SAT has unfair advantage over ACT

Applying to College
21

<p>Xiggi method:</p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=68210%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=68210&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>OP: I HAVE read Princeton's app many times...do they have an obvious preference for the SAT? - yes; will they accept the ACT in lieu of the SAT? - yes; will the ACT-only decrease your chances? - like everything in the admission game, it depends (on the score)</p>

<p>btw: the concordance study was a joint study between the CB and ACT corp -- they compared several years of data of students who took both tests. The study has been replicated by several Universities, including the UC system and the UT system, both of which conducted their own analysis and concurred with the CB-ACT results.</p>

22

<p>I think it is accurate to say that the test scores for schools accepting both are "lower" on the ACT when using the conversion table. I think the tables underestimate the SAT number for those using the ACT by about 20-40 points on the SAT 1600 scale. If you compare similar percentile scores, the conversion tables are off.</p>

23

<p>barron's , I've had similar thoughts about the percentiles. Do you believe that the top schools mentioned are looking more at the percentiles than the concordance? Would that tend to explain the situation that appears to exist?</p>

24

<p>Where I applied, they took the best sections of the SAT and combined them and the best ACT subsections and combined those. They call it "super scoring."</p>

25

<p>The Princeton application instruction reads as follows: "If all of you other college choices require ACT results and not the SAT, you may submit the ACT..."</p>

<p>According to USNews under the Admissions category for Princeton, it says "First Year Students submitting SAT scores: 100%." And, if that's is not enough, here are Princeton's SAT statistics on the USNews website:</p>

<p>First-year students submitting ACT scores: N/A
ACT scores (25/75 percentile):
English: N/A
Math: N/A
Composite: N/A </p>

<p>Percent of first-time, first-year students enrolled in Fall 2004 with scores in each range:
ACT Composite ACT English ACT Math
30-36 N/A N/A N/A
24-29 N/A N/A N/A
18-23 N/A N/A N/A
12-17 N/A N/A N/A
6-11 N/A N/A N/A
Below 6 N/A N/A N/A </p>

<p>Accordingly, I rest my case about Princeton's consideration of ACT scores. They DO NOT want your ACT scores and you would be foolish to waste your time and money applying with ACT scores only.</p>

26

<p>That would have nothing to do with the fact that PU and the CEEB are in the same town??!</p>

27

<p>ACT is not easier than SAT u dumb A New Yorker. Just because you couldn't find an ACT prep course near your whitey high school, don't get all p.o'd b/c u bombed it. The poster is indeed correct- the SAT gets more due than it should (even thou it's been cracked by Kaplan and co.) just because:</p>

<ol>
<li>Wow 1600 > 36 That's HUGE!!!</li>
<li>SAT's got more history, and people love being foolishly loyal.</li>
<li>Eastern kids suck compared to Midwesterners on ACT and wet themselves.</li>
</ol>

28

<p>
[quote]
Wow 1600 > 36 That's HUGE!!!

[/quote]
About that: statics show there are far less people who score perfectly on the ACT than the SAT. Something to think about...</p>

29

<p>There does seem to be some cultural identification connected with the test. The fast-talking, shifty citizens on the East Coast using tricks and test-taking techniques to get a high score on the SAT. Taking prep courses to learn the tricks and test-taking techniques if they don't come to them naturally. The solid, hard-working citizens in the Midwest taking the knowledge oriented ACT with questions of substance. Shunning prep classes because they know that if you don't know the material, no prep class can help you. :)</p>

30

<p>As a Midwesterner who plans on taking the SAT over the ACT, I think it is important to understand the fundamental differances between the tests.</p>

<p>Firstly, the ACT tests knowledge. Period. That is why it is unnecessary at most colleges to submit SAT II tests if you use an ACT score. The SAT, on the other hand, is formulated to test a person's ability to think quickly and logically. Which approach is better is not important for the discussion.</p>

<p>People have mentioned a few statistics on this board that I feel should be adressed. The highly intelligent people who plan on heading to the Ivies usually will not take the ACT, even if they are Midwesterners. Therefore, the population that is taking the test is slightly, to put it bluntly, dumber. This affects the entire curve of the test as well as the conversion from ACT to SAT.</p>

<p>More importantly, it is impossible to compare mean ACT and mean SAT scores from college acceptances. MANY factors go into determining who is accepted to each college, location being an important one. Whether you want to believe it or not, someone from the Midwest would have a leg up over someone from the East Coast. </p>

<p>Therefore, even with lower scores, they would gain admittance compared to their Eastern counterparts.</p>

<p>Statistically, it is also necessary to point out how the mean ACT and SAT scores are generated. Since many more people apply with the SAT, the average will be more accurate and less influenced by outliers (either high or low) than the mean ACT scores. Since substantially fewer students are accepted with ACT scores, the average is based on a much small sample, thereby making it possible for outliers to greatly skew the mean. </p>

<p>Don't mindlessly listen to statistics. Only a weak argument must rely upon them.</p>

<p>So, back to the point. I think the point of a standardized test is find a way to compare all students. In my opinion, I think that a school should choose to accept only the ACT or only the SAT is they require a standarized test. Otherwise, it comes to comparing apples and oranges. While they both may be fruit, you can't really count them as the same thing.</p>

<p>If you believe the SAT is easier, then take it. No one is stopping you. Just because you don't live on the East Coast doesn't mean you have any less of an opportunity to succeed. It is blatantly stereotypical to say that ALL Eastcoast kids take a prep class, just as it is stereotypical to say that NO midwesterners prep for the ACT.</p>

<p>If you are smart and motivated, you can do well on the SAT or ACT. Period. So what does it really matter? The 20-40 point differance you believe the ACT deserves accounts to basically nothing. That much can be easily lost or gained from one sitting of the test to the next. No college is going to use a 20-40 point differance between scores as a justification for admittance or denial.</p>

31

<p>Actually, the SAT and the ACT have moved closer over the years in terms of what they test. The "A" in SAT originally stood for Achievement. Now, it doesn't stand for anything. The last revision of changes, especially to the
SAT Math section, move it more towards a knowledge based test. The addition of writing to the ACT makes it less a knowledge based test. The SAT relies more on knowledge of vocabulary while the ACT relies more on knowledge of grammar rules. I have read that the SAT is more "coachable" than the ACT because they publish more tests and they consistently use certain "tricks." However, I'm not sure the ACT isn't just as "coachable," but in a different way. I wish the colleges would get together and combine the two into one test, and save the students alot of hassle. I would even settle for them picking one of the two out of hat.</p>

32

<p>I meant to say the "A" in SAT originally stood for "apptitude" and not "achievement." Sorry.</p>

33

<p>
[quote]
The highly intelligent people who plan on heading to the Ivies usually will not take the ACT, even if they are Midwesterners.

[/quote]
Who are these 'highly intelligent' people? You? Just because you're a Midwesterner who's taking the SAT doesn't mean everyone prefers the SAT over the ACT. In fact, they don't have to be from the Midwest at all. A lot of students from the East coast are taking the ACT over the SAT simply because CollegeBoard is a pain in the ass and more expensive.

[quote]
Therefore, even with lower scores, they would gain admittance compared to their Eastern counterparts.

[/quote]
This is not a thread about Affirmative Action and yet you still had to throw in that insulting remark. Good job.

[quote]
MANY factors go into determining who is accepted to each college, location being an important one.

[/quote]
Unless you're from some place like Alaska or Wyoming - no.

[quote]
Don't mindlessly listen to statistics. Only a weak argument must rely upon them.

[/quote]
Yes, your blatantly elitist claims are much better.</p>

34

<p>
[quote]
I meant to say the "A" in SAT originally stood for "apptitude" and not "achievement." Sorry.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It has actually stood for both at different times:
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT#History_and_name_changes%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT#History_and_name_changes&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>1901: Scholastic Achievement Test
1941: Scholastic Aptitude Test
1990: Scholastic Assessment Test
1994: SAT (doesn't stand for anything)</p>

<p>This is because of the controversy about what the test actually is good for, and what does it measure.</p>

35

<p>According to USNews under the Admissions category for Princeton, it says "First Year Students submitting SAT scores: 100%." And, if that's is not enough, here are Princeton's SAT statistics on the USNews website:</p>

<p>You forget that SAT scores include SAT II scores. Since they are required, I would expect anything around 99-100% SAT scores submitted.</p>

36

<p>SAT review courses are overrated. I learned more about the Boston subway system two summers ago, and the before and after SAT scores differed by only 30 points. It was pretty useless. Not having access to an SAT review course doesn't give you a disadvantage at all.</p>

<p>The ACT...it's strange. It's not logical, most of the questions...at least not to me. But somehow I end up with good or mostly good scores. I don't know. It's closer to the school curriculums, I guess, but some of those questions were really just bizarre.</p>

<p>My ACT composite is lower than my highest single-sitting SAT...go figure. But I'm sure colleges are familiar with both tests, and don't hold the ACT as a second-degree standard which is compared and scaled to the SAT 400-1600 range.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>It also used to stand for assessment, more recently. In fact, at one point in time it probably stood for achievement, or any number of words beginning with the letter 'A.'</p>

37

<p>Did you read to the bottom of the post re Princeton SAT vs. ACT. All of the ACT statistics were N/A. Can you hear a bell ringing?</p>

38

<p>I don't mean to stereotype, but I think the students on the West and East Coast may be generally more qualified than those in the Midwest. If that is true, than that could explain why percentiles do not correlate.</p>

39

<p>Why would the students on the coasts be generally more qualified?</p>

<p>I might agree that people in the midwest are generally less obsessed with college admissions from an early age.</p>

40

<p>
[quote]
Just because you're a Midwesterner who's taking the SAT doesn't mean everyone prefers the SAT over the ACT.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't go to some fancy-schmancy boarding school. I go to public school just like the majority of other people in the Midwest. I know who the "smart" kids are, and I know what tests they are taking for college admission. Tis might be a foreign concept to you, but the academic high school community isn't very large. Between Academic Decathalon and Quizbowl, I have an opportunity to meet the cream of the crop from basically every in my state. These are the kids who would have a chance at the Ivies, and they are usually taking the SAT.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This is not a thread about Affirmative Action and yet you still had to throw in that insulting remark. Good job.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you not know how to read? I'm from the Midwest, so I would only be insulting myself. However, I do have a valid point. Colleges want diversity. In general, of two equally qualified individuals, being from the Midwest would be more helpful than the Eastcoast. What type of diversity would a campus create if everyone came from the same few states?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Yes, your blatantly elitist claims are much better.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How are my claims elitist? I am intelligent, as are many people on this board. I do have first hand experience with what testing route many students choose. How is this elitist? Just becuase I disagree with what you say doesn't mean I am being snobbish, it simply means we disagree. I'm not trying to tell you how to think-- just providing accurate information about an area of the country that you seem to be unfamilair with.</p>

<p>It would be like if I tried to talk about education in Thailand. I simply don't know alot about it.</p>