<p>What I mean by this is would you rather have the allotted times (45 min for E, 60 min for M, etc.) or would you rather have 175 minutes (45+60+35+35) to complete all the sections, having the ability to go through all of them without any restrictions?</p>
<p>Personally, I'd rather have the second option. It allows people that are very advanced in one subject to use that to their advantage in other subjects. </p>
<p>Here's a scenario.</p>
<p>On my first ACT test back in February I scored a 36 in the math section, but it only took me approximately 30 minutes to do all the questions. That gave me 30 minutes to do either absolutely nothing or just review. If I'm gifted with math to the point where I have the ability to do 60 questions correctly in 30 minutes, then I should be able to use those other 30 minutes to answer other questions throughout the test. Those 30 minutes would be used for reading and perhaps science (depending on how hard it is), which would benefit me because reading tends to be my weakest part of the ACT. This doesn't just go for me, but for others as well. I know people that could pull a 35+ in the reading section with more than 5 minutes left on the clock, something I could never accomplish. I also know people that could complete the english section in 30 minutes and do fairly well, so this would benefit them as well. </p>
<p>I don't see what harm there is in doing the whole test in 175 minutes straight-through other than the fact that it doesn't give colleges a depiction of a students ability in the 4 various areas given that they were taken separately. I don't find this to be a big problem though because in the end the main point colleges look at in your ACT is the composite score, and all students would be testing under that same condition, thus making composite scores comparable.</p>
<p>What do you all think of the matter?</p>
<p>I'll add anything that I feel I forgot to mention (because I do feel as though I forgot something lol).</p>
<p>The downfall of this is that it would take away the break in between the four sections; no one would be able to eat, relax, or go to the bathroom without sacrificing some of his test-time.</p>
<p>I agree, but endurance comes into the matter. If you eat well before and take care of everything then you should be fine. If you do, however, have a medical condition, in which you have to go to the restroom more frequently than others, then that could be assessed. Before the test even begins the proctors are supposed to ask if anyone needs special time-associated accommodations, or something of that sort. I’m pretty sure proof of such a condition is eligible to receive these accommodations.</p>
<p>That’s way too long to be taking a test without a break. For me, an ACT section is really intense and I go as quickly and accurately as possible. That would be really hard to do for three hours. What about bathroom/water breaks? Also, time management would drop many people’s scores.</p>
<p>It’s an interesting idea, though in my opinion, the ACT is testing your college readiness, including testing under timed conditions. In high school/college, when you take your finals, you turn in your test, and you leave the classroom, you can’t just go to your next test and take it. I like your idea though, but I see a problem in having too much time: you’re going to have people who are going to take a lot of extra time on the math or reading or whatever section they’re weak at and then rush at the end to try to finish the other sections. I would like to see it as kinda of a block schedule, with you first taking English/Science then Math/Reading, with a break in the middle. There, you could get a break and have extra time for sections if you wanted.</p>
<p>I also like that idea, because I finish math and science fairly early. So I could use that extra time for reading and maybe English if it were needed.</p>
<p>^^^ That’s where preparation comes in for it. The questions on the math section are always going to be similar, so if you finish it in 60 minutes all the time, by working your speed you could get down to 50 or 40 minutes, hence allowing 20 minutes of leeway for all the other sections. </p>
<p>Also, time management is an important aspect of life. Being able to manage time better than others greatly benefits you, and the way you would do it on this exam would affect your composite score. As for breaks I don’t see why you can’t take care of everything right before the exam. When I took the THEA it was 5 hours long and they didn’t allow a single break. Although, if you wanted a break they could just call a break at 87.5 minutes and then you’d leave off wherever you were when you get back from the break. </p>
<p>^^ Think about it though. The way the current ACT is, a 36 in the math using all 60 minutes to answer the questions, and getting a 36 using only 30 minutes on the test has the same exact value, yet I think we could all vouch for the 30 minutes being a lot more impressive. If someone has such an advantage over others, they should be able to use it to their advantage and proceed to look at the other portions of the test and work on those. As for the break you mentioned, I think the one I stated to the post above yours would be a better one. And again, as I said earlier, time management will affect your composite score, but it is a key factor in college and life, so having good time management skills should be a necessity on this test. </p>
<p>one thing to consider here is “superscoring”, where a college will take the best parts of your act scores and combine them
(for example if you took the test 4 times and your results were
W: 32, 30, 33, 32
M: 35, 33, 33, 34
R: 33, 34, 34, 35
S: 32, 32, 33, 32
your “superscored” score would be W: 33, M: 35, R: 35, S: 33)</p>
<p>with an open ended test, there would be no superscoring because students could take the test four times and spend 175 minutes on each section.</p>
<p>Ah, true. That’s the best argument put out there yet. I dislike superscoring though. I know people who go through the first 2 experiments in science and based on how they feel, they’ll either guess at the rest or actually try. They’ll try if the exam is fairly easy, but they’ll guess if they don’t think it’ll add up to a good superscored score. This reliance on waiting for an easy science examination doesn’t flow well with me. Superscoring and taking the whole test in 175 minutes is something to think about though.</p>
<p>I usually finish the english section in less than 30 minutes and score high 30’s on them. I would be in favor for something like this because then I could have amore time to finish math and science lol. but the superscoring thing is a good point. people would come in, finish 1 test in like 130min so they know they had all of them right, and then not fill in or randomly bubble the rest.</p>
lol</p>