<p>If there is an ACT prep course available in your area sign her up now. As moonpie mentioned, these prep classes really don’t teach you the material, she knows what she knows. They teach you how to take the test. </p>
<p>For example if you don’t know the answer 100% they teach you strategies on how to eliminate a few of the multiple choices so when you guess your chances of a right answer are vastly improved. For the reading comprehension part, they normally teach students to read the answers first then skim the passage for keywords and key sentences so time is not wasted reading past the answer in the passage.</p>
<p>Just learning strategies on how to take the test will increase her score 2 - 5 points. If she has a lucky day, 5 points could happen. Definitely worth a shot if she has the motivation to take the class and practice what they teach. </p>
<p>My son increased his score from the first practice tests to the real ACT test ~4 to 5 points after taking a Princeton review class. Also, the best money in the entire college process we spent because those extra points drastically opened up his college options.</p>
<p>I learned the value of these review courses when I went through the Princeton review process for the GMAT. I increased my score over 100 points which is probably the equivalent of 5 points on an ACT test.</p>
<p>True story, for my son the hardest section was the science section. So to demonstrate how you take the test is as important as what you know I took the practice science section. I am no science wiz and have not had a science related class in many years and I ended up with a 26 or 27 on that section, my son was shocked - especially when I told him I guessed on at least half the questions using the Princeton review techniques I used on the GMAT.</p>
<p>After that he was sold on taking an ACT prep class, and very happy with my advice when he got his final score.</p>
<p>Yes artlover if we’ve been reading along the thread you do know the OP has a D at 24. The point is yes, she can improve a couple of points and that might put her in reach of some colleges that have a 25th percentile of 26 or 27, but the OPs did is probably not going from a 24 to over 30. If the OP’s D took the PLAN test that does a pretty good job of giving students a pretty broad range of expected scores but rare indeed is the kid who “jumps” from an expected PLAN ACT score of 27 or 28 to a 34 for instance. For parents and students the ACT is simply a benchmark to help choose appropriate colleges and unis for applications. </p>
<p>I haven’t read the whole thread. For what it’s worth, my daughter went from a 27 in June of junior year to a 30 the following September with minimal prep. She had one session with a tutor to go over strategies and maybe did one full practice test.</p>
<p>@dreadpirit – if a student is <em>not</em> reading things like The Economist or FT, that says more about his/her preparation for college and life than test sores, whether prepped or not.</p>
<p>One thing no one mentions here besides the test score “supporting” your holistic evaluation, if your “dream school” uses this method of admissions, is the impact a high test score has on merit awards. We spend a lot of time supporting our children to get admitted to said dream school, but will it be affordable once accepted? In my experience, the some of the elites may limit merit awards to all but the top 1% accepted. Admissions officers have directly told me that in the case of merit, the higher the test score, the better. So, while the kid may have gotten in with the 31, the 34 would likely put him/her in a much better position for merit offers. </p>
<p>There was some collective wisdom from folks here a few years ago that the science section of the ACT is really more reading comprehension. Mentioned this to my niece and she raised her science score from 27 to 34. </p>
<p>Bowdoin is a reach for pretty much all applicants based on their low acceptance rate. My 2290 kiddo was waitlisted there in 2010. We considered it a reach. New England LACs are difficult admits for young women even with excellent scores – the schools want to maintain a level of gender balance.</p>
<p>It is the bolded claim I originally took issue with, and there was no point restating it, except to let me know I did not state my objection clearly enough. The bottom line is, there is absolutely no proof that test scores are a weak predictor of college success because people take them too many times and ‘mask’ their true level of intelligence. There is zero statistical support for this claim, which seems more like a way for you to align reality with your beliefs. As I already tried to explain, standardized testing does not test intelligence, intelligence is not the differentiating factor between students who succeed in college and students who don’t, and anyone with an SAT score above 1800 is capable of succeeding at the most selective colleges in America (by these colleges’ own admission). Moreover, almost no one who scores above 2200 on the SAT takes it for the first time, and many people who score above 2200 on the SAT retake numerous times and/or prepare for it, on their own or with tutors–and then go on to excel in college despite their supposedly inferior ‘natural intelligence.’</p>
<p>I suppose what I ultimately object to is the claim that people who achieve a high score on the SAT (or ACT) without preparation are smarter than the people who achieve the same score after preparation. No. Their scores are equal in the eyes of adcoms everywhere, and if you track the performance of college students with no-prep 2300s and college students with with-prep 2300s, you’ll see why. There is no difference. The test does not measure a single skill that is valuable in university, where hard work, discipline, original thinking and dedication are far more useful than the ability to solve many simple arithmetic problems in quick succession or to pick between ‘congruent’ and ‘complementary.’ To suggest that the entire concept of ‘intelligence’ can be interrogated through the limited range of basic tasks which the SAT consists of, and that, furthermore, one has to be a natural at them in order to qualify as intelligent, and that learning to perform them well is a worthless act of deception that dooms the student to four years of academic struggle, is not simply inconsistent with the evidence but in fact plain barmy.</p>
<p>Again, the SAT may be ‘meant’ to be taken without preparation, whatever that means, but it is not taken without preparation and it does not measure intelligence or scholastic aptitude. They took that out of the name for a reason.</p>
<p>As for me, I retook the SAT to bring up one of my section scores above 700.</p>
<p>S2 increased his ACT by 4-5 points in the fall of senior year. He found a dream school and wanted to apply ED. He did practice tests in September/October to refine the pacing. He got into his dream school ED and I am sure the ‘in range’ ACT was part of it. So it can be done. Remember it is a different test every time and if you have a dream school, have a plan if it doesn’t work out but don’t give up on the dream until you run of out time and tests.</p>
<p>@Torveaux Could be she may have gotten in. However, in her mind, she needed a couple more points to be sure. And knowing now that so many with 34-35s were turned away, I feel her extra curriculars were a huge part of her getting in. Her sister had been wait listed with a 31 2 years before at the same school, so she didn’t feel comfortable with that score. She’s way smarter than me… I would have jumped hurdles with a 31! </p>
<p>@Dreadpirit, given that <300 kids each year make a 2400, I find it hard to credit that fewer than that read The Economist and FT. The HS debaters alone would blow that number out of the park. </p>
<p>How is it that every thread that starts off dealing with “ordinary” non high stat kids morphs into a discussion about how one’s child achieved 34,35 for scholarships? </p>
<p>The OP’s child has an initial score of 24. </p>
<p>Talk about 2400, 36, or SAT sections over 700 is just not really useful unless your child went from a 24 in their junior year to a 34 later in their junior year. </p>
<p>If the child got anything over 29, this thread would not exist.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This thread started April 17, not March. It’s been three, four days.</p>
<p>Honestly going from 24 to 29 in a few weeks is unlikely to happen no matter how much your D prepares. Perhaps it is time to accept that her standardized test scores are what they are and find schools where her scores will be acceptable. After all, doesn’t she have better things to do than take standardized tests over and over?</p>
<p>^^^^ On the other hand, going from a 24 to a 27 could change things a lot. It certainly did when my kid went from 27 to 30. Yes, there are test-optional schools, but they are limited in number and a few points could put the OP’s kid in the ballpark for a much bigger universe of colleges.</p>
<p>I agree that a small change of 2 or 3 points could mean a lot to the OP’s daughter. But if both of her standardized test scores are similar (in percentile terms) perhaps she and her mother need to come to grips with where she is, and likely will be rather than chase some unattainable dream.</p>
<p>I would say that if the OPs D raises a couple of points it might not change her reach or “dream” college as by nature those are colleges where the likelihood of gaining acceptance is generally a big stretch…but it could change how they look at matches - although a kid with a good GPA as the OP’s D has and mid-20s ACT scores has abundant choices for match colleges.The OPs post is because the OP wants the D to hit the numbers for the dream and most likely reach college. </p>
<p>“perhaps she and her mother need to come to grips with where she is, and likely will be rather than chase some unattainable dream.”</p>
<p>If the child wanted to nail her jeans to the chair and work around the clock for the next six weeks, I’d encourage her to do just that. But she doesn’t want to, and it sounds like she won’t do it even if pushed. That’s what makes me say that they need to work with the scores they have. You can’t get significant improvement without sweat and tears on the kid’s part, and the kid doesn’t want to put forth the effort. So be it.</p>