OT- 1st ACT Tomorrow

[PaulKonerkbro]

ACT prep has prepared me well! Anyone else taking it?!

 

[cowboysrule48]

ACT prep has prepared me well! Anyone else taking it?!

In my experience. The ACT was much easier than the SAT.

Good luck.

 

[coltsfan23]

ACT prep has prepared me well! Anyone else taking it?!

In my experience. The ACT was much easier than the SAT.

Good luck.

Really? It tests grammar, which is something that you seem to lack.

The ACT isn't too bad. The science is a pain, though.

Best of luck!

 

[gldneagles311]

Man, I am so glad my days of standardized tests are behind me! I thought the ACT was easier than the SAT. I took my last one 3 years ago for grad school...it's the GRE.

So, just relax tomorrow and remember whatever your prep taught you. Good luck...

 

[dethomas07]

I took it back in October, 1991. It helped me to obtained a full scholarship through college!!

Good luck!

David

 

[caseya10781]

Oh so glad my testing days are over, lol.

Good luck!

Casey

 

[J.O.]

The SAT is easier. The sections are much shorter, so if you "freak" during one, then you're not screwed out of 1/4 our score, but rather 1/8 your score. It's easier to stay focused for 20 minute intervals than it is for 60 minute intervals, as far as testing goes.

good luck, seth. my bro is taking it tomorrow. the folks at Acad. Tutoring do a fine job preparing you. My brothers and I all used their services.

 

[wolfmanalfredo]

If you get a good score, your GPA is high school doesn't really matter. I only took it once and I got a 27.

 

[PaulKonerkbro]

I'm aiming mid thirties...that is what my GPA/previous test scores translate to. Hopefully I get it!

 

[wolfmanalfredo]

I'm aiming mid thirties...that is what my GPA/previous test scores translate to. Hopefully I get it!

35 was the highest when I took it. Only 2 people in the state got 35 that year.

 

[J.O.]

If you get a good score, your GPA is high school doesn't really matter. I only took it once and I got a 27.

false. depends on the school you're applying to. big state schools is act, smaller schools tend to be more into GPA.

 

[fengzhang]

I actually tutor the ACT right now and, as a West Coaster, I took the SAT back in HS. The biggest determinant of your score isn't the length of the test or the difficulty of the material but rather the quality of your competition. The SAT and the ACT are always scaled based on percentiles (for example, a 30 would always be equal to the 90 percentile from test to test; that's just an example with made up numbers). I can give an ACT to you and 100 Nobel Prize winners and scale the test based on that and you would probably score at the bottom and end up with a horrendous score. I can give you and 100 high school dropouts the same test, you'd do the same in terms of # of questions right, but suddenly you will get a 35 or a 36 because a 35-36 is usually awarded to the top 1% of performers.

From what I've seen from the handful of students who've taken both tests, the students tend to score higher percentile-wise on the ACT. This suggests that the quality of students taking the ACT isn't quite as high as the quality of students taking the SAT. This may have something to do with the fact that the ACT is popular in the Midwest and South while the SAT is popular in the West and Northeast. Hopefully, I didn't offend anyone with that comment.

 

[PaulKonerkbro]

I actually tutor the ACT right now and, as a West Coaster, I took the SAT back in HS. The biggest determinant of your score isn't the length of the test or the difficulty of the material but rather the quality of your competition. The SAT and the ACT are always scaled based on percentiles (for example, a 30 would always be equal to the 90 percentile from test to test; that's just an example with made up numbers). I can give an ACT to you and 100 Nobel Prize winners and scale the test based on that and you would probably score at the bottom and end up with a horrendous score. I can give you and 100 high school dropouts the same test, you'd do the same in terms of # of questions right, but suddenly you will get a 35 or a 36 because a 35-36 is usually awarded to the top 1% of performers.

From what I've seen from the handful of students who've taken both tests, the students tend to score higher percentile-wise on the ACT. This suggests that the quality of students taking the ACT isn't quite as high as the quality of students taking the SAT. This may have something to do with the fact that the ACT is popular in the Midwest and South while the SAT is popular in the West and Northeast. Hopefully, I didn't offend anyone with that comment.

I am in the Midwest...and I dont really have to take the SAT

 

[J.O.]

I actually tutor the ACT right now and, as a West Coaster, I took the SAT back in HS. The biggest determinant of your score isn't the length of the test or the difficulty of the material but rather the quality of your competition. The SAT and the ACT are always scaled based on percentiles (for example, a 30 would always be equal to the 90 percentile from test to test; that's just an example with made up numbers). I can give an ACT to you and 100 Nobel Prize winners and scale the test based on that and you would probably score at the bottom and end up with a horrendous score. I can give you and 100 high school dropouts the same test, you'd do the same in terms of # of questions right, but suddenly you will get a 35 or a 36 because a 35-36 is usually awarded to the top 1% of performers.

From what I've seen from the handful of students who've taken both tests, the students tend to score higher percentile-wise on the ACT. This suggests that the quality of students taking the ACT isn't quite as high as the quality of students taking the SAT. This may have something to do with the fact that the ACT is popular in the Midwest and South while the SAT is popular in the West and Northeast. Hopefully, I didn't offend anyone with that comment.

I am in the Midwest...and I dont really have to take the SAT

where you looking seth? (besides Wisco )

 

[PaulKonerkbro]

Hopkins (my uncle is a professor there), BC, illinois obviously for instate, michigan, tufts, duke, pitt

 

[fengzhang]

I actually tutor the ACT right now and, as a West Coaster, I took the SAT back in HS. The biggest determinant of your score isn't the length of the test or the difficulty of the material but rather the quality of your competition. The SAT and the ACT are always scaled based on percentiles (for example, a 30 would always be equal to the 90 percentile from test to test; that's just an example with made up numbers). I can give an ACT to you and 100 Nobel Prize winners and scale the test based on that and you would probably score at the bottom and end up with a horrendous score. I can give you and 100 high school dropouts the same test, you'd do the same in terms of # of questions right, but suddenly you will get a 35 or a 36 because a 35-36 is usually awarded to the top 1% of performers.

From what I've seen from the handful of students who've taken both tests, the students tend to score higher percentile-wise on the ACT. This suggests that the quality of students taking the ACT isn't quite as high as the quality of students taking the SAT. This may have something to do with the fact that the ACT is popular in the Midwest and South while the SAT is popular in the West and Northeast. Hopefully, I didn't offend anyone with that comment.

I am in the Midwest...and I dont really have to take the SAT

Yea, it's pretty weird that schools here (I go to med school in Chicago) practically force high schoolers to take the ACT. I was never given any kind of pressure by my HS in California to take the ACT vs. the SAT.

But, my point was that, for those of you who didn't do so hot on the SAT, you should try the ACT. You might do better despite the fact ACT covers a broader range of material (science, math, reading, grammar) than the SAT (which is basically a reasoning/intelligence test).

 

[predatorkj]

Good luck.I never took the ACT but I did take the Sat.I didn't score very high(I think around an 1100 or so) but I tried my ass off.I did notice though that a good portion of the stuff(in fact just about all of it) was nothing like what we studied in preparation and we never even got close to going over a lot of it in class.I guess its because of the school I went to but you would think we had covered at least some of it.

I am pretty sure that a good portion of the stuff I got right was merely common sense or my ability to problem solve given certain info.But I was totally unprepared as per what we went over at school.And the bad thing is I wouldn't consider myself dumb but I really felt stupid after that test.

 

[yankeefan812]

Yea I'm a junior in HS right now and just took the SAT last weekend. The only reason why I took the SAT instead of the ACT (which I hear is easier) is because the colleges I am applying to take your best score in each section every time you take the SAT, however, in the ACT they only take your best composite score. Good luck!