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.

You are wrong.

Admissions officers don't care how an applicant gets to 34 or 1500. Get there, and then they can consider the rest of the app. They really don't give a damn if you get a 33 or 1450 on the first pass. Hit 34 or 1500 ultimately. It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of attempts.

- said nobody, ever, whose own score or whose kid’s score was a 1600 or 36 in one attempt

DP. My kid got a 36 in one attempt, and PP is right. The score is just a threshold the kid has to cross for further consideration.

Untrue, and the evidence of that is right there in the CDS. Schools want the reported 25th to 75th percentile range to be as high as possible, and the pathway to achieving that goal is to accumulate the highest scores possible. Suggesting they are indifferent when choosing between two applicants who are identical but for the fact that one has a 36 and the other has a 34 or 35 is obviously incompatible with what we know of their agenda to boost their 75th percentile.

If all of you “34 is just as good as 36, the schools don’t even check once you meet the 34 standard” experts were right, why would the standardized testing portion of the CDS simply state that the “minimum threshold” is X?

As far as one-and-done, the poise to nail a 36 in one setting, given the pace of the ACT, absolutely has significant meaning over another a student taking four or five administrations to cobble together a 34 or 35. Cannot even believe this needs to be re-stated …

Any score 34 and above is 99th percentile

Good enough for serious consideration, don't you think?

*why wouldn’t

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.

You are wrong.

Admissions officers don't care how an applicant gets to 34 or 1500. Get there, and then they can consider the rest of the app. They really don't give a damn if you get a 33 or 1450 on the first pass. Hit 34 or 1500 ultimately. It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of attempts.

- said nobody, ever, whose own score or whose kid’s score was a 1600 or 36 in one attempt

DP. My kid got a 36 in one attempt, and PP is right. The score is just a threshold the kid has to cross for further consideration.

Untrue, and the evidence of that is right there in the CDS. Schools want the reported 25th to 75th percentile range to be as high as possible, and the pathway to achieving that goal is to accumulate the highest scores possible. Suggesting they are indifferent when choosing between two applicants who are identical but for the fact that one has a 36 and the other has a 34 or 35 is obviously incompatible with what we know of their agenda to boost their 75th percentile.

If all of you “34 is just as good as 36, the schools don’t even check once you meet the 34 standard” experts were right, why would the standardized testing portion of the CDS simply state that the “minimum threshold” is X?

As far as one-and-done, the poise to nail a 36 in one setting, given the pace of the ACT, absolutely has significant meaning over another a student taking four or five administrations to cobble together a 34 or 35. Cannot even believe this needs to be re-stated …

OP here. Thanks for the many insights.

Interesting to hear all the discussion about one and done 36 scores. My older one was one of those 36 one and done, so this is why I am trying to understand the multiple test strategy with my daughter. She is taking the test much earlier than my older one, so my hope is she could possibly approach a 35 (although she is determined to do as well as her brother).

From what I understand, Science and English are the easiest sections to improve. Considering she got 35 on the Math and Reading, the possibility of getting a 35 superscore (or even composite) is doable. Hopefully her next test will have a 35 composite and that will make her eligible for all the schools. She really hasn't expressed any interest in schools like Yale and Harvard, but she has one particular top 20 school as her first choice that does accept ACT superscores, so that is a relief.

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.

You are wrong.

Admissions officers don't care how an applicant gets to 34 or 1500. Get there, and then they can consider the rest of the app. They really don't give a damn if you get a 33 or 1450 on the first pass. Hit 34 or 1500 ultimately. It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of attempts.

- said nobody, ever, whose own score or whose kid’s score was a 1600 or 36 in one attempt

DP. My kid got a 36 in one attempt, and PP is right. The score is just a threshold the kid has to cross for further consideration.

Anonymous wrote:All they want is to keep their 75%ile reported score high, and to satisfy other "institutional priorities".

This is what my thoughts are. This is why many schools stayed test optional.

Anonymous wrote: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.

I did check the website, and you’re wrong. See the first question on this page: https://admission.brown.edu/ask/standardized-tests

All they want is to keep their 75%ile reported score high, and to satisfy other "institutional priorities".

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.

You are wrong.

Admissions officers don't care how an applicant gets to 34 or 1500. Get there, and then they can consider the rest of the app. They really don't give a damn if you get a 33 or 1450 on the first pass. Hit 34 or 1500 ultimately. It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of attempts.

Bingo

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.

not PP, but we were told at highly selective schools the best outcome is a first try single test 35-36 composite. This is opposed to multiple tries to build up composite. If not applying to highly selective schools it probably doesn't matter

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.

You are wrong.

Admissions officers don't care how an applicant gets to 34 or 1500. Get there, and then they can consider the rest of the app. They really don't give a damn if you get a 33 or 1450 on the first pass. Hit 34 or 1500 ultimately. It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of attempts.

Per the PP, many elite schools do not accept ACT superscores at all.

Given this, it’s reasonable to wonder if amoung the schools that do accept superscores—and also have access to the full set of scores from each individual test session that went into the super score (via the Common App)—might view an applicant who earned a 36 in a single sitting differently than one who needed multiple attempts to achieve a 35. While the final scores are only one point apart, the applicant who earned a 36 in one sitting could be seen as a stronger test-taker.

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.

You are wrong.

Admissions officers don't care how an applicant gets to 34 or 1500. Get there, and then they can consider the rest of the app. They really don't give a damn if you get a 33 or 1450 on the first pass. Hit 34 or 1500 ultimately. It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of attempts.

- said nobody, ever, whose own score or whose kid’s score was a 1600 or 36 in one attempt

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.

You are wrong.

Admissions officers don't care how an applicant gets to 34 or 1500. Get there, and then they can consider the rest of the app. They really don't give a damn if you get a 33 or 1450 on the first pass. Hit 34 or 1500 ultimately. It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of attempts.

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.

Just to clarify. The Common App has you report your highest scores in each section of the ACT and your highest composite from a single setting (not a superscore). The colleges that superscore will calculate the composite superscore.

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?

Those scores are confirmed upon acceptance. You can't lie if that's what you're thinking.