<p>I would like to find out. Does my daugther get in the semifinal list?</p>
<p>That’s great, the ACT deserves just as much merit as the SAT. In fact, I personally prefer the ACT with the exception of the science section. It didn’t seem to cover any basic science concepts, only the ability of the test taker to interpret graphs. For the other sections though, the test didn’t try to fool you into the wrong answer like the SAT is known to do.</p>
<p>I feel that there is definitely a difference. I took the SAT twice and then later decided to try the ACT. My first ACT trial was approx. equivalent to my better SAT, and then after test prep I took it again and got a 300 pt. difference. Go ACT!</p>
<p>If you need to see any difference between the 2 tests, then ACT is not on a finer scale. A 36 could be 36.0, 35.75, or 35.0, and there are many ways to get the latter 2. However, if one reports his/her real ACT score (e.g., not 33, but 32.5), then ACT and SAT are similar for most people if not for all.</p>
<p>I have taken both the SAT and ACT. I took the ACT because my SAT scores were abysmally low (1600 first try). My ACT score without study was like a 30, but it was way out of the time limit for reading and science so that number isn’t very meaningful. </p>
<p>Now I’ve studied an equal amount for each of them - maybe a little more on the ACT. My scores are roughly equal. On the ACT I score 33-35 while on the SAT I score 2150-2250.</p>
<p>In the end, I would say that the SAT1 in combination with SAT2 is the ideal combination. The ACT Math and English (though I found rhetoric questions absurd) are fair tests, although personally I think they are too easy (and thus make the curves harsh when you do something silly). The ACT Science/reading section were absurd. Especially reading. How can one improve their science/reading score? Learn to look at graphs quicker? Retain more information when you read at lightening speeds? If anything, those are the hardest to improve. They are even harder to improve than the “sort of IQ based” SAT sections. </p>
<p>When I studied for the SAT, I felt like I became much smarter. I feel like I have a better mastery in math, reading, and writing.</p>
<p>After studying for the ACT, I feel no different. I have coached myself to read at lightening speed and try and find the answers to the questions within the time limit, but still there’s not much else I can do to improve my score. How does this help me in life?</p>
<p>The majority of our internationals are loyal to SAT. If anyone takes ACT, we will deride his/her.</p>
<p>I’ve always found the differences between the ACT and SAT to be interesting to look at. For two tests that test similar concepts, they are both unique in how they test subject matter:</p>
<p>SAT:
-CR: Vocabulary tested, much more inference based questions on passages, more passages with fewer questions
-W: Essay required, more rigorous grammar rules tested, identifying errors
-M: Much more abstract thinking, Highest content level is Algebra II
-Tougher questions, more time per question
-Most colleges can super score</p>
<p>ACT:
-R: Four passages, more questions per passage, tests content of passage more than inferences
-W: Easier grammar errors, no identifying errors, brevity valued in answers, errors given in a context of a passage
-M: Straightfoward questions, content goes up to some advanced Trig topics like Identities
-S: It HAS a science section
-Efficiancy is being tested as much as accuracy, easier questions overall
-Colleges look at best score in one sitting</p>
<p>Overall:
-On content alone, the SAT is the more rigorous test. What the SAT tests in terms of grammar, critical reading skills, and vocabulary is barely seen on the ACT. Throw in the ACTs curved grading scale and alakazam.
-The ACT makes up for this by the minescule time per question. A student is rewarded for being fast yet accurate
-No two sections are perfectly comparable. Each test requests a different skill of the student and getting a high score on an ACT section does not guerantee a comparable score on the same section of the SAT (though the chances of doing so are still pretty high).
-Math is the only section that is remotly comparable on both tests. While the math section is harder on the ACT in terms of content and time, the SAT tests content in a manner that a student who takes the test cold would not be familiar with. Assuming one is familiar with both tests, there should be no reason why a student shouldn’t get comparative scores on both sections assuming all else is constant.
-SAT is harder to prep for in a short term setting. Learning all of the abstract reasoning (not to mention vocab) to do well on each section is not something one can learn in an hour long sitting the day before the test and even harder if you go to a school like mine that only teaches to the ACT that every student has to take (and not to the SAT that no one takes unless they want to). That said, the SAT is an easier test to prep for if one puts the time and energy to do so; it’s easier to understand how to answer harder questions with a remotly comfortable time frame than how to answer easier questions in a few seconds.</p>
<p>Overall, both tests are about equal in terms of proving preperation for college assuming one takes the ACT + writting. The test are still vastly different, so choosing one to cram for is a matter of playing to one’s strengths and weaknesses.</p>
<p>I think SAT reading is easier to prep because there are 19 sentence completions and as long as you are willing to work hard you will be rewarded.</p>
<p>SAT and ACT are both crude attempts to measure a person’s college potential. We all know that grades carry the most weight in college admissions, these tests provide a supplement, a standardized measure so that colleges have some (albeit small) means of comparing students from all different regions and schools. Grading standards vary wildly from school to school, so we need some kind of standard.</p>
<p>It’s a flawed system, I know it, you know, the Collegeboard and ACT know it, but complaining about it is a little flippant to say the least. What did people do before the SAT? Basically if you wanted a top-notch college education, you had to be connected. College would cherry-pick their incoming classes from certain prep schools whose academic standards could be accounted for. If you didn’t attend a tony prep school, then the odds were stacked against you. You had little chance to prove your worth to top universities. It was very elitist compared to the system we have now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Definitely do not agree with that. I usually finish the math sections of the SAT in half or a little over half the time. I usually get annoyed because the questions are so easy/boring. I felt the ACT challenged me more, while still easy, it required more thinking.</p>
<p>The last time I read anything about it, the CB claimed the SAT measured “developed ability”. Not ‘ability’. Developed ability suggests that ability is not a fixed trait, as we often think when we consider terms like ‘aptitude’ or ‘intelligence’. I think it reflects the CB’s response to the valid criticisms leveled against the test over the years. I don’t think changes like that necessarily reflect badly on the CB. To change in response to new knowledge seems more reasonable than to refuse to do so.</p>
<p>Please, don’t be silly. The ACT is still not respected in the ivy league. Only SEVEN percent of admitted ivy league students fail to submit the SAT.</p>
<p>^ As I indicated on another thread, that statistic is not evidence for your claim.</p>
<p>It is perfect evidence. And I recently visited Harvard and every single student I talked to said they had never taken the ACT. The ACT is a midwestern tradition that is not valued in New England.</p>
<p>Also, 60% do not submit the ACT</p>
<p>That’s based on student preference alone. It indicates nothing about the preferences of the schools.</p>
<p>It sure does. Look who gets in. The SAT takers</p>
<p>You have no clue what you are talking about.</p>
<p>Xiggi:
</p>
<p>I wish it did. Maybe for most others, not for me. I catch on to advanced calculus in a snap yet I don’t do so great in SAT math. I can write essays from heaven yet I can’t get higher than an 8 on the SAT essay and there’s nothing special about my critical reading and writing scores. I can outwit and out-think all but top debaters in California (in speech and debate tournaments) but according to the SAT, my 1750 (the first time I took it, no prep) means that I’m not as intelligent as my achievements would imply.</p>
<p>Sorry Xiggi, the SAT does not measure critical reading, mathematical reasoning, or writing skills. It measures SAT test taking skills. It’s not a measurement of intelligence but a measurement of HOW you think. </p>
<p>Anyway, that’s just the perspective of one who is more intelligent than the SAT would have you think. The people who know me best say “w.t.f?” when I tell them my SAT score. Go figure.</p>
<p>
My sister has a 140 IQ, skipped a grade and has a ~1700 on the SAT and a 30 on the ACT (she’s not particularly academic). SAT is definitely not an IQ test nor is it even correlated at all. The ACT is not an IQ test, but I would most definitely say that it’s atleast correlated with general reasoning.
That would make the SAT percentile be off about ~.21 versus the ACT percentile off about ~.05.
I don’t know my IQ, but in reference to this one:
I have a 34 ACT and much lower SAT.</p>