Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was speaking with an admissions officer at a school in the 20-40 range and they said the most interesting thing. They said their school always wants the sky high SATs because it makes them look good, increase caliber of student, etc but that there isn’t a direct correlation between students they really like and those high scores. Whereas apparently the high ACT students almost always seem intellectual curious and interesting. They hypothesized that this was because the ACT better served kids who read (intellectually curious) whereas SAT is more gamed through studying and of course, there are kids who study who are curious but you don’t need to be curious in order to want to do well on a test. Just an interesting thought I’d love some opinions on. Not saying any kid is better or worse for which test they took and the officer did say they don’t favor either test in admissions.
This is a really stupid post. Until fairly recently the overwhelming majority of applicants to schools on both coasts submitted only the SAT and applicants in the midwest submitted only the ACT. So it's not like most school have a real basis for comparison.
+1. OP appears to have an agenda. I believe OP's kid got a high score in ACT, but failed to get a high score in SAT.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Most kids find the ACT easier.
+ 1. ACT is much easier. In fact, what I heard is non-intellectual students submits ACT because they cannot get a high SAT score.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That’s interesting. The ACT rewards speed, so it makes sense that it would reward those who read a lot (more than just what’s required for school).
Anecdotally, my DC did better on the ACT, which surprised me a bit, since math is not his strong suit, and I thought he’d benefit from having more time there. But it wasn’t even close.
My DC does conform to the hypothesis. He is a voracious reader — he’s currently reading a book on the history of the Ottoman Empire for fun, and knows as much about current events and politics as just about anyone I know (and I worked on Capitol Hill). He’s near the top of his class, but he’s not going to waste his time studying stuff he’s not interested in any more than he has to, so his grades aren’t perfect. That said, his teachers give him rave reviews, because “he’s always got something interesting to say.” I think he’s going to blossom in college when he gets to focus on things that he’s passionate about, and he’s going to be one of those kids that professors enjoy teaching.
So, one anecdote in favor of the theory, I guess.
Would you mind sharing a little more about this? What level of math had he completed when he took the ACT? And how big was the difference in his score between ACT and SAT?
DP here. Look, another poster's experience on this really isn't helpful to yours or anyone else's. Just have your kid take both the SAT and ACT and see what the results are. They're often unpredictable.
Example. We had three kids take both. One got a 600 on the SAT verbal, a 710 on the math -- but a 34 on the English section of the ACT and a 30 on the math. Another got a 770 on the SAT verbal and a 660 on the math, but only had a 24 composite on the ACT and didn't crack anywhere near a 30 on any subject. The third got virtually identical scores on both. And for what it worth, the one who got the 770 on the SAT verbal was a voracious reader, and the one who got the 34 on the English ACT was not. Not even close.
Look, my kid has anxiety and hates standardized testing, so I’m trying to help them avoid having to take any more tests than they have to. Interested to know what “math is not his strong suit” meant in this context. But thanks for sharing your experience (immediately after noting that “another poster’s experience on this really isn’t helpful to yours or anyone else’s, LOL).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was speaking with an admissions officer at a school in the 20-40 range and they said the most interesting thing. They said their school always wants the sky high SATs because it makes them look good, increase caliber of student, etc but that there isn’t a direct correlation between students they really like and those high scores. Whereas apparently the high ACT students almost always seem intellectual curious and interesting. They hypothesized that this was because the ACT better served kids who read (intellectually curious) whereas SAT is more gamed through studying and of course, there are kids who study who are curious but you don’t need to be curious in order to want to do well on a test. Just an interesting thought I’d love some opinions on. Not saying any kid is better or worse for which test they took and the officer did say they don’t favor either test in admissions.
This is a really stupid post. Until fairly recently the overwhelming majority of applicants to schools on both coasts submitted only the SAT and applicants in the midwest submitted only the ACT. So it's not like most school have a real basis for comparison.
Anonymous wrote:Most kids find the ACT easier.
Anonymous wrote:Figuring out which test to take is as easy as downloading a sample SAT from the CB and a sample ACT from ACT and taking both.
One of my kids was stronger per by 150 points on the SAT. TJ kid with ADHD/ slow processing speed. His verbal was consistent across SAT/ACT. But math was much higher on SAT. He ended up with a 740 V/780 M. He could not break a 30 on math ACT without using extended time. And he hated using extended time because he didn’t need it on verbal and science, and it made the test too long to sustain attention. So, he submitted a high SAT.
My other kids is the stereotypical wonky reader described above. SAT of 1370 (730V/640M). Concordance is a 30 ACT, 27M, 34V.
Her ACT OTOH was a 34– concordance of 1510 SAT. 36 Eng, 36 Reading, 33 Science, 31 math. Concordance is 800 V, 710 M. ACT was 140 points higher.
Have your kid take the practice tests and figure out which test works best for them. It can make a huge difference.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That’s interesting. The ACT rewards speed, so it makes sense that it would reward those who read a lot (more than just what’s required for school).
Anecdotally, my DC did better on the ACT, which surprised me a bit, since math is not his strong suit, and I thought he’d benefit from having more time there. But it wasn’t even close.
My DC does conform to the hypothesis. He is a voracious reader — he’s currently reading a book on the history of the Ottoman Empire for fun, and knows as much about current events and politics as just about anyone I know (and I worked on Capitol Hill). He’s near the top of his class, but he’s not going to waste his time studying stuff he’s not interested in any more than he has to, so his grades aren’t perfect. That said, his teachers give him rave reviews, because “he’s always got something interesting to say.” I think he’s going to blossom in college when he gets to focus on things that he’s passionate about, and he’s going to be one of those kids that professors enjoy teaching.
So, one anecdote in favor of the theory, I guess.
Would you mind sharing a little more about this? What level of math had he completed when he took the ACT? And how big was the difference in his score between ACT and SAT?
DP here. Look, another poster's experience on this really isn't helpful to yours or anyone else's. Just have your kid take both the SAT and ACT and see what the results are. They're often unpredictable.
Example. We had three kids take both. One got a 600 on the SAT verbal, a 710 on the math -- but a 34 on the English section of the ACT and a 30 on the math. Another got a 770 on the SAT verbal and a 660 on the math, but only had a 24 composite on the ACT and didn't crack anywhere near a 30 on any subject. The third got virtually identical scores on both. And for what it worth, the one who got the 770 on the SAT verbal was a voracious reader, and the one who got the 34 on the English ACT was not. Not even close.
Look, my kid has anxiety and hates standardized testing, so I’m trying to help them avoid having to take any more tests than they have to. Interested to know what “math is not his strong suit” meant in this context. But thanks for sharing your experience (immediately after noting that “another poster’s experience on this really isn’t helpful to yours or anyone else’s, LOL).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That’s interesting. The ACT rewards speed, so it makes sense that it would reward those who read a lot (more than just what’s required for school).
Anecdotally, my DC did better on the ACT, which surprised me a bit, since math is not his strong suit, and I thought he’d benefit from having more time there. But it wasn’t even close.
My DC does conform to the hypothesis. He is a voracious reader — he’s currently reading a book on the history of the Ottoman Empire for fun, and knows as much about current events and politics as just about anyone I know (and I worked on Capitol Hill). He’s near the top of his class, but he’s not going to waste his time studying stuff he’s not interested in any more than he has to, so his grades aren’t perfect. That said, his teachers give him rave reviews, because “he’s always got something interesting to say.” I think he’s going to blossom in college when he gets to focus on things that he’s passionate about, and he’s going to be one of those kids that professors enjoy teaching.
So, one anecdote in favor of the theory, I guess.
Would you mind sharing a little more about this? What level of math had he completed when he took the ACT? And how big was the difference in his score between ACT and SAT?
DP here. Look, another poster's experience on this really isn't helpful to yours or anyone else's. Just have your kid take both the SAT and ACT and see what the results are. They're often unpredictable.
Example. We had three kids take both. One got a 600 on the SAT verbal, a 710 on the math -- but a 34 on the English section of the ACT and a 30 on the math. Another got a 770 on the SAT verbal and a 660 on the math, but only had a 24 composite on the ACT and didn't crack anywhere near a 30 on any subject. The third got virtually identical scores on both. And for what it worth, the one who got the 770 on the SAT verbal was a voracious reader, and the one who got the 34 on the English ACT was not. Not even close.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ACT is a test of speed.
This. My kid is intellectual, curious, a voracious speed reader (checks out a dozen books at a time from the library; read War and Peace for fun while at a sleep away camp), but has somewhat slower processing speed, and the SAT score was hundreds of points better (took it once) than the ACT score.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That’s interesting. The ACT rewards speed, so it makes sense that it would reward those who read a lot (more than just what’s required for school).
Anecdotally, my DC did better on the ACT, which surprised me a bit, since math is not his strong suit, and I thought he’d benefit from having more time there. But it wasn’t even close.
My DC does conform to the hypothesis. He is a voracious reader — he’s currently reading a book on the history of the Ottoman Empire for fun, and knows as much about current events and politics as just about anyone I know (and I worked on Capitol Hill). He’s near the top of his class, but he’s not going to waste his time studying stuff he’s not interested in any more than he has to, so his grades aren’t perfect. That said, his teachers give him rave reviews, because “he’s always got something interesting to say.” I think he’s going to blossom in college when he gets to focus on things that he’s passionate about, and he’s going to be one of those kids that professors enjoy teaching.
So, one anecdote in favor of the theory, I guess.
Would you mind sharing a little more about this? What level of math had he completed when he took the ACT? And how big was the difference in his score between ACT and SAT?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That’s interesting. The ACT rewards speed, so it makes sense that it would reward those who read a lot (more than just what’s required for school).
Anecdotally, my DC did better on the ACT, which surprised me a bit, since math is not his strong suit, and I thought he’d benefit from having more time there. But it wasn’t even close.
My DC does conform to the hypothesis. He is a voracious reader — he’s currently reading a book on the history of the Ottoman Empire for fun, and knows as much about current events and politics as just about anyone I know (and I worked on Capitol Hill). He’s near the top of his class, but he’s not going to waste his time studying stuff he’s not interested in any more than he has to, so his grades aren’t perfect. That said, his teachers give him rave reviews, because “he’s always got something interesting to say.” I think he’s going to blossom in college when he gets to focus on things that he’s passionate about, and he’s going to be one of those kids that professors enjoy teaching.
So, one anecdote in favor of the theory, I guess.
Would you mind sharing a little more about this? What level of math had he completed when he took the ACT? And how big was the difference in his score between ACT and SAT?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ACT is a test of speed.
This. My kid is intellectual, curious, a voracious speed reader (checks out a dozen books at a time from the library; read War and Peace for fun while at a sleep away camp), but has somewhat slower processing speed, and the SAT score was hundreds of points better (took it once) than the ACT score.
Anonymous wrote:ACT is a test of speed.
Anonymous wrote:That’s interesting. The ACT rewards speed, so it makes sense that it would reward those who read a lot (more than just what’s required for school).
Anecdotally, my DC did better on the ACT, which surprised me a bit, since math is not his strong suit, and I thought he’d benefit from having more time there. But it wasn’t even close.
My DC does conform to the hypothesis. He is a voracious reader — he’s currently reading a book on the history of the Ottoman Empire for fun, and knows as much about current events and politics as just about anyone I know (and I worked on Capitol Hill). He’s near the top of his class, but he’s not going to waste his time studying stuff he’s not interested in any more than he has to, so his grades aren’t perfect. That said, his teachers give him rave reviews, because “he’s always got something interesting to say.” I think he’s going to blossom in college when he gets to focus on things that he’s passionate about, and he’s going to be one of those kids that professors enjoy teaching.
So, one anecdote in favor of the theory, I guess.