<p>I'm wondering if I should take the ACT again. I have read many students' posts on the weight of the SAT's,ACT's,etc. but am now more confused than ever, so I was hoping some parents may be able to give me some advice. My superscore on the SAT was a 2110 (770/760/580) and my score on the ACT was a 32. I had near-perfect/perfect scores on the English section and a solid Science score. In both cases, I was brought down by my Math score. Should I test the ACT standby in February? I applied to two Ivy's and some Top 20 schools as reaches. The rest of my schools are lower ranked, but still selective and my weighted GPA is a 3.98, if that helps. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.</p>
<p>I guess the first question needs to be : When is the last test date the schools you have applied to will consider? Second question : is the score 770 Verbal, 760 Math, and 580 writing? That's the usual order we use for those scores.</p>
<p>Don't waste your time taking more tests. Expend the energy doing something productive and interesting with your time. You have good scores and good grades: Assuming you chose your schools wisely, you'll get accepted to some of your choices and have a great experience.</p>
<p>I cringe when I think of all the fun and interesting things kids could be doing/reading/learning instead of prepping endlessly for these tests.</p>
<p>Oh, sorry. It's 770 CR, 580 Math, 760 WR. (Yeah, I kind of which it was the other way.) I know a few of the schools to which I applied will take the February date at the latest.</p>
<p>And to be clear, I'm not applying for anything related to Math or Science and my lowest grades in school have always been in Math, so it's obviously my weakness.</p>
<p>What was your ACT math subscore?</p>
<p>Your SAT and ACT scores are roughly equivalent. You didn't post your ACT subscores, but if they're consistent with your SAT subscores, then I'm assuming it's the ACT Math that pulled your composite down. Pulling it up could make a real difference. A below-600 math subscore (or its equivalent in ACT terms) is likely to hurt you at the most selective schools. Do you have some time to do additional prep for the math? If so, it may be worth taking the ACT once more. I don't see much value in taking it cold.</p>
<p>My ACT broke down like this:
English 34
Math 26
Reading 36
Science 31
Writing 11</p>
<p>Have you taken any math refresher courses, or done alg and geom problems for hours each night to improve your math score?
If not really, then I wouldn't think you would go up that much more on the verbal and science, and your math score won't change.<br>
My daughter's math ACT score of 29 was very consistent with her math scores of 700 and 680 on her 2 SAT tests.<br>
Your ACT and SAT math scores sound likewise consistent.<br>
Retaking the ACT isn't going to change anything if you have not taken a math refresher course.</p>
<p>Take it again. Doesn't sound like you are the type to sweat a test too much. If you have the time and inclination, why not? D had a 32 first time out that looked similar to yours (a 34 composite without considering one topic, science). She took it again with little prep but a much greater understanding of the science section and scored a 35. It may be, as some posters may be suggesting, that the SAT and ACT fairly reflect your math ability , but then again........(Yes, I know science is not math.)</p>
<p>Since you don't need to submit your scores, retake the ACT, but review where you fell down in math first.</p>
<p>I'd suggest additional work on math and a retake. Avail yourself of one of the ACT prep books and focus on the math section. Notice the different types of math questions and the approaches to deriving the corrent answers. Practice. Get some help if you skills or comprehension need it. In my estimation, the potential upside makes it worthwhile.</p>
<p>Thanks for all the input. I think I will take the ACT again. If I do happen to get the same grade or test lower :( I obviously won't send my score, but is a 32 the type of score that will be a serious detriment to my app (or keep adcoms from even seriously considering it) or is more of a "it won't hurt- it won't help" type thing?</p>
<p>The answer depends to some degree on where you're applying. A 32 is a solid score for many schools. I do think that the low math subscore could be a serious liability at highly selective schools.</p>
<p>I also had a 32 composite and was wondering whether or not to retake the test. Math was my lowest section also. If you look at the score distribution charts that compare composite scores to percentiles, you will find that a 32 is the first score of the 99th percentile. Obviously you cannot get any higher than that.</p>
<p>If you continue researching, you will find that, by scoring in the 99th percentile and obtaining that "detrimental" 32, you probably missed fewer than 6 questions on the entire test. All this information is available on the ACT website.</p>
<p>Also bear in mind that in order to raise your composite score (31.75-they rounded in your favor) one point you essentially need to raise the rest of your scores by a total of 3 points (up to a 32.5 which would round to a 33). Congratulations on not being able to improve reading! It is also unlikely that you will improve on English, an assumption I base only on the fact that you scored nearly perfect. Your options, then, are to increase Science or Math. The likelihood of raising each of those scores one or two points is definitely do-able, which would lead me to suggest that you go ahead and retake the test.</p>
<p>HOWEVER if I were you, I would first ask the schools in question whether or not they superscore your tests. Superscoring is when they take the best results from each test to create your highest possible composite score. If the school does not superscore (not many do), then you would also have to consider the likelihood of you scoring perfectly on reading and near-perfectly on English again. Do you think that will happen?</p>
<p>I've heard that many ACT subscores are used for placement in classes and the composite is used more for admissions decisions. Therefore, a "low" math subscore might not be too detrimental in the long run.</p>
<p>Bottom line: You have a very good score and certainly don't need to retake it. If you think you can improve your test enough to raise your score, then go for it. It might not be worth the risk if your school doesn't superscore or you don't want to take the writing section over again.</p>
<p>Up to you, but if it were me (and it was!) I'd stop stressing about it and be satisfied with one of the top scores in the country. </p>
<p>All the best,
Kristin</p>
<p>An interesting analysis.^^^</p>
<p>However, regarding one point: I don't see that there is any "risk," in that you do not have to allow any school to see your score.</p>
<p>“If you look at the score distribution charts that compare composite scores to percentiles, you will find that a 32 is the first score of the 99th percentile. Obviously you cannot get any higher than that.”</p>
<p>That is not the relevant statistic. What’s important is how you measure up against other applicants to the colleges on your list, not how you measure up against other students who took the ACT.</p>
<p>Here’s an example. I use Yale only because a related issue came up on the Yale board recently, and I looked up the numbers for that school. I don’t know if cj has applied there, and the numbers will obviously vary from college to college. </p>
<p>A 26 ACT subscore is roughly equivalent to a 580-600 SAT subscore. The mid 50% Math SAT subscore range for students who entered Yale in 2006 was 700-790. That means 25% of matriculating students scored below 700, 25% scored over 790. More to the point, according to the US News website, which I can't link to here because it is by subscription only, the percentage of first-year students enrolled at Yale in 2006 who had SAT Math subscores below 600 (between 500 and 599) was a mere 2.0%. That's fewer than 30 students, and it’s a virtual certainty that all of them had a hook. </p>
<p>That is why, despite a respectable composite, a very low subscore is a detriment.</p>
<p>wjb: would you use the same analysis for the science subscore or do you believe that has less relevance? In addition, do you think that it's the english/writing score or the reading score that relates to the verbal portion of the SAT? This has been discussed before on this forum with mixed opinions....</p>
<p>I think the science section of the ACT is sui generis; nothing to compare it to on the SAT. I don't think it's irrelevant, though. I believe colleges evaluate it. As for whether the Critical Reading section of the SAT corresponds more closely to the English or the Reading subsection of the ACT, I don't know. Interesting question. I guess if I were to try to do a quick and dirty comparison, I'd average those two ACT subscores and compare them with the SAT CR score.</p>
<p>My D was in this situation , a 1470 SAT no prep and a 32 ACT no prep taken within a week or two of each other. For us there was no question that top 1% scores overall on the ACT and for SAT taking females that year was "good enough" for anywhere. She was done. </p>
<p>I reacted quite poorly when posters "explained" that for the great merit hunt and for super-selective admissions schools she might need to retake. Pshaw!Hogwash! Nonsense! This is top 1% of collegebound females we're talking about here. </p>
<p>I did the research to find that the average invited participant to the scholarship weeknds for the big awards at several schools D was considering was higher than her score. Higher than top 1% of collegebound females ? That's nuts!(Furman and Rhodes for two). That UMiami's and Case's top scholarships required a higher score as did many other top awards that were formulaic at least as a cut-off. I was flabbergasted. Her 1470/32 scores were well within the middle range at all the most selective schools. What kind of craziness is this? </p>
<p>Can you be acccepted/win top scholarships with those scores (32 and a 1470)? Yep. Happens everyday to lots of kids. Are you in better shape with a higher score? Yes. Yes, you are.</p>
<p>My kid "knew" the science score was an aberration (dang dewpoint graph). She doesn't mind standardized tests. She took the ACT again and we believe it helped her in admissions and scholarships. YMMV.</p>
<p>"Can you be acccepted/win top scholarships with those scores (32 and a 1470)? Yep. Happens everyday to lots of kids."</p>
<p>At the super selective schools, kids with those scores who are admitted have a hook, IMHO. They are recruited athletes, promising URMs, development cases, or the offspring of big time celebrities. Aside from those kids, the vast majority who get into the super selectives do it the old fashioned way --with top grades, the most rigorous curriculum available to them, top test scores, all backed up by the intangibles (ECs, recs, essays).</p>
<p>To clarify: Obviously, some athletes, URMs, etc. will have top stats and don't need the boost.</p>