Is an ACT Superscore less impactful than a single test composite score?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if the applicant has taken the ACT twice, but the second time went up in every category. So their highest scores are from one sitting, but it's not their only sitting?

To echo the PP, you don't report the lower scores.

First, understand that many colleges will just ask you to report the scores in the Common App, which asks for your highest scores in each section and highest composite. Colleges that take scores this way do not see the lower scores. Second, the schools that ask for an official report at the time of application will only see the test dates you choose to send them.

The only school that requires applicants to report all their scores, including the lower ones, is Georgetown.

Can someone please explain how colleges that accept self reported scores validate those scores? Or do they just take the student's word?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if the applicant has taken the ACT twice, but the second time went up in every category. So their highest scores are from one sitting, but it's not their only sitting?

To echo the PP, you don't report the lower scores.

First, understand that many colleges will just ask you to report the scores in the Common App, which asks for your highest scores in each section and highest composite. Colleges that take scores this way do not see the lower scores. Second, the schools that ask for an official report at the time of application will only see the test dates you choose to send them.

The only school that requires applicants to report all their scores, including the lower ones, is Georgetown.

Can someone please explain how colleges that accept self reported scores validate those scores? Or do they just take the student's word?

If the student is accepted and decides to enroll, the school then requires an official score report to be sent directly from the testing agency.

[Anonymous]

There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD got a 34 composite score on her first ACT test this Sept. as a junior. She wants to get at least a 35 composite to be competitive for her top choice school, which has a 25th-75th percentile of 33-35.

For the section scores she got Math 35, Reading 35, Science 32, English 32.

Going forward to prep for the next test, my gut tells me she should focus on Science. I think the English score was a weird fluke considering she took 6 practice tests and scored 34 or 35 on all of them. However on Math, the highest practice test score she got was a 33.

My fear is that on the next test she might not do as well on Math, and that would be a bad look. Do the schools care weather the score they record is a superscore or a single test composite score? If it doesn't matter, then I won't have her stress about trying to keep/improve the math score and just hone on improving the Science score.

Thanks for any insights.

Don't get tripped up by some of the misinformation on this threat! ACT superscoring is actually less common than SAT superscoring. For example, I know that Harvard and Princeton do not accept ACT superscores; they evaluate by the single sitting. However, both schools do accept SAT superscores. (From Harvard's Admissions website: "We do not create superscores for applicants. We will evaluate your application noting the highest test scores in each section across test dates for the SAT and your strongest sitting for the ACT. ")

There are compelling reasons why some colleges prefer a high ACT score from a single sitting. A composite score from one test date can demonstrate consistency in performance, suggesting mastery of content under test conditions. This aligns well with the rigorous academic environments at these institutions.

Moreover, highly selective schools may view a high single-sitting score as a better indicator of a student’s ability to perform under pressure — a critical skill in competitive academic settings.

Finally, this preference might signal to admissions committees that the student is less reliant on multiple attempts to achieve high scores, which could be seen as more impressive. If your daughter's top-choice schools value this consistency or do not superscore, it may be best to focus on maintaining or improving her one-time composite score rather than relying on superscoring.

[Anonymous]

OP, look at your DD's college list. And then look at each college's website.

As of last year, Yale, Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, Texas A&M University, and the University of Washington did NOT superscore the ACT. They only considered composite scores from a single test sitting. Always check the school's actual admissions website, not DCurbanmom.

One possible reason these schools may avoid ACT superscoring is the ACT's emphasis on measuring academics overall, reflecting consistency in performance and college preparation. The SAT in contrast is a skills-based test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a slight advantage to single sitting score, but only slight. I'd say she should go ahead and retake. Only Georgetown asks to see all the scores anyway.

You're making this up. Schools don't care---they all say this on tours. Over and over again.

Stop trying to make s$%T up just to cause anxiety in other parents.

Wow. Chill.

no, I hate when people come on here pretending to have definitive news on something when they are in fact just making it up.

I am sorry PP, but you are misstaken. Some schools accept ACT and/or SAT superscores and other schools do not. I'm sure that you heard this information on the handful of tours that you attended with your student, but this is not the case for every school.

OP, again, the Admissions websites for each school are the best source of reliable information. It's crucial to double-check each school's policy to avoid any confusion. Admissions policies, particularly regarding standardized tests, can be complex and vary widely even within similar types of institutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD got a 34 composite score on her first ACT test this Sept. as a junior. She wants to get at least a 35 composite to be competitive for her top choice school, which has a 25th-75th percentile of 33-35.

For the section scores she got Math 35, Reading 35, Science 32, English 32.

Going forward to prep for the next test, my gut tells me she should focus on Science. I think the English score was a weird fluke considering she took 6 practice tests and scored 34 or 35 on all of them. However on Math, the highest practice test score she got was a 33.

My fear is that on the next test she might not do as well on Math, and that would be a bad look. Do the schools care weather the score they record is a superscore or a single test composite score? If it doesn't matter, then I won't have her stress about trying to keep/improve the math score and just hone on improving the Science score.

Thanks for any insights.

Don't get tripped up by some of the misinformation on this threat! ACT superscoring is actually less common than SAT superscoring. For example, I know that Harvard and Princeton do not accept ACT superscores; they evaluate by the single sitting. However, both schools do accept SAT superscores. (From Harvard's Admissions website: "We do not create superscores for applicants. We will evaluate your application noting the highest test scores in each section across test dates for the SAT and your strongest sitting for the ACT. ")

There are compelling reasons why some colleges prefer a high ACT score from a single sitting. A composite score from one test date can demonstrate consistency in performance, suggesting mastery of content under test conditions. This aligns well with the rigorous academic environments at these institutions.

Moreover, highly selective schools may view a high single-sitting score as a better indicator of a student’s ability to perform under pressure — a critical skill in competitive academic settings.

Finally, this preference might signal to admissions committees that the student is less reliant on multiple attempts to achieve high scores, which could be seen as more impressive. If your daughter's top-choice schools value this consistency or do not superscore, it may be best to focus on maintaining or improving her one-time composite score rather than relying on superscoring.

For colleges that accept superscoring, a superscore is a superscore - whether it's the SAT or ACT. If a college doesn't superscore the ACT it will tell you . Georgetown, a couple of Ivies and Carnegie Mellon come to mind.
95% of colleges superscore both the SAT and ACT. A high percentage of applicants take these tests more than once. The "one and done" test takers are rare and no additional value is accrued here. If you're going to submit a test score, maximize it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

Actually, a 35 is equally impressive as a 36. The application includes a lot more than test scores. A 35 and a 36 are both excellent scores and will get that second look. It's the other parts of the application that matter after that. FWIW, my kid was a one and done 36. His score was actually a 35.5. If he was a 35.25, he would have had a 35 score. That could be a matter of a couple wrong answers in a section.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

Actually, a 35 is equally impressive as a 36. The application includes a lot more than test scores. A 35 and a 36 are both excellent scores and will get that second look. It's the other parts of the application that matter after that. FWIW, my kid was a one and done 36. His score was actually a 35.5. If he was a 35.25, he would have had a 35 score. That could be a matter of a couple wrong answers in a section.

It’s not equally as impressive. There are far more 35s than 36s. The scores are differentiated for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

Actually, a 35 is equally impressive as a 36. The application includes a lot more than test scores. A 35 and a 36 are both excellent scores and will get that second look. It's the other parts of the application that matter after that. FWIW, my kid was a one and done 36. His score was actually a 35.5. If he was a 35.25, he would have had a 35 score. That could be a matter of a couple wrong answers in a section.

It’s not equally as impressive. There are far more 35s than 36s. The scores are differentiated for a reason.

Sure, but they’re both 99percentile and will end up in the same pile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

Actually, a 35 is equally impressive as a 36. The application includes a lot more than test scores. A 35 and a 36 are both excellent scores and will get that second look. It's the other parts of the application that matter after that. FWIW, my kid was a one and done 36. His score was actually a 35.5. If he was a 35.25, he would have had a 35 score. That could be a matter of a couple wrong answers in a section.

It’s not equally as impressive. There are far more 35s than 36s. The scores are differentiated for a reason.

They are both very impressive and do the job of getting the application a second look. Very rarely is anyone deciding between two applicants based on a 36 vs. a 35. So in that sense, they are equally impressive. It's like saying a 1570 is way better than a 1560. A 1560 converts to a 35 and a 1570 converts to a 36.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

Actually, a 35 is equally impressive as a 36. The application includes a lot more than test scores. A 35 and a 36 are both excellent scores and will get that second look. It's the other parts of the application that matter after that. FWIW, my kid was a one and done 36. His score was actually a 35.5. If he was a 35.25, he would have had a 35 score. That could be a matter of a couple wrong answers in a section.

It’s not equally as impressive. There are far more 35s than 36s. The scores are differentiated for a reason.

They are both very impressive and do the job of getting the application a second look. Very rarely is anyone deciding between two applicants based on a 36 vs. a 35. So in that sense, they are equally impressive. It's like saying a 1570 is way better than a 1560. A 1560 converts to a 35 and a 1570 converts to a 36.

Not quite. A 36 converts to a 1590.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

In context, not really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no advantage for a one sitting 35 vs a 3 test 35. Just none. Once you are in the right range for that school they no longer look at test results. No school goes back and says well this person had a 36 and the other had a 35 so we will take the kid with the 36. The 35 and the 36 qualified them and the decision is on other things. No one looks at that 36 again.

That is straight-up bullshit. Continue to live in your fantasyland where nobody cares how much test scores are frankensteined to get to the finish line, but no self-respecting AO from a Top 50 school is indifferent to the 36 vs. 35 comparison. They’re just not.

It matters. One-and-done 36 is better than one-and-done 35, and both are better than a super scored 36.

Actually, a 35 is equally impressive as a 36. The application includes a lot more than test scores. A 35 and a 36 are both excellent scores and will get that second look. It's the other parts of the application that matter after that. FWIW, my kid was a one and done 36. His score was actually a 35.5. If he was a 35.25, he would have had a 35 score. That could be a matter of a couple wrong answers in a section.

It’s not equally as impressive. There are far more 35s than 36s. The scores are differentiated for a reason.

They are both very impressive and do the job of getting the application a second look. Very rarely is anyone deciding between two applicants based on a 36 vs. a 35. So in that sense, they are equally impressive. It's like saying a 1570 is way better than a 1560. A 1560 converts to a 35 and a 1570 converts to a 36.

Not quite. A 36 converts to a 1590.

True. ACT.org converts 35 to 1540 and 36 to 1590. Also true that this difference likely matters not at all.