Okay, I’m about to rant a bit. First, I would like to present my argument. I believe the ACT is ludicrous to say the least. I feel this way because the ACT focuses more on how well you can remember information that you have already moved on from and how quickly and efficiently you can read a passage to find an answer. I don’t believe in society’s definition of “smart”. In today’s world, being “smart” is basically how well you can remember things. If you are taught something today and you remember how to do it on a test next week you’re considered “smart”. But what about two years later when you take the ACT, you’ve forgotten all of the information you once knew well mainly because you weren’t practicing that one topic every day. Why does addiction or subtraction come almost naturally to us? Because we use it on almost a daily basis. The motivation behind the ACT is understandable. I believe colleges should have a reference point for a student’s level of effectiveness in a classroom. But I believe colleges should make overall grades throughout high school more important than one big test. In conclusion, I think colleges basing a student’s capability on one test such as the ACT is unfair and the system should be changed. I’m also willing to discuss my opinion and learn from other peoples’ viewpoints.
@SuperPickle194 Most colleges already do.
I agree that standardized testing has its flaws, that’s for sure. But many of the skills needed on the SAT/ACT are also needed in college.
How can a college compare students across high schools without a standardized testing process? Grades are subjective. You can study for the ACT or SAT to refresh your memory. And reading comprehension is critical in college.
I agree that the ACT is a weak test that measures nothing important. All incarnations of the SAT have been superior.
Why is the ACT even a thing? Because accepting both tests allows colleges and universities to receive more applications and thus lower their admissions rates. Lower admissions rates lead to higher rankings from U.S. News and other sources.
Many college classes base your grade on one to four big tests.
My children attend a highly regarded public school system. For the most competitive colleges, the Naviance scattergrams show a hard cutoff for GPA and a soft cutoff for test scores. For example, almost nobody gets into Harvard with a GPA below 4.5, but it seems indifferent whether a student received a 2200 or a 2400.
Then take the SAT
Apparently colleges disagree. If anyone really feels the ACT is a sham/ludicrous then they should take the SAT. I second @GMTplus7
Or, as I wrote above, they may agree that the ACT is inferior but believe it very much in their interest to accept the ACT regardless.
@jgoggs Then take the ACT, get a 36 and apply to Harvard. What do you want people to say? It’s a fair exam.
If you don’t like the ACT, don’t take it. Simple as that.
I’m not sure what you’re asking me, @Middleman68. The original poster complained that the ACT was not a good test. I agreed. Not much more to it than that.
The OP is correct about weighing HS performance vs a baseline, but because of the wide variance in high school curriculum , teaching effectiveness, grades and reporting, colleges need to use something to compare students between high schools. I don’t think either the ACT or SAT are particularly good tests, but they are a reasonable measure of what a HS student should have learned by 10th or 11th grade. They don’t really require more than a refresher and familiarity with the test format.
If you don’t like the idea of standardized testing, look at schools that don’t require standardized testing. Many colleges see merit in having standardized test scores, and accept either the ACT or SAT - it’s not like you’re forced into the ACT. But if you don’t like either test, then look at these schools: http://www.fairtest.org/university/optional
^ I agree with poster above. There are many schools that are top notch and don’t require testing.