<p>according to people at my school that have gone through state testing before, i’ve heard two different things:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>the state test is easier by far. you will get your best score ever.</p></li>
<li><p>the state test is the same level of difficulty as the national test, but you will score higher because it is curved with every single student in your state, including kids who never otherwise would have wanted to take the ACT (and presumably score badly, therefore making curves more generous).</p></li>
</ol>
<p>^I guess it depends what state you’re in XD</p>
<p>I’m in MI btw</p>
<p>I got 31 state 35 national…</p>
<p>My theory is that because the state testing is related to funding for public schools, by making the test extra hard it is possible to decrease the amount of funding to even excellent school districts.</p>
<p>My state doesn’t have mandated testing, but from what I’ve heard, the ACT pays to be allowed to test all the kids in the state. I think that they use the “unofficial” opportunities to experiment with questions they wouldn’t try on a national administration. Sometimes these might turn out easier, sometimes harder, but this would result in the discrepancies of opinion. I would highly doubt that ACT results determine statewide funding, those are other standardized tests, and I don’t think they would want to specifically decrease funding anyway. Plus, if everyone did poorly in proportion the excellent school districts would still do the best</p>