<p>
[quote]
A 36 is roughly 1/4000 while a 2400 is about 1/5500. However, that isn't the complete story, because most of the smarter people prefer the SAT over the ACT, which increases the frequency of 2400s.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The concordance tables are based on the results of 300,000 students who took both tests. Is there a reason to think these students were, in aggregate, smarter on the days they took the SAT?</p>
<p>Of course, one could say that a true "perfect" score on the ACT is achieved when 36 is earned on every section (net 144). Such scores are rarer than SAT top scores. Perhaps they should be more prestigious?</p>
<p>Actually I find it remarkable that both tests manage to have ceilings which seem to be reached by roughly the same percentage of the population. And, as I recall, the tests yield results that correlate at .90 or better. In spite of the different approaches they use, they really are very close to testing the same thing, which is why both are now universally accepted.</p>
<p>2400, no question. maybe it's just that i've only heard of ONE bad ACT score in my entire life and the rest 31+....and that I've only heard one SAT score over 1800 so far at my school...</p>
<p>2400 are more common than 36s because sooo many more people take the SAT. It is a much more widely used test especially for top students applying ot top schools. While yes there are exception, the vast majority take the SAT.</p>
<p>Thats why only 30% of students submit ACT scores to a lot of schools.</p>