading and english, or to say i made a 29 on the act by making a 36 in math and a 25 in reading?</p>
<p>To me, i think the person who had the 36 in math should get the 32 scholarship. Reading is not nessacry past a certain point. You dont get any jobs being good in reading and english.</p>
<p>I can’t believe this question would even be brought up!</p>
<p>I second that Weather11.</p>