<p>I just don’t understand…
Almost everyone who doesn’t score high on the SAT (~1800s) seems to get really high scores on the ACT (30-36).
Plus, I feel that a 36 is much more common than a 2400, and because there is no guessing penalty on the ACT, it seems to be easier to get a higher score on the ACT.
Plus, the general consensus is that the ACT is easier than the SAT, so why is the ACT valued the same as the SAT?
I know people who got 1900s-2000s who ended up score 33-35 on the ACT. A 35 is supposed to be the equivalent of a 2300 on the SAT, but I personally think that’s bull…</p>
<p>It’s not easier. It’s just different. I have friends who get in the 2100 range who score in the mid 20s on the ACT. Neither is easier.</p>
<p>They are compared based on percentile, not absolute score. So they are comparable.
It is indeed easier to get ACT 36 then SAT 2400 since you can be 35.5 and rounded up to 36 in ACT. You probably should compare 2400 with a pure 36 ACT score. Or you should compare SAT 2340-2400 with ACT 36.</p>
<p>
[The</a> ACT® | Understanding Concordance | ACT](<a href=“http://www.act.org/aap/concordance/understand.html]The”>http://www.act.org/aap/concordance/understand.html)</p>
<p>Reality is that most of those who take both tests score in the same precentile range, and the rest are fairly equally divided as to those who do better on the ACT and those who do better on the SAT. Although it may have fewer “tricky” questions, the ACT has more time pressure than the SAT. Of the 1,664,479 graduating seniors who took the SAT in high school last year, 360 got a 2400 on a single test; for the ACT the number was 1162 out 1,799,243. Though that may sound like a large difference, the percentages for both are so low that it is a almost meaningless difference. The logic presented above that it is easier to get a 36 on the ACT because a 35.5 becomes a 36 does not work because there are times on the SAT when you can actually get one or even two questions wrong in a section and score a 800, while the ACT awards a 36 in a section only to those with all correct answers, and the number you can get wrong to achieve a 35.5 that gets raised to a 36 is actually usually fewer than the number you can get wrong and get a 2400. Moreover, the lower number for those scoring 2400 on the SAT is a direct result of the writing test. Before 2005 when the SAT had no writing test and max score was 1600, the number that scored 1600 was yearly about three to four times the number who scored 36 on the ACT. Those numbers flipped the other way after the writing section was added to the SAT.</p>
<p>It also invariably seems that students in the eastern states and west coast states, where the SAT is the predominate test taken in high school, are the ones who most often believe the SAT is the harder and superior test, and students in the middle of the country, where the ACT predominates,are the ones who believe the opposite. That “general consensus” that the SAT is harder is is not a national consensus</p>
<p>I have few friends who got 36 in ACT, but struggling to get beyond 2300 in SAT.</p>
<p>I got a 33 and had a 2180 sat. They are quite comparable. Ultimately I an deciding to submit the ACT because I want to be an engineer and math math act was 35 while my SAT math was a mere 720</p>
<p>You could also argue that the act is a harder test since it has five sections - which is why some colleges not only consider the act equal to the sat but also to two stakest tests on top of it. In the end some students score higher on the act and others score higher on the sat. each student should take the test they’re best at. the sat is trickier , the act has more advanced content and in the end it is not the test you choose it’s whether you score 32 or 2100. Of course you can be a masochist and prefer the test where you score. the lowest.</p>
<p>What I really don’t understand is why colleges will take only the ACT, but if you take the SAT, you also have to take subject tests. So not only is the ACT easier (for most people, at least that I know) to score higher, but they also don’t have to take subject tests, which are extremely annoying to study for.</p>
<p>I think I did worse on the ACT actually (2320 SAT, 33 ACT, both first and only sittings). The science section really threw me off.</p>
<p>^People take them anyway, I thought? Everyone in my area takes the ACT, but those looking to get into top colleges also take the subject tests.</p>
<p>I can’t beat drusba’s answer. It’s not accurate that “everyone who scores 1800’s” on the SAT are scoring 30-36 on the ACT. That may be the case for your circle of friends but that doesn’t make it a national standard. Most kids will test in the same range. An 1800 SAT is equivalent about a 26 on the ACT.</p>
<p>There will be a few individuals whose particular abilities make one test a better fit than another and you’ll see more drastic differences. That is not the norm though.</p>
<p>ACT also allows a few error for 36. English is the part the mostly require all correct for 36. Math allows 0-2. Reading and Science are even more generous. This is not much different from SAT. If you missed 2 in Math, you may be down to ~740. This is contrary to what drusba said. However, if you do miss 1 or 2 question more in ACT and get two sections of 35 or one section of 34 among 36 in the other sections, you still get a 36 composite score. Anyway, the score method and questions are different between the 2 test. I don’t see why would use the number of wrong answers as an argument to compare the 2 tests. The percentage of students getting 2400 is lower than ACT 36 composite is also due to the high resolution. Each ACT point is around 60 points difference in SAT (at least in the top range). Having 2350 is still comparable to ACT 36 (which could be 35.5). After all, there is no standard way to compare of convert the scores as different schools put different weight in different section. Some include SAT writing score, some don’t. That would definitely affect the percentile distribution. If you are doing similarly in both tests, do not hesitate to send in both scores even one may appear slightly weaker than the other.</p>
<p>The thing is, you can’t super score the act. This its harder to get a perfect score</p>
<p>YUNGKHALIFA420 makes an excellent point.</p>
<p>Though there may only be a handful who get 2400 on the SAT in one sitting, I’m sure there many more who get a 2400 superscored. Most schools (or do all?) superscore the SAT while only a select few superscore the ACT.</p>
<p>So technically, though I don’t have actual data, I’d be willing to bet there are a lot more “perfect” SAT scores than ACT scores because of superscoring.</p>
<p>"Why is the ACT valued the same as the SAT? "</p>
<p>Because life it too short to get all worked up about a just one part of the college application process.</p>
<p>It depends on the person. For me, the ACT is slightly easier than the SAT, but for others it’s the opposite. In my personal opinion, the ACT has easier, more straightforward questions most of the time, BUT the time limits (with the exception of the essay) are much harsher than those on the SAT, so it pretty much equals out.</p>
<p>Plus you can’t superscore the ACT.</p>