Simple Q
Are the Princeton Review Cracking the ACT practice tests harder/easier than the real thing?
I got 29, 30 and 31 on the first second and third test respectively and was wondering if the tests were accurate or not.
Plus some feedback on PR 1296 would be good too
I took the ACT in October and used both PR’s Cracking the ACT and 1296 practice questions for practice. My actual ACT scores were almost exactly the same. My PR practice tests were between 23 and 26 and I scored a 23.25. I would say that PR’s practice test are very close to the real thing.
Some people say that 1296 is harder than the real thing… I guess not though
I have taken the first 3 tests in the 2016 Cracking the ACT book. 28 on all (27.5, 27.75, 28.0 respectively). I made a 28 on February, too. I’d say they’re a good representation of a score, but I’ve found that some of the math questions are different than real ACT math questions. I scored a 27 on February’s math and never got higher than a 25 from the Princeton book. There are also a few differences in their English tests – I don’t think I’ve seen any/many “Suppose the purpose was ________. Did the author reach his/her goal?” with the “Yes - Yes - No - No” answer choices.
Reading and Science seem to be good representations though.
Red Book tests are more accurate.