<p>I've only taken each test once and I was wondering which score would be considered better? My SAT breakdown was 660 M, 670 CR, and 780 W for a total of 2110. My ACT breakdown was 33 E, 32 M, 29 R, and 28 S for a composite of 31. Anyone know which score is considered higher? I'm thinking the SAT is; however, there is such a huge difference between my writing score and my M+CR score that I feel my 2110 is not actually that high.</p>
<p>Thank you!</p>
<p>According to online ACT/SAT Conversion Charts, your SAT score is better. However, since your writing score is far superior to your Math and Critical Reading, you should check your college list to see if they consider the writing section of the SAT in admissions.</p>
<p>unique, unique case: I would send both…but I actually think your 31 ACT is better due to the math and english subscores…totally depends where you are applying to and how they approach the scores</p>
<p>SAT is better</p>
<p>Send both…</p>
<p>For schools that don’t count the SAT writing as much, then your ACT 31 is better.</p>
<p>For schools that do count the SAT writing equally, then your SAT is better.</p>
<p>And, the same goes for scholarships…some don’t use the W of the SAT for scholarships and some do.</p>
<p>Usually when you are not certain which is better, you should just send both. Colleges then use that test they believe is the better for you.</p>
<p>I would send both. The two scores, according to the chart I have, are pretty close to one another in equivalency. An SAT score of about 2140-2190 is equivalent to an ACT score of 31. And, a score of 2100-2130 is equivalent to a 30.</p>
<p>
…</p>
<p>Uh, no. A 30 is a 2000 on the SAT so the 2110 is significantly higher.
[Estimated</a> Relationship between ACT Composite Score and SAT CR+M+W Score](<a href=“http://www.act.org/aap/concordance/estimate.html]Estimated”>http://www.act.org/aap/concordance/estimate.html)</p>
<p>^^yup, hte standard conversion chart has a 31<2100. Thus, the SAT is better. HOwever, the sub-700s on the M & CR will be noticed by highly selective colleges.</p>
<p>I suggest that you not send your score in ACT. It is not that your score in ACT is much worse than that in SAT but that ACT is inferior to SAT. It is not untrue that adcoms do not openly admit of the SAT’s superiority to ACT but deep within they know that ACT is at best a test for students who are diligent but not intelligent. A score in ACT is hardly anything more than an indication of a student’s diligence, which of course the high school trasncript reveals more successfully. The SAT, although not an IQ test in explicit terms, is a better indicator of a student’s mental abilities. Any bull that is capable of working hard is also capable of scoring 31 in ACT but it takes genuine intelligence (an IQ of about 125 or higher) to score 2110 in SAT.</p>
<p>“The SAT, although not an IQ test in explicit terms, is a better indicator of a student’s mental abilities.”</p>
<p>Where exactly are you getting this information? From what reliable source? </p>
<p>“Any bull that is capable of working hard is also capable of scoring 31 in ACT but it takes genuine intelligence (an IQ of about 125 or higher) to score 2110 in SAT.”</p>
<p>Again, the freaking source? The correlation does not imply anything close to meaning that one MUST have an IQ of 125 to get 2110.</p>
<p>I intend to imply no more than that the SAT is a better indicator of a person’s IQ than is the ACT.</p>
<p>The ACT is not “inferior”. If it were, schools would never accept the ACT in lieu of the SAT I and SAT subject tests…yet many do.</p>
<p>I would like to see the data about IQ and SAT.</p>
<p>I would argue that the SAT is not, in fact, a better indicator of IQ, but a better indication of a persons socioeconomic class and their ability to pay for prep.</p>
<p>
I disagree. If the SAT were such an accurate indicator of innate “intelligence” (whatever that may be), then a person should never be able to score much higher on a retake and should remain in the same score range. The very fact that practicing for the SAT can make a very significant jump in your score disproves your claim. I have friends who retook their SAT in a span of a month and scored 200 points higher,simply because they practiced questions (It went from 1920 to 2120). Does this mean their IQ somehow increased by a corresponding number of points in 30 days? Of course not (IQ tests themselves are highly debated, but that’s a separate issue).
There are many flaws with the test itself. Apart from the fact that practice can make you score better, it is heavily culturally biased-I should know, I’m an international student and lots of my friends experience the same. A 3 hour test taken on one day does not account for factors like emotional turmoil, general health etc. that may affect the score. As for your statement about any bull being able to get 31 on the ACT, well couldn’t the same be said of the SAT? Wouldn’t you have to work hard to score well on any test? You seem to completely disregard diligence and hark on about intelligence-if the result of hard work is an excellent score, then what’s the big deal? If “intelligence” were so highly valued and diligence should not count for much-then why do we see colleges telling us that GPA is much more important than standardized testing scores?
Basically, your entire argument was flawed.</p>
<p>OP-Sorry about the rant here! Regarding your scores I would send both. They’re both pretty good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would probably concur with that approximation for total populations. But, I would also opine that it requires someone with a similar IQ to score a 32 on the ACT. (The ACT is a speed test, and thousands of individuals with an average IQ of 100 will just not be able to process fast enough to score high.)</p>
<p>An applicant should not choose which test scores to send based on the relative merits of the test itself. The decision needs to be made on the basis of which scores are more likely to result in admission.</p>
<p>Colleges accept scores from both tests without preference for one over the other.</p>
<p>fwiw:</p>
<p>how about some real data? A 31 on the ACT correlates with a 135 IQ score and 1310 SAT score – pre-2005.</p>
<p>[IQ</a> Scores - AssessmentPsychology.com](<a href=“http://www.assessmentpsychology.com/iq.htm]IQ”>IQ Scores - AssessmentPsychology.com)</p>
<p>^^funniest chart I have ever seen…chuckle of the day…there is NO way that my 27 ACT daughter has a superior IQ score (and I know that for a fact!!)</p>