<p>The consensus you see here on CC is that many colleges superscore the SAT, few if any superscore the ACT (superscore = take best score from subsections at different sittings and combine for the highest possible score using the best results from the various attempts.) The usual off the cuff explanation for this is that the SAT is an addition of the three sections, while the ACT is an average of 4 sections, making superscoring the ACT harder. I assumed that the composite ACT was not merely an average of the reported subscores, but perhaps of the sub-subscores, or something of the type, creating mathematical subtleties which would make superscoring somehow inaccurate.</p>
<p>But in a different thread a link was posted to a U Texas study involving the ACT score, and there it said that the ACT composite score is simply an average of the four basic subscores - E + M + S + R divided by 4 and rounded to the nearest whole number. It doesn't seem to me that that's much harder to superscore than the SATs.</p>
<p>So why are the two tests treated differently? Any ideas out there?</p>
<p>It may have something to do with how the testing companies provide reports to colleges. The one college I know of (I learned this from a CC thread) that superscores the ACT is Florida State. (I confirmed that on the Florida State website when I saw the thread.) I don't know what combination of convenience and custom results in the typical pattern of private colleges superscoring the SAT I but not the ACT.</p>
<p>One reason might be that Collegeboard reports all SAT scores at once but ACT only sends out scores from one sitting, the one the student selects. If the ACT were superscored, students would be motivated to send 2 or 3 or even 4 separate ACT score reports to colleges and pay up to 4 times the fees. Colleges might be trying to avoid the extra financial burden on students.</p>
<p>Of course I don't know if the initial assumption, that many colleges superscore the SAT but not the ACT, is correct or not.</p>
<p>Kluge, my daughter took the ACT twice with some variation in scores. The first sitting had some very high and some rather low scores, so she retook in an effort to bring up the lower ones -- she did, but then didn't do as well on the higher ones, and the composite was actually one point lower. (I figured out later that it was really a matter of a quarter point, but because of the way ACT composites are reported, you don't see that part).</p>
<p>Anyway, she ASKED the ad coms at the most selective colleges she was applying to whether they superscored, and while they did not specify how they would handle it -- the advice was uniform: all wanted to see both scores and indicated that they would take both into consideration. So the reachier schools all got both. </p>
<p>Whether it made a difference or not, I don't know -- it may be that even though schools do not take the time to "superscore" that they do at least take a look at the composites. </p>
<p>I think because of the way that ACT is reported, it is kind of easier to take a holistic view of it rather than bothering to do the math to come up with a different composite number.</p>
<p>When colleges report the SAT score distribution of their student body (medium 50% range), do they use the superscored scores or do they stick to one sitting? If "superscore colleges" reported the superscored scores and other colleges did not, wouldn't that distort the SAT ranges and give them an unfair advantage in rankings?</p>
<p>The colleges report the mid-50 percent range for SATs separately for each section: Math, CR & now Writing -- and it is in their interest to report the highest of each element for each student -- so yes, those are super-scored numbers.</p>
<p>Before looking at the differences between the two tests, one might want to look at the schools that HISTORICALLY preferred the ACT versus the SAT. It so happens that the territory of the ACT does not include many private and highly selective schools. </p>
<p>Superscoring the SAT has always been in the domain of the highly selective private schools. Public schools have been known to NOT superscore the SAT. </p>
<p>Whle one can expect the wannabe ACT to do everything in the power to emulate the SAT, in theory you can't have superscores and score choice at the same time. You can also expect schools that LOVE to report the highest score possible are interested in using the ACT in this way (read WUSTL.) This said, when looking at the ACT versus the logic if often broken. Will someone ever provide a logical explanation why the asinine ACT science test could be an acceptable substitute for a SAT Subject Test?</p>
<p>Although I don't have a definitive answer to the OP's question, I suspect that the reason that most adcoms will not superscore the ACT is because, unlike the SAT, the ACT reports a composite score which is the AVERAGE of the scores achieved on each section of the test. The SAT simply adds the CR, math and writing scores together. As such, I think that by allowing SAT examinees to "superscore" their test results, adcoms are essentially permitting students who have taken the SAT more than once to do what the ACT composite already does. Granted, it's not a perfect comparison, but I would guess that this is the rationale.</p>
<p>"Before looking at the differences between the two tests, one might want to look at the schools that HISTORICALLY preferred the ACT versus the SAT. It so happens that the territory of the ACT does not include many private and highly selective schools. </p>
<p>Superscoring the SAT has always been in the domain of the highly selective private schools. Public schools have been known to NOT superscore the SAT. </p>
<p>One can expect the wannabe ACT to do everything in the power to emulate the SAT."</p>
<p>Xiggi, with all due respect, let's look at the facts:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The "historical" territory of the ACT -- by which I assume you mean the South, West and Midwest -- has included and continues to include many of the nations top colleges and universities, both public and private -- they aren't all in the Northeast, you know. </p></li>
<li><p>"Superscoring the SAT has always been in the domain of the highly selective private schools. Public schools have been known to NOT superscore the SAT." HUH? This is fantasy. Can you give us a laundry list of the public schools that don't superscore the SAT?</p></li>
<li><p>The "wannabe" ACT? As I understand it, the SAT is losing ground to the ACT in terms of the number of students taking the test. In addition, there are at least some sources (the Princeton Review, for example) that view the ACT as a "fairer" test of what high school students have learned and a "better" predictor of how students will fare academically once they reach college than the SAT.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Thanks, Calmom. That probably makes sense for selective schools; if they're going to take the effort to dissect the various HS transcripts they'll be seeing I imagine they would be willing to consider subscores on a standardized test. My personal interest is largely due to the fact that my D did rather poorly on the writing portion of the sitting where she got the highest composite score; the other time she did OK on the writing but her composite score was 3 (actually 3.75) points lower. </p>
<p>It's still an academically interesting question why the "official" policy is different for the different tests, though, or why, for the common data set, colleges don't even even report their freshman class' 25-75 data for total SAT scores - only the subscores. For the ACT they generally report 25-75 for the cumulative score, and only sometimes for subscores. </p>
<p>The question remains: why?</p>
<p>P.S. gbesq: University of California doesn't superscore. I don't know which other publics do or don't.</p>
<p>What an interesting question. Here's another theory, related to xiggi's: superscoring gave selective (and competitive) Eastern colleges the ability to boost their reported scores significantly. Because the midwestern schools that favored the ACT were generally not competing head-to-head as much as the Eastern establishment, and because superscoring the ACT doesn't produce dramatically higher mean scores--since it's an average of an average--there was less incentive to superscore. I also wonder if, historically, it was more common to take the SAT multiple times before it was common to do multiple sittings of the ACT. </p>
<p>Wouldn't you love to know, when it comes to the close calls, which adcoms really are blind to all the reported SAT scores? It seems to me that if a student has scored, say 550, 600, 650, and you know something about the margin of error in testing, you're glad to enter 650 in the database, while pegging the student at about 600.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Xiggi, with all due respect, let's look at the facts
[/quote]
</p>
<p>GB, indeed, there are facts and fantasies. </p>
<p>As far as providing you a laundry list of public schools that do not superscore the SAT, why don't you read a bit about the never ending "excuse" given by schools such as Michigan and the UC system for lower SAT scores. I thought that having to use the best sitting as opposed to the best composite score was ... part of the excuse. </p>
<p>Of course, you may have your own definition of what is a superscore. Here's the one I "borrow" from the University of Texas:</p>
<p>
[quote]
"You may submit as many score reports as you like. If you submit more than one score report, your one highest composite score will be considered; we will not combine scores from different test dates (a verbal score from one test date with a math score from another test date, for example) to come up with a better score."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Lastly, have you checked the qualification of the people at the Princeton Review who describe the ACT in the manner you just did? Could it be the same charlatan who was ridiculed during the Michigan hearings when he had to admit not to possess any qualification in evaluating standardized tests, and not having ANY documentation to back his claims?</p>
<p>I am familiar with the situation at Michigan and the UC system. That being said, that's hardly a representative sample of all of the public colleges and universities in the United States. Truthfully, most publics DO superscore the SAT, do they not? By "superscore," I mean adding the highest CR and math scores from different administrations of the SAT to achieve the highest total score. And as for the opinion of the Princeton Review, I agree that it is just that -- an opinion. In point of fact, if you go to fairtest.org, which some would say is the "source" on this topic, they would point out that BOTH the ACT and the SAT are inherently biased. My point is that I do not believe that you can still consider the SAT to be the unabased leader in terms of college standardized testing any longer. What troubles me about your post is your use of the term "wannabe" as to the ACT, particularly in view of the vehement past criticism of the SAT from the academic community, which had a lot to do with the recent redesign of the test.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Truthfully, most publics DO superscore the SAT, do they not?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not aware of any that do. I'd love to see some someone go to the work of gathering college policy statements on this issue, and I'm the person who went to all that work would receive thanks from kluge too.</p>
<p>^Well, perhaps I am mistaken, but that is certainly my impression having worked with my daughter on her past applications and having attended more college admissions counseling and information sessions than I care to remember. It would be an interesting exercise, but I'm not about to volunteer. :-)</p>
<p>From the University of Connecticut (my state public) undergraduate admissions website. If I'm reading this correctly, they do superscore the SAT (and the ACT, as well, it seems):</p>
<p>Your official school record must be sent by your high school directly to UConn’s Office of Undergraduate Admissions. SAT or ACT scores must be sent directly from the appropriate testing service or be posted on your official high school transcript. Students who graduate from high school in 2006 and subsequent years must submit the new SAT or ACT with writing exam. We encourage students to take the SAT and/or ACT more than once. We will accept the highest scores from your combined test dates.</p>
<p>From the William & Mary admissions website. In short, SAT superscore = YES, ACT superscore = NO. Maybe I will take a look at the top 50 publics and compile a list. This is getting interesting.</p>
<p>SAT - When evaluating SAT scores the admission committee places primary emphasis on the Math and Critical Reading sections of the exam. If an applicant submits multiple test scores, we use the best overall combination of the highest scores achieved on each section when reviewing the application. William & Mary does evaluate the Writing section of the SAT, but places less emphasis on this section, and still approaches the SAT on a 1600 point scale.
William & Mary's school code for the SAT is: 5115.</p>
<p>ACT - The admission committee evaluates the ACT by reviewing the composite score of the exam. If an applicant submits multiple test scores, we will use the best composite score achieved when reviewing the application.
William & Mary's school code for the ACT is: 4344.</p>