<p>I don't like how some schools require either SAT + subject tests or ACT.</p>
<p>I just don't see how they could be equivalent to each other!</p>
<p>I understand how SAT = ACT, but SAT plus subject is just way more than what ACT tests on.
SAT subjects actually test on how well you know different subject areas, ACT doesn’t. The science section is not about science, it’s about how fast the student can read passages and tables and still stay sane.</p>
<p>I agree…subject tests are insanely harder than either the SAT or ACT…and require fact-based info. </p>
<p>My theory is that mid-westerners only really have the ACT (not much SAT), so they feel they might be missing out on them.</p>
<p>a lot of top schools now require specifically 1) SAT or ACT and 2) SAT IIs</p>
<p>Yeah, but even places like Yale (if I’m not mistaken) take SAT + subject or ACT… argh.</p>
<p>Most schools are actually moving toward not requiring Subject Tests. In fact, I know of only a couple of schools that specifically require Subject Tests with ACT. As someone who’s taken the SAT I, SAT II, and the ACT, I can say that ACT definitely does not test the same things. However, I think it is a more valuable test than SAT I.</p>
<p>By the way, the Midwest has been an ACT region for a long time. Most students at my school in Ohio barely know what the SAT is, and none of them have heard of Subject Tests. Since Midwestern schools do not focus on SAT or SAT Subject Tests, it would really place Midwesterners at a disadvantage if Subject Tests are required.</p>