is the science test changed?

Test Preparation ACT Preparation
1

<p>Since the October science ACT was like nothing I’ve ever seen before, I’m wondering if they have revamped the test to focus more on one’s science background, rather than one’s chart and graph reading ability. The remove of the “conflicting scientist” section, which was really nothing more than another reading section, makes me believe that they are changing the direction of the test, and making it a lot harder! </p>

<p>What do you people think? I’m no science expert, but I know many people who had trouble with the science section simply because they had no way to prepare for it. Thoughts? Are people actually going to have to dedicate an ample amount of time studying chemistry, biology, and physics concepts in the future?</p>

2

<p>I don't think you can conclude from one test that they revamped the whole ACT Science section...Maybe after one or two more like this, then maybe one can hypothesize something.</p>

3

<p>The test better be different in that this curve is generous...lol</p>

<p>One of the questions in the biology section asked a very specific question. One of the choices was "enzyme" and the other choices were other biological-related words. Where did those come from?? Were they on the page b/c I couldn't find them anywhere.</p>

4

<p>Salsa, I was very disappointed that the "Fighting Scientists" section was not on the ACT on Saturday. I had used Princeton Review's "Cracking the ACT" in hopes of improving my Science and Critical Reading scores. While my Critical Reading score is sure to go up because of the new strategies I implemented, I'm not so sure about my science score after Saturday's test.</p>

<p>I hardly finished it, and actually ended up guessing on 6 of the questions I had saved for last. I tried to set up the way in which I would approach the questions (charts and graphs first, experiments second, and fighting scientists third), but it was set up in such a weird way and I felt totally deceived. </p>

<p>The way that PR put it, there are always three (3) Charts and Graphs, three (3) Experiments, and one (1) Fighting Scientists. I was so POed when this was not the case!</p>

<p>20 bucks for nothing! arg!</p>

5

<p>hey i agree, but i didnt use PR. i used free sparknotes prep haha. </p>

<p>The answer to ur question madboy, is gametes. I agree, that was specific, and if you were a junior at my school having just started bio, there is a 99% chance you didn't know that.</p>

6

<p>Is there anyway I would have been able to deduce that answer from what was provided?</p>

7

<p>No. I looked back, because some strategy guide i read said "not to use outside knowledge, but what the passage provides you, or you may get the answer wrong". Gametes was not mentioned. Neither were any of the other answer choices. I'm 99% sure you just had to know that gametes was the answer</p>

8

<p>I'm going to contact ACT about that...I'm gonna go Mock Trial on their ass...wish me luck!</p>

9

<p>Good luck madboy. Make them raise the curve.</p>

10

<p>Thanks...here goes nothing. I'll keep you guys posted.</p>

11

<p>I love how nobody really knows what they are going to get on the science test...this should be fun!</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
I'm going to contact ACT about that...I'm gonna go Mock Trial on their ass...wish me luck!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What kind of results are you expectin from this call, exactly? O__o. I'm sure the ACT was well aware of the fact that their October ACT Science contained no fighting scientists passage. That doesn't mean their curve is going to be more lenient, though. Wasn't fighting scientists formerly the hardest passage for most people?</p>

13

<p>The "Fighting Scientist" section was always a breeze for me because it was basically just an extension of the reading test.</p>

<p>Anyway, I didn't think that the curve was predetermined? Where did you get this idea?</p>

14

<p>I noticed the gametes question, too. Fortunately, I knew that one, but I couldn't believe they randomly threw that out there. So not fair for those that came expecting to be tested on their scientific REASONING ability...</p>

15

<p>It truly was not that much harder than what I have seen in the past.
It will all be taken care of with the curve. Do not worry.</p>

16

<p>Gametes was the only answer that sounded vaguely familiar to me, so I chose it.</p>

17

<p>Well, for the "gametes" question, we definately had to know the term to solve the problem(it was not provided in the passage) but it's not the first time ACT did it.</p>

<p>Last test, (either april or june) I remember seeing "amphibian" as an answer for the science section. They did not provide any description on the passage either. You had to "know" it.</p>

18

<p>eh this is my second time taking the ACT, and i took a few practices and were definitely easier than this. But i have heard from many people that this science was alot harder than before. But ya, i honeslty have no idea what to expect from the science section. Anywhere from a 20-30 would not surprise me lol</p>

19

<p>I wrote an angry email to ACT, and they told me they'd get back to me in 3 weeks.</p>

<p>If anyone wants to read what I sent them, I can PM it to you.</p>

20

<p>In September, they had a passage about the heart, and I believe they asked a question re: the name for the blood vessels (or whatever...my mind completely just went blank!) that take blood to/or away from the heart. So yes, like lami said, it wasn't the first time they required previous science knowledge to ace the test.</p>

<p>I'd like to see what you wrote, Madboy121. Thanks!</p>