What do you think? Is it accurate?

<p>Okay, so this past weekend I took a full ACT practice test using "2012 Edition McGraw Hill's ACT w/ 6 Practice Tests."</p>

<p>My scores were as follows:</p>

English: 34 (3 wrong)
Math: 33 (3 wrong)
Reading: 33 (3 wrong)
Science: 26 (like 9-10 wrong... I know, IT COMPLETELY SUCKS!!)</p>

<p>Can I expect to recieve similar scores on test day (my test is next month, April)?</p>

<p>…or is mcgraw hill not an accurate (estimate) source? For example, are other sources more “accurate” than others, or are they essentially the same?</p>


<p>There are some that are harder/easier than others. I would suggest taking a test out of THE REAL ACT PREP GUIDE it is put out by ACT and, includes REAL act test from prior years…</p>

I’ll check it out!</p>

<p>Yeah, I used mcgraw hill. on the actual test, my score was 2 points lower composite because the science section in mcgraw hill is too easy ( 33 C v 31 actual). Get a different book.</p>

<p>When I took a science test from a different McGraw book (the one with a bunch of practice exams), I had a 35 in science. I definitely thought it was too easy, so I agree with you.
Were the other 3 tests about the same score on the practice and real?</p>

<p>The 33 was my average score using the McGraw Hill practice. Once I got a 36 in math, which wasn’t accurate. I consistently got near-perfect (34+) on the science sections. Obviously, this is a big difference from the 27 I got on the real ACT (though admittedly I did not properly time myself on the real thing and guessed on the last section). I still foudn the real ACT science section (which I took in February) much harder than the McGraw Hill science section.</p>

<p>I found the online practice that they mention in the front of the book helpful – not that the material was any different, but that it was a more accurate way of timing yourself and whatnot for the ACT … Maybe you should give it a shot?</p>