<p>I just finished taking the ACT, and i must say it is an unrealistic test, and the quality is much poorer than that of the SAT tests. Here is why : </p>
<p>1 - The people giving instructions for the test - In my case, the person was clueless to what was going on and had i believe skipped over many parts of the instructions, including a very brief and unsure answer to the question "is it better to guess on questions that you arent sure of?". Her answer was this- "i think its better to guess"(in an unsure tone of voice). She also had to ask her fellow instructors some questions during the test, which leads me to the next point.
2-The testing environment - During the testing I could hear music being played from a car outside, two of the instructors had a brief chat, and there was a loud beeping sound going off ever few seconds for about a minute.
3- Finally, the science section. This part of the test was completely unrealistic, and involved almost none of the science learned in any school i have ever been to. I would explain the first question, but i think they refuse to score it if they find out you let any of the questions out before a month.</p>
<p>Final decision- The ACT is excessively disorganized, and i cannot see how some colleges prefer it over the more reflective SAT tests</p>
<p>Though I agree with you that the SAT is a better test, I'm compelled to point out that the first two points on your list didn't have anything to do with the ACT itself; you simply have incompetent proctors. I took the SAT last week at the same place that I took the ACT today and I encountered more of a problem in terms of testing environment (people talking constantly outside, etc) at the SAT. Both my proctors were okay.</p>
<p>Also, CollegeBoard is SO much more organized and exact than the ACT website.</p>
<p>Yea you are right about all of that- Especially about collegeboard being more organized. But i still think it would be better for the ACT company to be more selective with who they choose to proctor the test. The proctors need to be competent for it to be a true standardized test.</p>
<p>I had a completely different experience with the ACT; I loved the test. First of all, not many people at all took it when I did, which put me in a more comfortable environment. Where I live, so many people take the SAT that I got put into this auditorium type room with 100 other people and we had to take the test on flip up tables that were about a square foot. I had my own full desk for the ACT. As far as the first two points of this post go, its simply a complaint not regarding the test itself. In reality, the test is better because it is shorter (much fewer unnecessary breaks) and you do a type of section once and you are done with it. </p>
<p>Finally, as far as the science section goes, it is not meant to test you on science you learn in high school. It is meant to test you on your aptitude of reading scientific charts, data, etc. and answering questions from them quickly. Science you learn in high school simply makes this easier, as you have more familiarity with the topics sometimes.</p>
<p>I'm bored right now, so I had to throw in my $.02.</p>
<p>its called scientific reasoning. how to read graphs and design experiments and such.</p>
<p>I think it really depends on the person- I have only taken the PLAN ACT and the PSAT tests, but I <em>did better</em> and <em>liked</em> the PLAN test more. I'm from the midwest, so maybe its just the regional thing. If I was from New York, I might like the SAT more.</p>