<p>I just bought the Barrons 36, and took the practice questions. I was wondering how hard the questions are compared to the ones on the ACT. I did well on the ones there. For example, on the english, i missed two. any ideas would be great. thanks!</p>
<p>40 views, zero responses</p>
<p>I have the same question.
A friend of mine got around 2000, but got 35 composite on ACT.
She practised more for SAT.</p>
<p>is ACT easier</p>
<p>Based on the 2008 numbers, out of the 1,421,941 individuals who took the ACT, 428 scored a 36 composite. I would say that you’ve got your work cut out for you.</p>
<p>ACT is easier in terms of material, but gives you much, MUCH less time than the SAT. So it depends on how fast you can think.</p>
<p>And the difficulty in getting a 36 is that luck is all that separated a 36 from, say, 34. Have fun with it, but it’s completely pointless to be disappointed with a 34/35.</p>
<p>Thanks for the responses, and I would be really really happy with a 34. like insane. but I just don’t know how hard the questions in the book are.</p>
<p>I think I formulated the question poorly, let me try again. How much harder or easier are the questions from Barron’s ACT 36 in comparison to those used on the actual test?</p>
<p>Barrons ACT, I believe, is harder than the actual one by quite a bit. At least, from what I’ve heard from friends and stuff. I haven’t actually taken a Barron’s practice ACT.
So missing only two is pretty good!</p>
<p>Barron’s is significantly harder than the real ACT. I got somewhere around a 21 on one of the Barron’s practice tests (an 18 on the diagnostic test), but I got a 28 on the real ACT.</p>
<p>If i got a 2000 on the SAT what would i get on the ACT? Ive studied for the SAT for a year btw</p>
<p>I think I got a 25 on one of the Barron’s tests, and I later got a 35 on the real thing. Yeah, don’t take it as an accurate reflection your actual scores.</p>
<p>What you get on the SAT doesn’t predict your ACT that well. If I had to guess you’d get something in the range of 27-30.</p>
<p>thanks for the comments everyone! :D</p>
<p>The Barron’s ACT is significantly harder than the real ACT. In fact, some of the material in the Barron’s book is not generally included on the ACT at all. I’m a pro tutor and have done every ACT book on the market-- your best bet to get a feel for the test is to go get the Real ACT Study Guide and then (and this is really key because the test has gotten a little bit more difficult in the past 24 months) is to see if you have friends who have copies of 2007 or 2008 tests and see how you do on those.</p>
<p>Yeah, as far as I know, Barron’s makes their practice tests extremely difficult. If you’re doing well on their tests, you’ll do great on the real ACT.</p>
<p>Getting a 36 on the ACT is MUCH easier than getting a 2400 on the SAT.</p>
<p>@Ranka
I agree with Ray192 about it not being a good predictor of your scores. I did much better on the ACT than the SAT. But a 2000 on the ACT would be about equal to a 30/31.</p>
<p>I walked into the ACT (my school provides it) without caring or studying and got a 33. Im afraid to retake it and get like a 17 or something haha</p>
<p>But if you actually put time into studying and have good common sense you can score in the 30s</p>
<p>getting a 36 on the act and 2400 on the sat are the easiest thing alive if you prepare well enough. i got a 2400 and 36 on both the sat and act. i’m going to stanford pre-med next year. i would say study at least an hour a day 3 years in advance would be sufficient.</p>
<p>I’m sorry but aryaeragon57 spells ■■■■■. Oh yeah let’s just devote one hour a day 3 years in advance…please. That’s suicide. If you need to do that to do well, you aren’t really being honest with colleges. There aren’t enough study materials in the world. You would have the blue book memorized by that point. I took a couple practice tests (2 or 3) before I took the real test, and pulled out a 2320. There is no need for excessive studying.</p>
<p>I second what DreamsofIvy said. No need for excessive studying. It is, however, important.</p>