SAT vs ACT- A rumor I heard

Test Preparation
21

<p>In the 2009 graduating class, 1.530 million students took the SAT, while a roughly equivalent number, 1.480 million, took the SAT. That’s about 3.3% more taking the SAT—an inconsequential difference. Here’s how they scored on the respective tests, using the official SAT-ACT Concordance Table as the basis for comparison:</p>

<p>SAT CR+M: # scoring (pct rank) // ACT composite: # scoring (pct rank)</p>

<p>SAT 1600: 1,192 (99+ %) // ACT 36: 638 (99+ %)
SAT 1540-1590: 5,969 (99+ %) // ACT 35: 3,450 (99+ %)
SAT 1490-1530: 11,611 (99%) // ACT 34: 7,533 (99+ %)
SAT 1440-1480: 20,238 (97-98%) // ACT 33: 12,082 (99%)
SAT 1400-1430: 28,139 (96-97%) // ACT 32: 17,558 (98%)
SAT 1360-1390: 37,733 (94-95%) // ACT 31: 23,981 (97%)
SAT 1330-1350: 29,556 (92-93%) // ACT 30: 31,457 (96%)
SAT 1290-1320: 48,279 (89-91%) // ACT 29: 37,830 (93%)
SAT 1250-1280: 58,853 (85-88%) // ACT 28: 47,716 (91%)</p>

<p>Thus at the very top of the scale, there are nearly twice as many students scoring a perfect 1600 on SAT CR+M as there are scoring a perfect 36 on the ACT. At almost every high-scoring level in the official SAT-ACT Concordance, there are significantly more students earning the SAT score than the corresponding ACT score. </p>

<p>Now in part this just reflects a flaw in the official Concordance, which privileges SAT scores at the top end by corresponding them with ACT scores that are, statistically speaking, more difficult to achieve. Going by percentile ranks, an ACT composite of 34 (99+ %) should correspond to an SAT CR+M of 1540-1590 (99+ %), or perhaps something like 1540-1570 (also 99+ %) —not 1490-1530 (99%), as the current Concordance has it. Similarly, an ACT composite of 33 (99%) should correspond to SAT CR+M of 1480-1520 (99%); an ACT composite of 32 (98%) should correspond to SAT CR+M of 1450-1470 (98%); and so on. Making those adjustments would equalize the numbers of top scorers in each test with the equivalent scorers in the other test. But it would also have the effect of indicating that an ACT score anywhere in the 28-34 range should count as the equivalent of a higher SAT score than is indicated in the current Concordance.</p>

<p>Bottom line: there’s just no basis for concluding that most people score better on the ACT than on the SAT (cf. post #14).</p>

22

<p>I did a lot better on the SAT than I did on the ACT and I’ve never studied for either of them… I know people who have studied and barely improved on the SAT but completely blew their previous ACT scores out of the water.</p>

<p>If I was going to make a generalization about one being for smarter people and the other being for hard workers, I’d say the ACT goes with the former.</p>

<p>That said, I’ve been studying for the SAT for the first time this past month and I’m scoring 200-300 points higher on every practice test and past examination I’m using.</p>

23

<p>

</p>

<p>25% of the CR is vocabulary, so you can’t get a good score without memorizing words.</p>

24

<p>However, the sentence completion is more about understanding the structure of the sentence than actually memorizing words. My vocabulary is certainly not above average, but I only got 1 wrong on this part.</p>

25

<p>

</p>

<p>I got a 70% in vocabulary on those cute little standardized test through elementary, and I didn’t know any of the words throughout every single CR section I took on thw SAT. I couldn’t do the vocab in the passages either or explain any of the tones as I didn’t know the definition of any of the tones. So approximately 25% of the CR section I couldn’t do because my vocabulary blows, however this does not automatically mean i’m not college-capable as the SAT points out.</p>

<p>I’m sure others are with here that vocabulary means nothing in value; the CR questions are pretty much the same as the ACTs. Now the ACT shows that I do infact understand how to read and interpret information.</p>

26

<p>Oh please. The ACT reading has the most basic questions; the only challenge to it is working quickly. I doubt your college readiness is determined by how fast you can work. And also, the science section does occasionally test your background knowledge in chem/bio, and the math section sometimes requires the law of cosines. So the SAT is not unique in requiring something to be memorized before taking the test. And BTW, I did score a 36, so unlike CJGone, I’m not just bashing a test because I didn’t do well on it.</p>

27

<p>

  1. Reasoning can often get your through words you don’t know.
  2. Many SC answer choices are composed of words the average high school student already knows. Unless you’re comparing SC totals of a 5 year old vs. those of a Harvard English professor, vocab is not going to hold a 25% sway in terms of scores.
  3. There’s no denying it; top colleges want students with rich vocabularies, and they should. In an age where technology is demotivating intellectual curiosity, it is ever more imperative that the nation’s top students stick with keeping alive the vitality of the English language. Vocab SHOULD factor at least a little bit into a reading score.</p>
28

<p>Memorizing vocabulary words that you never have read is very very difficult. Most people learn vocabulary by hearing it or reading it many many times in a variety of contexts. </p>

<p>Every one I know who scored very high in Critical Reading has read voraciously for many many years, and has had exposure to parents/teachers who use high-level vocabulary in their normal speech.</p>

29

<p>@ CJGONE</p>

<p>vocab is a small part. if you did poorly because of vocab then I’m sorry but don’t be bitter about it. The plural of anecdote is not data. For each story of someone doing poorly on reading because of vocab, there is a story to counter it.</p>

<p>and what about math then? the SAT gives you every formula you will need. does the ACT do that? NO. so therefore you could argue that the ACT math depends on your memorization of math formulas moreso than the SAT depends on memorization of vocab.</p>

<p>FACT: The SAT is much more of an intelligence test than the ACT, which tests pure knowledge aquired through schooling.</p>

30

<p>Very simple. SAT is way harder than ACT, in my opinion. It seems a lot easier to raise one’s ACt score than SAT score.</p>

31

<p>stix2400/moricarak,</p>

<p>Your anecdotal evidence aside, the numbers are what they are, and they don’t support your arguments. milwdad and bclintonk have it right – it is no easier to do well on the ACT than it is on the SAT.</p>

32

<p>I loled at the post above mine. No proof to even back up your absurd claim.</p>

33

<p>I don’t believe that the SAT is an intelligence test, since I went from a 1900 to a 2260 after a little bit of studying.</p>

34

<p>The tests are simply different. One is not an IQ test. They are graded on bell curves.</p>

<p>Case in point. If IQ correlates with SAT and scholastic performance with ACT…</p>

<p>MY IQ: 161 (top 0.0024%)
MY SAT: 2270 (top 0.0067%) (9400ish/1.4Mish)</p>

<p>Another kid I know’s IQ: 151 (top .034%)
Another kid I know’s SAT: 2400 (top .0002%)</p>

<p>MY GPA: top 1.5%
MY ACT: 36 (top .0003%) (500ish to 600ish/ 1.5Mish)</p>

<p>Another kid I know’s GPA: top 5%
Another kid I know’s ACT: 36 (top .0003%)</p>

<p>Clearly, the correlation is not as you’ve described. Both of us slack more in school, yet did better on the ACT. I was sick on the SAT date and refused to retake because I hate it. Everyone is just vouching for the superiority of the test in which they excelled more.</p>

35

<p>And anyone that says blacks are inferior needs to shut the ***** up. The SAT is a test of how wealthy your parents and environment are. Hence, the people who were enslaved for hundreds of years and have only had the option of university for a generation are at a ridiculous disadvantage. Shut up you racist pig.</p>

36

<p>The bottom line: The SAT was never meant to be an IQ test. If colleges wanted to base it off of IQ they can go ask for an IQ test.</p>

37

<p>Think about it this way. Get a bunch of questions wrong on CR/Writing, still maintain a ~750+. Get 3 questions wrong on any section of the ACT? You’re getting a 31 or less. Goodluck.</p>

38

<p>Let’s see, ACT 2004-2005 prep booklet</p>

<p>72/75 raw, English - 33
57/60 raw, Math - 33
37/40 raw, Reading - 32
37/40 raw, Science - 30</p>

<p>There goes your argument. Granted, the science for this particular test must have been ridiculously easy because -1 yielded a 34.</p>

39

<p>They’re simply different tests. Some people will do better on one, whereas others will excel at the other.</p>

40

<p>Are there any statistics by region about who takes SAT v. ACT? In my son’s school here in Michigan all Juniors take the ACT for free in school. As a general rule, the ACT scores are what students in Michigan use for their applications to State schools. It seems like the only kids who go ahead and take the SAT also (they have to pay for it) are the ones who are considering private schools or out of state schools.</p>

<p>My point is, could there be a correlation between the type of school you are looking at and which test you take? My S will take both because he is looking at Stanford, MIT, etc. Some of his friends in AP class who have U of Mich as their #1 choice will just rely on their ACT score because it is easy to predict that if you get a 32 or above, you’ll get into U of Mich.</p>