<p>It seems like every time I look at someone's score breakdown (or it's told to me), the person's Science score is lower than his/her scores in the other sections - and usually by 3 or 4 points. This is unusual to me, since the Science section isn't really that difficult (in my opinion, the Reading section is harder), and the cutoff for "college readiness" as determined by ACT is higher for Science than for the other sections (I think it's 26 for Science and 23-24 for the others, but I'm not sure). Why does everyone have such a hard time with it?</p>
<p>Several reasons including time pessure, it is a type of test, dealing mostly with data and graphs rather actually being on science, that is unfamiliar to first-time test takers, and it usually takes few wrong answers to have your score dive, e.g., on a number of test versions one wrong drops you to a 34 section score and a handful wrong takes you out of the 30s. Based on prior reports it is the section that often sees the most improvement when there is any improvement for repeat test-takers.</p>
<p>I got a 35 on the science section when I took it.</p>
<p>But from what my friends said, to add on to what Drusba said, it is the last major section of the test (second to last with writing), and the mind is getting worn out by then. Concentration is not as good, and since the curve is such that your score drops by each wrong question, sometimes 2 points by 1 wrong question, people get low scores.</p>
<p>Or if you’ve never prepared for the ACT before, the science section at first seems tricky. That’s what happened to me…I did alright on science but I was hoping for higher.</p>
<p>The curve is harsh, but the national percentiles are high. For example a 27 is 91st percentile.</p>
<p>idk i 36’d it lol</p>
<p>Out of my two composite 34s, I got a 31 on one Science section and a 35 on the other.</p>
<p>I got 36 on math, 31 on reading, 30 on writing and science, which is kind of backwards from what I was expecting, because my reading/vocab is kind of mediocre and my grammar and science should be pretty good. Overall it was 32 composite, with no preparation. I guess I could’ve easily gotten 33-34 composite with some preparation, but oh well.</p>
<p>2 reasons time crunch and it isn’t really testing science knowledge (which some prep books and companies don’t understand) it’s testing data analysis skill, needed for science but really statistics.</p>
<p>I don’t think it should test science knowledge, because not everyone takes the same science classes. Some people at my high school didn’t take basic Biology until they were juniors.</p>
<p>^agree about testing science knowledge, trying to point out that many don’t know that and are not really prepared for the test (including some test prep companies; read a question from one of them that expected a test taker to know the planets in order from the sun, while not tough is some pretty specific knowledge that some will not know). </p>
<p>Simple way to do this test;
in the science there are sections with either 5, 6 or 7 questions. For the 7 question section you need to read the paragraph(s) for the 5 and 6 question sections just read the questions and find the answer in the graph/table. Time is the biggest problem for most with this part of the ACT.</p>
<p>I guess I can see that. On each of the other sections during my ACTs, I had about 10-20 minutes left, but on Science I barely finished in time.</p>
<p>I really agree with what everyone says about the time constraints. My proctor didn’t give us a time warning on this section, and I didn’t finish–I ended up leaving two blank. I got lucky and had a lenient curve on mine (-2 was a 35), which probably saved my 36 composite.</p>
<p>I think partly because some people aren’t to familiar with the science section. As someone who is use to taking the SATs, the Science section was really esoteric to me. Some questions I knew, some I had no idea what was going on.</p>
<p>It’s just something people aren’t as used to. The first time I took it I got a 31; not bad, not awesome. Now that I know what to expect I think I can raise it. My biggest issue was time; because of the information-overload I got bogged down and didn’t work as fast as I normally do.</p>
<p>I thought it was really easy! I had no idea what to expect, but I got a 36. It was basically just paying attention to details and analyzing data. By the end, I stopped reading the info at the start of a set of questions because I found it just threw in a bunch of big words and took a long time to process. Instead, I looked at graphs and questions first, then read the info if there wasn’t anything I could easily answer from the graphs alone.
And I did a lot of putting my hands over my ears because it helps me concentrate!</p>
<p>“it’s just something people aren’t used to.”</p>
<p>Many high school classes teach scientific content but fail to put it in a critical scientific context. </p>
<p>Cell Cycle</p>
<p>Pro
Meta
Ana
Telo</p>
<p>^^ they learn that. </p>
<p>But what they are never asked is why. So when completing scientists say contrary views it’s seen as illogical.</p>
<p>Most of the exam however is graph reading. Many students go blank when they see very complex graphs that take several pieces of information to answer each question. If you aren’t in that mindset when you take the exam you won’t do well.</p>
<p>^That’s probably the best explanation I’ve heard so far.</p>
<p>It’s the most reasoning based section on the test (followed by math and English). The reading section is pretty useless though.</p>
<p>^^^ it’s a check of literacy. </p>
<p>Yeah it’s pointless and boring AS … </p>
<p>But if you can’t read four passages and come to some very simple inferences and get 30-40/ questions write you probably aren’t ready for college leveled reading. </p>
<p>Also, for me anyway its the most fluctuating score wise. My three ACT’s i got 33,30 and 27… -.-</p>