<p>^Actually, they are very close. A 27 ACT composite is roughly equivalent to a 1210-1230 SAT I (CR and Math only). I think you would be fine submitting either, but I see no harm in submitting both.</p>
<p>From the New York Times: </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/education/edlife/guidance.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/education/edlife/guidance.html</a> </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Look, the evidence that SAT=ACT is the fact that there is no evidence against it. </p>
<p>I said it once and I'll say it again, Harvard, Yale et al aren't trying to cut the "poor mid-west kids" a break by allowing ACT scores. They have no reason to. They could ask students to submit a DNA sample, official birth certificate and cup of pee to test for pot use and kids would still do it. They could demand SAT III scores and people would find a way to take them. They have no reason to accept the ACT if they didn't treat it as equal. They truly just don't care! Not to mention that once your above a certain threshold, scores matter very little... an other fact often lost on CCers.</p>
<p>Interesting</a> article in the NYT today suggests the SAT may be better for naturally smart underacheivers, whereas the ACT may be better for the hard-working "grind".</p>
<p>(Same article as in TokenAdult's post above)</p>
<p>^ Hah I probably agree with that article. The first two years of high school I averaged 88% (not really caring)..then in grade 11 and now grade 12 I decided that I want to try to get into the best schools, and my average shot up to 97%. I took the SAT after studying for about two months, and got 2170 (an increase from 1860 when I first took it without even knowing what it was as a practice (I'm Canadian)). Then I signed up for the ACT just for s*ts and giggles, and took a practice, with no prep, two days before the test and got a 35. Same thing happened on the real one</p>
<p>I read somewhere that Cal Tech takes both but considers the ACT a better predictor of college achievement.</p>
<p>Basically, we have reached a verdict: SAT=ACT.</p>
<p>Now, even if a school accepts the ACT in lieu of both the SAT I and II, I'd still submit SAT II's along with the ACT. Dunno why, but that's just me. :)</p>
<p>I know I am a representative of but one school, but I'll drop my two cents. </p>
<p>I absolutely do not care which test is submitted. DO NOT CARE. And if you submit both, I pledge to look at the one that's best; there is no disadvantage to submitting both tests, even if one is much better than the other. Following up on that, and speaking totally anecdotally here - I would say the quantity of applicants with better ACTs is about the same as the quantity of applicants with better SATs. From where I sit, there doesn't seem to be any evidence to suggest that the ACTs are for students who don't perform well on the SATs.</p>
<p>You need to trust us when we say we do not have a preference. It is not in our best interests to be misleading applicants about how to best represent themselves academically. This thread has moved all over the place in terms of its discussion of testing, and it is my intent to comment on the original question of how selective colleges look at the ACT. </p>
<p>Having said that - were I counseling students, I would encourage them to consider the ACT over the SAT. Not because of a college preference, but because one sitting of the ACT + Writing covers testing requirements at many institutions that require sitting for the SAT and the SAT2s. Why spend two Saturdays taking tests when you can just spend one?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks, Dan. I don't think I've had the pleasure of seeing your participation in one of the test-related threads before. It's great to know that this issue is not at all a worry at one great northeastern college in the heart of former SAT-only territory. </p>
<p>P.S. I'm impressed that Tufts drew Robert Sternberg away from Yale. I'll be curious to see how his project with your admission office develops.</p>
<p>Yea, Dan from Tufts!</p>
<p>^ Indeed, we thank you for confirming what we understood to be the case. Good to actually hear it from an admissions officer at a top school. I have no doubt that we would hear the same thing from admissions officers at virtually all of the nation's elite colleges and universities.</p>
<p>Token, </p>
<p>It's really exciting to be on the front lines of Sternberg's research (in more ways than one). His inclusion amongst Tufts' administration sparked our office into thinking of new and increasingly innovative ways to be deliberate about our decisions. Our optional</a> essays are a direct result of that initiative. </p>
<p>Testing has its place as a tool of academic evaluation, but I've never seen an SAT or ACT score that actually captured personality and the ability a student has to leverage his personal skills into meaningful successes. The template that Sternberg's theory of research provides allows us to capture those pieces of intellectualism that might otherwise slip through the cracks. On a personal level, I've embraced the underlining philosophy and am thrilled to have the additional tools and increased confidence that we're making the best decisions we can. </p>
<p>But I digress and don't mean to thread-jack...</p>
<p>The impression that I have is that if one is coming from the east coast, and applies to a top tier or ivy league school, and just submits the ACT, that the school is left wondering whether or not that student took the SAT and did not perform well. Although they won't admit they do this, I believe that the admissions office looks more favorably upon the student who submits SAT scores even if they are comparable to another candidates ACT scores. The admission officers however if given both the SAT scores and the ACT scores will take whichever is higher, so it is better to be honest, if applying to the top tier or ivy league schools and submit both. If however, the admissions office wants to take a particular student (ie. the student is a recruited athlete that a coach really wants, or a developmental legacy), then a strong ACT will suffice. The above is also true about applicants who apply from states across the country where the SAT is the test most students take. In states where the ACT is more popular ie. the midwest and certain states in the south, a high ACT score without an SAT score will still be given great weight.
The reason why the above is true is as follows: If a student from a top high school in New Jersey for example applies with just a high ACT score and no SAT, and is viweed against applicants from New Jersey with lets say a 750 verbal math and 770 critical reasoning, the admission officers, although they wont admit this, wonder whether the student with the high ACT score and no SAT,might have scored in the low 600's and did not want to submit it. Most admission officers to the ivy league and other top tier schools know that students in the northeast will try the ACT if they have not performed well on the SAT. They know that students who took both and did well on both would submit both</p>
<p>
[quote]
I believe that the admissions office looks more favorably upon the student who submits SAT scores even if they are comparable to another candidates ACT scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you have any evidence for this besides your imagination?</p>
<p>Maybe it is my midwestern naivete, but I just can't imagine admissions officers at top schools have enough time to ponder the motives of every piece of data that every student submits, especially when they say they don't. What is it that makes people cling so fervently to the notion that the SAT is more beloved by institutions than the ACT?</p>
<p>Quote:</p>
<p>"The impression that I have is that if one is coming from the east coast, and applies to a top tier or ivy league school, and just submits the ACT, that the school is left wondering whether or not that student took the SAT and did not perform well. Although they won't admit they do this, I believe that the admissions office looks more favorably upon the student who submits SAT scores even if they are comparable to another candidates ACT scores."</p>
<p>Let me get this straight:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>No one on this forum, or any other forum on CC that has addressed the same subject, has any evidence that adcoms at any school, Ivy League or otherwise, behave as the post above suggests.</p></li>
<li><p>The admissions websites for all colleges and universities that I'm aware of, which address the question, state that the admissions committees have no preference for one standardized test over another. </p></li>
<li><p>When asked whether adcoms prefer one standardized test over another, every post I've read on CC indicates that the response from admissions counselors, college reps and admissions officers is "we don't care."</p></li>
<li><p>We have a college rep from Tufts who, in fact, TELLS US that he doesn't care which standardized test a student takes and, further, that it's not in a school's best interest to mislead its applicants. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>And yet we continue to see posts like the one above. I think I give up . . .</p>
<p>Crazy Mom isn't so crazy.</p>
<p>At a certain point, however, individuals make a decision not to believe what college admissions officers say. That's certainly your prerogative, but you're not going to benefit from that way of thinking. And I can think of a really good reason for why that New Jersey applicant didn't submit the SAT scores: that student wizened up and opted for the testing requirements that could be completed in one sitting instead of two.</p>
<p>Collegebound5, I think that the difference these days is that the geographical bias of which test to take is much less pronounced. We live on the West Coast, which was traditionally SAT country, but my daughter's friends were all taking the ACT last spring so she went along for the ride. When she scored high enough to make further testing pointless, she didn't proceed with the SAT the following month, but used that test date for SAT IIs instead, since some colleges want them regardless of which "basic" test you take. I suspect that that scenario plays out more often than you might think, all over the country, and that the adcoms at the various colleges are likely to make that assumption rather than wasting their time "wondering" why a given student didn't take more than one test.</p>
<p>The data comes from statistics I have seen regarding those who were accepted at ivy league schools. That data shows a very small percentage of students who were accepted who submitted the ACT scores only. At some schools it was as low as 4%. One has to imagine that there were more than 4% of those who applied who submitted just the ACT. The ivy league schools will not admit that they have a preference for the SAT. Statistics seem to indicate that they do have a preference.
How many applicants do you know from predominately SAT states who got into the top tier schools with a high ACT score only, who were not legacies, development admits, or recruited athletes? The number is probably very small.</p>
<p>^ collegebound5, no offense, but the statistics that you cite (and from where, by the way?) have a great deal more to do with the fact that the Ivy League schools are in the Northeast (an SAT dominated region) and draw a sizeable percentage of their students from both coasts, which are also SAT dominated regions. In other words, the reason that you don't see as many "ACT only" admits vis a vis "SAT only" admits at these schools is because most applicants come from areas where the SAT is the predominate standardized test, and not because the "ACT only" admits are any less competitive. As the ACT becomes more popular on the coasts, I think you'll see those statistics start to change. In any event, like the rest of the "adcoms like the SAT better" posters, you offer no real evidence to support your point.</p>