<p>Gbesq, I answered your post only because you asked me to look at facts --after calling me out for posting fantasies. </p>
<p>Many years ago, our discussions regarding the SAT and ACT were quite different. The issue of superscoring was also different as posters inquired about the schools that offered the possibility of merging scores from different administrations. In fact, I spent time listing the schools that offered what is now routinely called "superscore" as well as defending the practice of taking multiple tests without .. hesitation or fears of penalties! I guess that what has become taken for granted today was very much a question only 3-4 years ago. Speak about vindication! </p>
<p>Since those days, there have been changes in the acceptance of the ACT on both coasts. Nonetheless, I maintain that the ACT is a wannabe test. In fact it is such as wannabe that the ACT is hardly different from the SAT, except for its continuing lack of longitudinal integrity and its lacking format. Simply stated, the ACT does not have the combined resources and experience of the College Board and ETS and ... never will. So, a wannabe it is, and this despite its original claim to offer something different! </p>
<p>However, discussing the history of the ACT and the SAT is well beyond the scope of this thread.</p>
<p>^Xiggi, my apologies if my initial post was overly aggressive. As I think I've noted in my past few posts, there are evidently publics out there -- including some very good ones -- that do superscore the SAT as I define that term. I don't dispute that the SAT was once THE college entrance examination. I simply don't believe that to be the case any longer and that the ACT provides a practical, but not necessarily better, alternative. Tokenadult and I have sparred with others on the SAT vs. ACT topic before, and I continue to believe that the College Board and ETS are far from infallible -- their combined resources notwithstanding.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I simply don't believe that to be the case any longer and that the ACT provides a practical, not necessarily better, alternative.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>GB, I happen to agree with you on this one. That is why I have always recommended to take both tests and ride the one that fits the student the best. The issue of one test being "better" than the other one is hardly relevant; it's all about which test works out the best for an individual person.</p>
<p>At our school, students generally took the SAT, then took the ACT as an option- many times because they were not happy with their SAT score/s. They felt there two advantages to the ACT- 1. They did not have to report the scores if they didn't like them; 2. They could guess and not get penalized. Given the same exact tests, one which does and one which does not penalize guessing, you will most certainly come out ahead when you can guess with impunity.</p>
<p>Between the self-selected population (mostly people who did not appreciate their SAT scores), the fact that "bad" ACT scores are not reported, and the ability to guess, and hopefully get a few more questions right that you really don't "know", the ACT had the reputation of yeilding better score success.</p>
<p>But doubleplay, those "advantages" are corrected for automatically when the scores are converted to percentiles, then converted to the comparable score on the other test for comparison. The student at the 90th percentile on each test has done better than 90% of the test takers under the rules of that test, regardless of what those rules are. (In fact, the standard conversion charts actually seem to penalize ACT test takers in the upper-mid scoring range, for some reason, converting an ACT score into an SAT score about 60 points below the comparable percentile range.) </p>
<p>I agree with Xiggi and gbesq that the SAT and ACT tests, while slightly different in their administration, test essentially the same skills. One study found that while the modest differences in the two tests will cause some students to do better on one than the other, on average the difference between taking each test once is no more than the different scores realized by taking one test twice.</p>
<p>Which is why I wonder why colleges treat the results differently. If you superscore the SAT, why not superscore the ACT? If you don't superscore the ACT, why do it for the SAT? I really can't think of an explanation for that policy.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Given the same exact tests, one which does and one which does not penalize guessing, you will most certainly come out ahead when you can guess with impunity.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's only true if one </p>
<p>a) wouldn't choose the right answer by simply knowing it and marking it within the section time limit, </p>
<p>and </p>
<p>b) has a tendency to land on the correct answer by wild guessing. </p>
<p>Students who can't think up a best answer for each question on either kind of test are well advised, while practicing with actual previous tests, to try taking the test both ways: once with wild abandon in guessing, and once with careful, plodding attention to make sure that every answer marked until right before the end of section timing is a correct answer. Some students are more accurate at a fast pace, and some at a slower pace. But ALL students fare better on either brand of college entrance test if they are good readers. (My son calls the ACT the American Reading Test, but he thinks the SAT I is fundamentally the same in that regard.) SAT I research shows that most students don't finish most test sections, </p>
<p>My assertion was based on this- if two students take identical 100 question (1 point each) tests, and both answer 80 questions correctly and 20 questions incorrectly (either through guessing or ignorance)... and if one test is graded using the SAT guidelines and the other using the ACT guidelines... the SAT scored test will receive a 75/100 and the ACT scored test will receive a 80/100. This is because the SAT reduces your score by 1.25 per incorrect answer and only 1 per omitted answer (except for free responses). So it definitely does not pay to guess on the SAT unless you can narrow it down. On the ACT, it is in the test takers best interest to guess away no matter what.</p>
<p>Put another way, let's say you are completely clueless on 20 questions. If you guess and get 5 questions right/15 wrong, you come out 5 points ahead on the ACT. On the SAT, however, you come out 1.25 points ahead.</p>
<p>Sorry about the confusing explanation- I'm not very good at explaining things.</p>
<p>At any rate, it's important for students to know how both tests are scored, when to guess, and when not to guess.</p>
<p>But then kluge's point applies that each test applies its scoring rules to all test-takers, and the top test-takers still get the top standard scores (and the top percentile scores). Really, really high scores on the ACT are sufficiently rare </p>
<p>doubleplay, I tend to think the collegeboard concordance tables will weight the relative score values accurately. They have absolutely no reason to make the ACT takers look better. The numbers are based on students who take both tests. I find it hard to believe someone would argue with CB over that. </p>
<p>And as to your explanation, the raw scores aren't supposed to be compatible. One could get 80% wrong SAT, and 50% wrong ACT and still get the same percentiles. It doesn't matter. They are raw scores. It's what the raw scores translate to by percentile that is important. It's how it's scaled which changes every time.</p>
<p>Are we talking here about advantage in superscoring to the college or to the student?</p>
<p>Does the adcom do the superscoring? Don't they have to look at all your scores to do that? If you send only one ACT score how can they superscore? And, if you send more than one, what's going to stop them from superscoring in their head even if they say they don't?</p>
<p>and I figure that for the most part, a student is compared to other students by the same rules (for each college), so it really doesn't matter how the test sections are treated. See the linked threads for what students say about why they like superscoring.</p>
<p>Thanks for the referral to that thread. Somehow it seems that the main beneficiaries of all this superscoring business are the prepping companies and CB. Great marketing scheme.</p>
<p>The ACT composites through an average score as opposed to adding them. So superscoring would take a lot more time on the colleges part, and individual section scores are not reported in their fractional forms so you cant distinguish a 33 and a 34 as well as a 700 and 750. </p>
<p>Its like a benefit tradeoff. With the SAT the colleges see ALL scores no matter what, but some superscore. With the ACT you can select the best score yourself everytime, but you don't get to superscore. </p>
<p>All of those are independent theories that i just thought of now.</p>
<p>It seems like a win-win for the students: No penalty for taking the SAT again because superscoring will not allow lower scores to count. No penalty for taking the ACT again because you only send your best score. </p>
<p>If a few hundred thousand people think that way, it makes for very happy test companies (and very anxious students).</p>
<p>To me, the reason is that the ACT is scored with more inherent rounding. That makes the final score meaningful, but with less differentiation than the SAT. Think about it: the SAT has scores (for math, say) from 200 to 800, scored by tens - 60 "slots". The comparable ACT has scores from 1 to 36 - only 35 "slots." By using the ACT scores, you've lumped together test-takers that would have separated scores on the SAT.</p>
<p>You would not want to compound this quality of lesser differentiation by then allowing superscoring. That would increase the amount of upward rounding, and repeated rounding would make the ACT scores less accurate, less differentiated. Pretty soon you've got oatmeal - scores that have become nearly indistinguishable.</p>
<p>In all fairness, though, I believe the ACT was designed to be an easy summary of comprehension reflected by a simple number, thus speeding the application process. It doesn't lend itself to retakes or other manipulation. It's a very midwestern approach to a problem.</p>
<p>I'm not an expert on tests, and I'm not saying or trying to say that one test is better than another. The (test tip?) about guessing or not guessing was what my kids were told by their teachers/guidance. I thought it was useful for students or parents to know. They were advised to not guess on the SAT unless they could narrow down the answer, but to guess on the ACT. Please, I'm not trying to diss a test. </p>
<p>The ACT is not the most popular test around here- the SAT is more widely taken. It's a regional thing. Kids who take the ACT tend to be more motivated for a variety of reasons- they are either trying to get into top schools and are taking multiple tests (SAT I's, SATII's, ACT's), or they've taken the SAT and want to see if they'll do better on the ACT. Most kids who want to go to regional publics or CC just take the SAT once, maybe twice. </p>
<p>A friend of mine's child took the ACT after taking the SAT and was disappointed- scored upper 1300's on the SAT and mid 20's on ACT. He didn't realize that he should/could guess and not get penalized, so he took a slower strategy (like he would use on the SAT) on the ACT. It didn't help him. This has nothing to do with test norming- I just think it's nice for kids and parents to know.</p>
You're assuming that the colleges place significant value on the ACT subscores as opposed to the composite -- but you'll note that for the most part they report composites only. So it may be that for most students they don't break the scores down when evaluating them -- and so the only thing they are interested in is the highest composite ---which, presumeably, is the one the student elects to submit. </p>
<p>I would assume that for specialized programs, the schools will look to those subscores -- you certainly would want to see the math score for an applicant to an engineering program -- but there may be no particular need for the schools to then re-index the composite. The fact that they do not "superscore" doesn't mean that they ignore what is sent to them -- so it may very well be that if a subscore goes up they take note of it. (As I noted above, when my d. asked the ad coms of selective colleges, they all said they would look at both test administrations and encouraged her to send both score reports.) Given the fact that my d. was admitted to highly selective colleges with low end ACT composites (28/27) - it means that either the tests weren't all that important to the schools in any case, or else they did give her the most favorable reading of the combined scores.</p>
<p>A lot of colleges in ACT-dominant parts of the country use ACT subscores for course placement, and report ACT subscores in Common Data Set filings. ACT has done a lot of research on subscores as predictors of college readiness. </p>
<p>And, the colleges themselves don't benefit from 'strongest class ever' press releases to alumni and donors? If it did not benefit colleges to superscore, they would not. IMO, it has absolutely nothing to to with CB; if it did, why would the ACT Corp not encourage the same?</p>
<p>It's such a big business that IMO if the companies are happy somehow so are the colleges.</p>
<p>By the way ACT indirectly does encourage you to take the test many times because you can take the test as many times as you want and only report your best score, and believe me many people do.</p>
<p>The ones that are saved from this are the ones that take the tests very early (10th grade and early 11th) and do so well that they don't need to retake (even though their original intention was to take them a few times).</p>