...so that may translate to less respect for the ACT. In other words, a top 1% nationally in the ACT wouldn't be equivalent to top 1% for the SAT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I totally get what you're trying to say, but it doesn't make logical sense to me.</p>
<p>More people take the SAT than ACT, so the 99th percentile of the SAT contains more students than the 99th percentile of the ACT. Consider those who take both. Either everyone who's in the 99th percentile of the ACT is in the 99th percentile of the SAT, or there are some students in the 99th of the ACT not in the 99th of the SAT. If it's the former then one could feasibly think everyone who takes the ACT and scores in the 99th on that would also score in the 99th on the SAT. Alternatively, if it's the latter, there are some people in the 99th on the SAT who score lower than 99th on the ACT. Either way, </p>
<p>If admissions officers notice a trend, then likely there's other factors in play; for example, maybe the incidence of people in the 99th percentile of the SAT are particularly unlikely to take the ACT for some reason. </p>
<p>Most likely, though, is that there's a flaw in my reasoning :)</p>
<p>According to the data, a 1340 (93rd percentile on the old SAT) is equivalent to a 30 (which is 97th percentile on the ACT). A 1220 SAT (81st percentile) is equivalent to a 27 on the ACT (which is 89th percentile). The regression analysis predicts through scientific means that the average 81st percentile scorer on the SAT will score in the 89th percentile on the ACT. I think the difference is too large to chalk up to rounding problems. So from this data we can tentatively conclude that the ACT-taking population is "dumber" than the SAT-taking population. Or at the least not as good at taking tests...</p>
<p>Why? Well the ACT is much more popular in the Midwest while the SAT is more popular on the coasts. My guess is that students on the coasts have more rigorous schooling on the whole, with more people taking AP classes. Perhaps students on the coasts spend more money on test-prep. So as far as test-taking is concerned, students on the coasts are "smarter" (I use this term very loosely - don't skewer me!)</p>
<p>So the top 1% of the "dumb" population is not as impressive as the top 1% of the "smart" population.</p>
<p>You do, however, raise an interesting issue in analyzing the type of person that would take both test. That is a confounding variable, certainly. But if the 99 percentile SAT scorers are less likely to take the ACT, that removes the highest achieving students from the "smart" group. Yet the weakened "smart" group still outperforms the "dumb" group.</p>
<p>state residency doesn't come into play when considering scholarships / acceptances. Don't be fulled by statistics. As i've asked an admission officer from USC why majority half of the kids are from California, he replied that it's because there are just way more kids from schools in California applying to USC than from outside the west coast. </p>
<p>USC is a private institude. I'd think that it weighs things such as legacy more than residency.</p>
<p>On socks's post, I saw 34 cited as the minimum for an RHP scholarship. I was just wondering, I got a 2370 on my SAT I and I received my acceptance packet yesterday for the Resident Honors Program--what are my chances for quarter or half scholarship?</p>