@ktrrights
Hello! I wanted to give an update on the board. For background, my story starts in post #127 on page 9 of this thread. My initial post included info about receiving our first notification of a score review from ACT on Dec 22, 2017, six months after our daughter took the June 2017 test. I am very grateful for this thread, the shared stories, and the efforts to call out ACT for their corruption. I almost laughed out loud when reading ACT’s official “non-response” to the contents of this thread. Typical form letter, cookie-cutter, legal disclaimer and non-responses that don’t answer any real questions about their practices. Now everyone can see the type of correspondence the students / parents who have appealed the ACT score review have received after we have spent hours compiling records, documents, letters of support, and legitimate proof substantiating scores. Outrageous. They don’t give students any list of guidelines of what to provide that WILL validate a questioned score (because the intend to cancel it), so you send in everything but a sworn affidavit from Jesus Christ himself, and they send you another form letter 6 weeks later quoting their same statistics.
So, as I said in my original post, we sent in a binder with substantial proof supporting the June 2017 score, got our form letter response denying the appeal, and we were once again offered the options - retake, self-cancel the score, or arbitrate. Since ACT had sent a form letter response to all the records we supplied, we did not select one of the options, and instead sent another follow-up letter demanding a person actually answer questions and address the contents of our appeal - Questions such as: If the equivalent SAT score wasn’t enough to validate the ACT, what SAT score would be confirming?, If a 3.7 GPA isn’t enough to validate, what GPA would validate?, If 11 hours of private one-on-one test prep isn’t considered a valid method of improving scores, why does ACT sell test prep and encourage retakes? Why were no basic test security measures implemented (students seated near each other with same test form) when we paid ACT to administer a valid test?.. So many questions were detailed in our follow up letter. After several weeks, we received a response from ACT, and this time, instead of a form letter from test security, we got a letter from an attorney in ACT’s legal department. It was part original correspondence, and part cut-and-paste standardized legal answers.
However, the most shocking contents of the attorney’s response letter were the copies of our daughter’s test booklet and answer sheet, as well as the test booklet and answer sheet of the “source examinee.” We were utterly stunned to receive this information in April 2018, AFTER our score review was completed, and well after our December 23, 2017 letter requesting any and all documents and records in the possession of ACT related to the score review matter. Prior to the score review, the only records ACT sent us were the seating chart, proctor notes, and their statistical score analysis, so we assumed that this was all ACT had on file. We immediately wrote back and brought this to the attorney’s attention and again requested any and all records and documents, including those from the June 2017 test and the Feb 2017 test (two scores were being compared due to score increase). We received another letter with the answer sheet from the Feb 2017 test and an option sheet that included self-canceling the score, arbitration, or reopening the score review by providing new and compelling evidence for the panel to consider. Upon examining the answer sheets with our daughter, she was able to explain that the bubbling/ erasure similarities on her answer sheet and the “source examinee” in the last column of each section were not due to copying, but were because she had used a strategy of bubbling in all the same answers in the last column of each block of bubbles (straight down the row, such as all B’s) so in case she ran out of time at least something would be bubbled for potential credit. If she had time, she went back and answered the question, erased and changed her bubble sheet. Her written answers in the test booklet supported this explanation, but the most compelling proof of all was the fact that she had used the exact same technique / same bubble pattern on her Feb 2018 ACT answer sheet, completely independent of the “source examinee.” We selected the option for a reopening of the score review in light of new evidence that we should have been provided back in Dec 2017, prior to the first score review, and we requested that the file be reexamined in its entirety since the totality of the evidence is overwhelmingly in our daughter’s favor and we were not treated fairly or ethically throughout the process.
We are now waiting on ACT’s response, but we fully expect to receive another denial because that is their playbook. This will be added to our ever-growing binder of evidence that we will provide to our daughter’s college should the need arise. In the meantime, she has attended orientation and we are moving forward with future plans.