<p>In today's NYT (FRiday, March 4, 2005)</p>
<p>"Strivers sharpen their no.2's for a different test for college."</p>
<p>According to the article, more and more students are taking the ACT.</p>
<p>I never realized students could send only their best ACT scores. I wonder if SAT will roll that out next year as an option to stay competitive with ACT. Personally, I like the idea that there will be writing on the SAT now. In the past, there was no way for admissions people to know how worked over (and by whom) application essays were. It puts everyone at the same disadvantage to have 25 minutes to write something.</p>
<p>Marite: I read this article, and I suspect the main reason more and more students are taking the ACT is that "...students have nothing to lose by taking the ACT...because they can take the test as many times as they want and choose which scores, if any, to send to colleges...in contrast, all SAT scores are sent to all colleges a student applies to." Hmm...Knowing this, I would be reluctant to take the ACT scores as seriously as the SAT (how would one know if the person had taken the test a half dozen times to get that great score, or just once?). Interesting, too, in light of the 'new SAT.'</p>
<p>Jack:</p>
<p>I think you're right about the reason many students are switching to the ACT or are taking it on top of the SAT. It also appears, however, that some students do better on the ACT than on the SAT--at least on the old SAT; it is more curriculum-driven than the SAT, which is more a test of reasoning. </p>
<p>Until recently, students could choose which SAT-II scores to report. No more.</p>
<p>For most applicants, it is a misconception that a college will not know your ACT scores. Yes, ACT sends only the test score you request to be sent. However, most high schools stick all your scores on your official high school transcript.</p>
<p>The ACT has always only sent scores ordered to be sent. The SAT used to do that with SAT II's (until July 2002). The ACT has always had a huge number of takers -- its annual total has usually been a figure that is about 90% to 95% of the total that take the SAT and they believe, despite that percentage, that the real numbers of different people taking the test are close to the same as the SAT -- the SAT has a significantly higher percentage than the ACT of people who repeat the SAT. The SAT is the dominate test in the Northeast/East where it began, and far west, particularly California. In between those areas, the ACT has long been the dominant test.</p>
<p>Though there a lot of things that could drive an increase in those who take the ACT, one factor for the growth in those in east/Northeast taking it is that many high school students have discovered that a number of the top eastern colleges -- like Yale, Penn, Brown, Duke, Amherst, Tufts, Johns Hopkins, Boston College, and several others -- take the ACT in lieu of BOTH the SAT and SAT II's; i.e., all you have to do is submit the one ACT test to be considered for admission.</p>
<p>Our local paper put this article about the new SAT on the front page yesterday, with full-color photo! It's worth a read. I'm bothered by the subjectivity of "scoring" the new writing portion. Consider this quote:
[quote]
In an article titled "Would Shakespeare Get Into Swarthmore?" in the Atlantic Monthly, several Princeton Review test experts judged excerpts from the likes of Ernest Hemingway, Gertrude Stein and the Bard, using the College Board's scoring criteria. None came close to receiving Swarthmore-worthy marks.</p>
<p>Stilted prose from Ted Kaczynski - the Unabomber - received a perfect 6 out of 6.
[/quote]
<p>
[quote]
I would be reluctant to take the ACT scores as seriously as the SAT (how would one know if the person had taken the test a half dozen times to get that great score, or just once?).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not sure what this shows besides persistence and devotion. And I personally don't have a problem with someone's showing that kind of commitment to his efforts to attend a good college. In addition, if a student is ABLE to raise his scores to that degree, then he obviously has the potential to do so.</p>
<p>Test scores belong to the STUDENT, imho. I firmly believe that ONLY the test scores one requests to be sent should be sent. I guess one could draw an analogy to athletics. I was a diver, so let's consider that. If I were to compete for an athletic scholarship in diving, should I have to send videos from all of my practice sessions, even the ones during which I were learning new things? Or should I be able to submit my best performance and one which I've practiced long and hard to achieve?</p>
<p>My own son took both the SAT and the ACT. He scored very well on the ACT the first time, receiving a perfect 36 on the English section and a nearly-perfect 35 on the Reading section. As a result, he only took the test once. He took the SAT twice, raising his score by 60 points in only one month. I have no doubt that he could have raised it a good deal more with additional time and practice. </p>
<p>Different schools devote vastly different amounts of time and effort to college entrance test prep. Ours devotes essentially NONE. Taking the test more than one time does not begin to close the gap between those who receive extraordinary test prep and those who do not. If a student takes it upon himself to attempt to close that gap by repeated testing, I see nothing wrong with that. </p>
<p>BTW, marite...my son also found the ACT more curriculum driven (and less "convoluted") than the SAT.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>drusba: The point is, though, that (I am assuming) a student could take the ACT innumerable times on his/her own and not necessarily have the scores sent to the high school. I mean, does the ACT automatically send to the student's school? And on a related note....I've not actually read anything much about how adcoms view this, but I was actually surprised to learn that they will take/consider your best SAT scores (separate scores) from your best tests--even though I know they will see the entire score from each sitting. Even with this way of viewing scores, I would hope that colleges consider more highly an excellent SAT score in a single sitting, than separate scores from multiple testings. There is a real difference. There is also a reason, I had always understood, that these standardized tests are actually timed, no? Just my thought.</p>
<p>Two guidance counselors have recommened that my J take the ACT. She took the old SAT and scored 1310 in Oct. On the PSAT she scored 197. I feel that if she gets a 2100 on the new SAT she should be done with all tests, save the SAT II's. She has a 3.8 (non-weighted) GPA. She is taking the HESPA's now and I just hate the thought of more testing.</p>
<p>I hadn't thought of that. I wonder is you request not to be put on transcript if that would take care of the problem. Our HS only reports PSAT score if you agree.
Mbe</p>
<p>berurah: If a student wants to sit for a formal standardized test innumerable times to improve his/her score, I don't have a problem with it either. But I do think <em>all</em> the test scores should be sent in to reflect that, just as with the SAT.</p>
<p>
[quote]
For most applicants, it is a misconception that a college will not know your ACT scores. Yes, ACT sends only the test score you request to be sent. However, most high schools stick all your scores on your official high school transcript.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>drusba,</p>
<p>We fought our school district on this issue and won. We had called every surrounding district, and NOT ONE, besides ours, would send scores over a student's objections. The way I see it (and I way I presented it to the superintendent) is this: If a student is issued a choice (over whether a score is sent or whether it is not) by the testing organization and also by the univeristy, then the school district has NO RIGHT to remove that choice. For one or two of the schools, my son wanted to send only his ACT scores. The school, in response to our request through the superintendent, sent only the applicable scores. In our district, there is a waiver that everyone signs at the beginning of the year that deals indirectly with this issue. I will never sign it again.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>
[quote]
If a student wants to sit for a formal standardized test innumerable times to improve his/her score, I don't have a problem with it either. But I do think <em>all</em> the test scores should be sent in to reflect that, just as with the SAT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>jack,</p>
<p>I do understand your point here. But one could also make the case that if a student had to disclose the number of times he took the tests, he should also disclose how many prep courses he took and how much money he spent on them, etc. Some students' families cannot afford those types of things, and taking the test a few times IS the prep.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>Jack, you can avoid your high school having the ACT score by not answering the question on the application for the ACT as to where you go to high school (answer it and your high school gets the score); but virtually no one fails to answer that. Likewise, your high school might agree to leave it off the transcript but the plain fact is few if any students ever ask that to be done.</p>
<p>Also note it is true that colleges generally do not take into account that you took the SAT test more than once and they really don't care if you scored lower on one and better on another and they really don't sit around considering or saying "this person did it in one sitting"-- they will still just consider the highest score; in fact, for the SAT, the majority actually consider your highest subscores from multiple tests. You would be placing far more importance on the SAT than colleges do to assume that they would be giving bonus points for one sitting test takers.</p>
<p>berurah: And what about those students who simply do well the 1st time and never take a prep course? We never laid out a dime for any prep courses, and we know plenty of others who didn't either. And if a student feels he/she needs to take some practice tests to get a sense of what the test is like, there are always those practice books out there--which can often be found for free. Why not save your money, and do that? Also, how is sitting for the test innumerable times to get a great score, and not allowing college admissions to see that, any different from--say--taking a high school physics course 3 times to finally get that A, but not allowing anyone to know that? I honestly don't see the difference. I was also one of those people against the decision to not mark on a student's SAT when he/she was given a separate room to take the test, and as much time as he/she needed to complete it. Again, that's fine if someone needs 10 hours to take the test, but that should be so noted. I grow so weary of everything being watered down to accommodate everybody (and let's not forget protecting/building up self-esteem). Don't want to open up a can of worms here, but this does get tiring.</p>
<p>We moved to NC from NV where my high schoolers attended the sixth largest school district in the country. All high school transcripts in that district are formatted EXACTLY the same from high school to high school. And that is 36 high schools. My children's high school had 4800+ students. Many of the high schools in that district have similar enrollment figures. We are talking about a huge number of transcripts.</p>
<p>And this district does NOT put SAT or ACT scores anywhere on those transcripts nor PSAT scores. Not allowed. Now we live in NC, in another HUGE district, 2nd largest in the state, 17 high schools and they do NOT put it on the transcripts. Instead they have a test card that can be copied and mailed along with the transcript and only the scores the students wants to send. So for example, my DD only sent her one set of SAT scores. </p>
<p>So as far as saying "most" high schools have scores on their transcripts, not in our experience. And again this was from the sixth largest district in the country. And as of last year from 2 very different parts of the country.</p>
<p>Kat</p>
<p>Same here, katwkittens. Our H.S. (suburban MI district) also did not include test scores on transripts.</p>
<p>The score choice of the ACT is overrated. The ACT will always play catch-up with the SAT, not the other way around. The main attraction of the ACT is built on severa misconceptions; one of them is that the material tested is more in line with the high school curriculum, and accordingly easier. The fallacy of this proposition is that the ACT, just as the SAT, is a standardized test and NOT a high school test. The presentation might differ, but in the end, both tests measure the same darn thing: the ability of the student to take a standardized test that requires a modicum of logic and alertness. The main difference of the AT and the SAT is that the ACT does it in a quasi-amateurish way. The ACT organization does not have the resources of the SAT is simply a poor version of the SAT that answers to geographical cronyism. </p>
<p>Back to score choice ... The main reason why The College Board got rid of the selective reporting of the SATII is that it served NO purpose whatsoever for their clients: the colleges. It is worth repeating that the students and parents are not the clients of TCB; they just happen to pay for the services. </p>
<p>When it comes to SATII and SAT scores, it is a MYTH that the numbers of sittings have a meaningful impact. It is well established that the schools look for the highest two or three SATII scores, and do not care if you submit three or nine to get there. As far as the SAT, it is in the BEST interest to have the HIGHEST scores possible for internal and external statistics. If anyone believes that a school favors a 1400 one sitting SAT score over a 1550 score obtained after FIVE sitting, they might decide to poll a few schools. Let's remember that the people who make the decisions might NEVER see more than your best scores expressed in an internal formula prepared by first readers or technician. It might be scale from one to five or any other numerical scale that first a VERY small part of the outside jacket. Considering that most files "earn" a few minutes of adcom time, does anyone really believe that schools go a tremendous effort to analyze the impact of several attempts at the SAT. No matter what, I would rather face a small penalty for multiple sittings than hoping that the score could be revised upwards for a single sitting! </p>
<p>As a good friend of mine says, the schools do not recommend to take the test more than three times. This advice is based on a study that shows that after three sittings, the law of diminishing returns kicks in. The school simply want to help the students save money.</p>
<p>Lastly, it IS a good idea to request your high school to NOT report the SAT or ACT scores. On this subject, one CANNOT trust the transcripts provided to the families. It is important to request to see the OFFICIAL transcript that is sent to the schhols. Do not be surprised if the official transcript is different and contains much more information than expected.</p>
<p>Jack, I would get all worked up about taking the tests more than once IF it mattered one iota, which it does not. There is a poster on CC who got a 1000 on the SAT and got into Harvard due to AA; he/she went on to get 4.0, a stellar score on the LSATs and is an attorney. That is ONE story out of about a hundred that I have heard over my 30 years being involved with colleges and universities. I was just above average, not great, but went on to get the highest possible GPA at my Ivy.</p>
<p>Last year, the three top SAT scorers in our school were nice but uncreative, boring grade grubbers; kids with lower SATs got into better schools, including the HYPSM variety and Top Ten LACs, because of their overall brilliance, creativity, etc. This happens repeatedly. There simply is no NECESSARY connection between perfect scores and success. Thank God the colleges know this.</p>
<p>The analogy with the physics test doesn't hold water. The colleges just want a benchmark of what the best you can do is. My god-daughter took the exam in a room with drilling going on outside the window the whole three hours; my son took it with the flu. So what if they take it again because they weren't at their best?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, how is sitting for the test innumerable times to get a great score, and not allowing college admissions to see that, any different from--say--taking a high school physics course 3 times to finally get that A, but not allowing anyone to know that?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Jack,</p>
<p>I see this as vastly different for a couple of reasons. A high school does not issue a CHOICE of whether or not a grade will appear on a transcript. It WILL appear. And if one repeats a course to receive a better grade, that is and should be reflected. Regarding college entrance exams, however, the choice IS issued as to whether or not the score is sent to either a college OR to the high school. No one has the right to remove that choice.</p>
<p>The second reason why these are two completely separate issues lies in the very nature of a h.s. class versus a college entrance exam. During the course of a high school class, one is exposed to a body of knowledge which presumably one is to absorb and come to understand. Because of this, taking the course three times WOULD give a student an advantage because he would have had much more exposure to said material. A college entrance exam is a 3-4 hour TEST. During this test, the student is not exposed to new material to absorb and learn. Therefore, the simple act of taking the test may or may not impart an advantage. Each test is different...the same test is not issued over and over again. Therefore, each time the student takes the exam, the chance exists of his knowing MORE than before or LESS than before. The test does not TEACH, and therefore, it does not afford the same advantage of an entire high school course. </p>
<p>I would also be inclined to agree with drusba on this sentiment:</p>
<p>
[quote]
You would be placing far more importance on the SAT than colleges do to assume that they would be giving bonus points for one sitting test takers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I am, however, in agreement with you that any extenuating circumstances (such as time or location differences) should be reported.</p>
<p>Like you, I am not in favor of "watering down" or gratuitously feeding "self esteem". It's just that in the whole scheme of things (ALL of the vastly "unfair" advantages one may have in the college application process), this seems minor to me. After all, each and every person may take the test as many times as he wishes.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>