<p>On every practice test in the "Preparing for the ACT", I was able to receive a score of 30+, but when I took the real ACT in April, I got a 25. The test was certainly harder than the practice test, and I struggled through most of it. My friend, who received a 36 in the Science portion, showed me his February 2011 ACT (where he got the 36) and to be quite honest, it was a breeze. It really affected my composite score as well, and has now given me two "weak" scores along with Reading. </p>
<p>So does it depend on what test you get? I never thought I would ever receive a score of 25, but it just happened. </p>
<p>Also, does your Science score improve as you begin to take more science courses like Chemistry. I am aware that the ACT Science is based on graph and analytical skills, but sometimes I find myself unfamiliar with the terminology present in the graphs, which falters my ability to understand it.</p>
<p>I am a sophomore and also took the april ACT and got a 30. It was much lower than I anticipated and brought my composite down to a 33. What I can tell you however is that a good basis in chemistry, physics, and biology are not necessary, they can help you do things much faster. For example, if in the introduction paragraph they introduce the concept of concentration’s effect on rate of reaction and you remember this from Chemistry, then you can just skim over it and do not need to take any time learning the concept. You don’t need very in depth understanding of chemistry, biology, and physics, but some understanding might help and can not hurt you.</p>
<p>I do think it is based on luck to a certain extent in that you get lucky if you get a science section that you understand. My daughter took the ACT on April 14th and then again on April 24th w/her high school. She thought the one on the 14th was brutally hard and only scored a 25 on the science section; she ended up w/a 30 composite because she did well on the other sections. She said the one on the 24th was so much easier than the one on the 14th, and she thought she did very well on it. Even on the practice tests she has taken, some science sections she found a whole lot easier than others. So to some extent I think there is “luck” involved, if you want to call it that. You get lucky if you get a science section that is easy <em>for you</em>.</p>
<p>Can’t wait to get my daughter’s scores back from the test on the 24th to compare the science scores.</p>
<p>To tell the truth, the whole Act is based on luck. I know smart people who take all ap classes and get 24s on the Act. And people who take only regular classes and get 25s.By any means, the act is not a measure in my opinion</p>
<p>It is by no means luck. However, the science section appears to be an all-or-nothing section. Sometimes, you’ll ace it, other times you’ll get things you’ve never seen. Sometimes the questions are really unfair if you don’t know the material, but it can be extremely easy if you’ve learnt the stuff. And let’s not forget that 1 question wrong on science, usually at the top end of the spectrum, can mean -2 in the score.</p>
<p>Hihghghg ~ I’ve seen that, too, where good students get lower scores and average students get high scores. I think that prepping properly for this test, along w/a little bit of luck in getting a test that is good for you as an individual, come into play.</p>
<p>Arghwhy ~ I do think a little bit of luck is involved. You still have to practice, and prep, and put your time in preparing the test, but if a little bit of luck isn’t involved, then how can you explain someone getting different scores on different tests? I think the test can be very inconsistent in difficulty level, especially in the science section and the reading section. My daughter can score anywhere from a 25 to a 34 on the science section depending on difficulty level. She spent a lot of time prepping for the ACT and probably has taken 7-8 practice tests, and 2 real tests. The reading is the same way for her. Her lowest score on reading was a 23 or 24 (on one of her earlier practice tests), but on the real test on April 14th, she scored a 31. Her highest practice on reading before that was a 29. I think the English and Math are the most consistent, but w/reading and science, it’s very inconsistent and varies greatly from test to test. The test my daughter took through her high school on April 24 had a science section that was so much easier (according to my daughter) than the one on April 14th. It will be interesting to see her score in science on that test and compare it to the other one. If she does score a 30 or above on science, then how can you explain a 5+ point increase from test to test from a student that has prepped themselves appropriately for the test? I can understand a couple of point drop in either direction from test to test, but if it is a significant increase or decrease, I think that just shows inconsistency in the difficulty levels of the various tests. And again, that is for a well prepared student. I am not talking about someone that went into the test cold and scored a low score and then put in a lot of prep time and then was able to raise their score significantly because of that. I just hope that when my daughter takes the test in June, that the stars align for her and she gets reading and science sections that she can do well on.</p>
<p>The thing about standardized tests is that a few questions will completely change your score. It might not be “luck”, but we all know those problems where we narrow it down to two, and on different days would pick different answers.
There are people who just know everything the ACT has to offer (I know plenty of people who have never gotten a math question wrong on a standardized test and never will). For the rest of us, it depends on “luck”.</p>
<p>Edit: To clarify, “luck” is the difference between a 27 and a 29. Not a 27 and a 34.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t agree with that entirely. I personally am one of those people who have gotten a 36 in math every time I took the ACT and a 800 every time I took the SAT, so I can’t speak on that topic, but I can speak for Science. I got a 36 on the science section I took on the actual ACT (not some practice garbage) as a freshman yet I got a 30 on the April 14th one as a sophomore. It really does have to do with luck because as someone was saying before, 3 questions answered incorrect can bring you from a 36 to a 30. If one test is a bit more challenging than another, then you might not have enough time and say leave 3 questions to guess on, and if you get those all wrong then this brings you down to a 30. In both situations the tester knew 100% of the material up to where they got, but on one they had to guess on 3 due to the test being just a bit harder and thus taking that much more time. One main reason that I believe that this happens on reading and science and not english and math is because there are less questions leaving less ability to average out your time if you get stuck on a couple of problems and took a bit longer than you should have.</p>
<p>Yes, it of course is based on luck. That’s why I always bring my lucky coin to the test center, and that is also why I got a 30 on the last science ACT (prob because I flipped the wrong lucky quarter during testing).</p>
<p>If you mean “luck” as in a probability for something good to happen, then that is an opinion based on no facts. Sure, you might base your score on the high probability for you to receive it, but it is all logically your fault for your own score.</p>
<p>From what I have observed, the main constraint in the science section is time. The students I know who have extended time on the ACT almost always do well on the science section.</p>
It is almost certainly based on luck. I took the ACT 3 times this year. Each time I walked in without any prep, and my science scores varied greatly. The first was a 31, the second was a 35, and the third was a 33. The first time I took it, the test was definitely harder, dealing with subjects I had never encountered in one of the topics. The second test was ridiculously easy, almost to the point that it felt like it was a test designed for freshmen. The third was about as hard as the first, but by this point I was pretty well practised, and so was able to do a little better. I strongly recommend taking the test multiple times to try to get an easy version.
If you want a tip on how to take it, I can tell you what I did to get my 35: Don’t bother reading the info on the studies. Just skip directly to the questions and then skim to find the words in the text that match up with the words in the question. This method eliminates any struggle you would have with the time constraint and doesn’t rely on you remembering anything for the text. As long as you have a vague understanding on what the test is talking about, it works.
I think these sometimes “fluke” ACT sciences scores are due to a lack of science knowledge more than anything. I know lots of people disagree with me, however. Whenever I see a biology passage, it always feels like a breeze. Many times I’ve done a similar lab or seen the same type of graph. But when I see a physics passage regarding motion, I struggle more. I take longer, the graphs seem more confusing, and I freak out a little. I’d review some of the science concepts and see if that helps. It helped me get a 32 on science.