Changes with ACT from next year (sales, schools, universities)

[iloveplano]

Students will be able to retake sections of ACT next year — without repeating entire exam

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...31d_story.html

What are your thoughts?

[UnfairPark]

Two theories make most sense.

1. Standardized testing is disturbing the status quo, making it irrelevant would help elite colleges ignore growing demand for transparency in admission practices. Without merit standards, they can admit as many donors, legacies, athletes, internationals or whomever they find beneficial for interests of their institutions.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj...ry-11570575962

2. It’s a marketing move against SAT. ACT is already easier, making it easier to score would mean more students paying money for taking, retaking and partially retaking it.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

Two theories make most sense.


2. It’s a marketing move against SAT. ACT is already easier, making it easier to score would mean more students paying money for taking, retaking and partially retaking it.

The ACT is not easier. They are standardized tests, so you are competing against the next guy, not any arbitrary score. A 90th percentile score on the ACT is comparable to a 90th percentile score on the SAT. Considering neither test attracts a more talented pool of test takers, it makes no sense to say that one is easier than the other.

If you want to talk about the underlying content that is tested, the ACT is probably a bit tougher. The math section includes more difficult trigonometry and even the occasional pre-calc question (even though the ACT says otherwise, they are wrong).


My opinion is that this is to cater to students who are relying on superscoring, which is a relatively common thing with the ACT. A lot of it is probably marketing, of course. Being perceived as more student-friendly is how the ACT ate into the SAT's market share significantly prior to the SAT redesign in 2016 (nearly all growth -- roughly 600,000 students -- went to the ACT between 2003 and 2016). Now that every college accepts either test equally, the sales pitch now goes to the student. If the ACT can convince the student to want to take their test instead of the SAT, they've gained a new customer.

Full disclosure: I own a relatively large SAT and ACT prep company.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

The ACT is not easier. They are standardized tests, so you are competing against the next guy, not any arbitrary score. A 90th percentile score on the ACT is comparable to a 90th percentile score on the SAT. Considering neither test attracts a more talented pool of test takers, it makes no sense to say that one is easier than the other.

If you want to talk about the underlying content that is tested, the ACT is probably a bit tougher. The math section includes more difficult trigonometry and even the occasional pre-calc question (even though the ACT says otherwise, they are wrong).


My opinion is that this is to cater to students who are relying on superscoring, which is a relatively common thing with the ACT. A lot of it is probably marketing, of course. Being perceived as more student-friendly is how the ACT ate into the SAT's market share significantly prior to the SAT redesign in 2016 (nearly all growth -- roughly 600,000 students -- went to the ACT between 2003 and 2016). Now that every college accepts either test equally, the sales pitch now goes to the student. If the ACT can convince the student to want to take their test instead of the SAT, they've gained a new customer.

Full disclosure: I own a relatively large SAT and ACT prep company.

*Good to hear from you and great post as per usual.

*Will colleges will have full visibility into this? FE will say school-X be able to she that little Jimmy took ACT math 4 times, science 3 times, entire test 2x etc? I bet they will.

[cordata]

Aren't some universities now making test scores optional? What impact does it have on your admissions chances if you don't submit ACT or SAT ?

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by cordata

Aren't some universities now making test scores optional? What impact does it have on your admissions chances if you don't submit ACT or SAT ?

There are some test optional schools. But it's not nearly the thing the anti-test crowd would like for others to believe.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by EDS_

*Good to hear from you and great post as per usual.

*Will colleges will have full visibility into this? FE will say school-X be able to she that little Jimmy took ACT math 4 times, science 3 times, entire test 2x etc? I bet they will.

My guess is it will treat partial test records the same as full test records. The ACT currently allows students to send just a specific score to colleges. Rather than creating one big record of all of Johnny's scores that go to colleges, it creates a unique record for each test date Johnny took (which is different than how the SAT does it, btw). Johnny can then go in and send just one of those records to the school he wants to attend. I imagine that will be possible with partial test dates as well, but of course that partial date will have to be sent along with a full test date in order to show an actual ACT composite score.

For what it's worth, every college I know of claims to only consider the student's best score. Whether this happens every single time in practice or not, I don't know.

Originally Posted by cordata

Aren't some universities now making test scores optional? What impact does it have on your admissions chances if you don't submit ACT or SAT ?

EDS is right. I think much more has been made out of this than is warranted. It fits a certain social narrative that a lot of people find desirable, but I would never advise a student to forego testing or not send scores because of it. The only exception might be a student who really is a star student in every way except testing (very, very high GPA, high quality extra C's, saved a baby out of a burning building, etc.) and has test scores that are significantly lower than the college's average. That doesn't mean I think that student has a good chance of admission without a score. It just might be higher than it would have been had he sent his 950 in. I would always rather have a score that is at least near the college's average than not have a score at all.

My guess is that few students are being admitted to competitive colleges without a test score. This will of course vary based on institution, though. Remember, it has long been a common thing for colleges or even grad schools to post an arbitrary "minimum score" to apply. For example, a decent number of graduate programs require a 50th percentile GRE score as a requirement for admission. That doesn't mean that a 50th percentile score gives you a decent chance of admission. It just means you're allowed to apply and be considered. I think that's a decent analogy for the test-optional thing.

I really can't imagine standardized college admissions tests going anywhere. If anything, I think they will only continue to become more competitive. I say that somewhat regretfully while also recognizing that I have a vested interest in that happening.

[jiping]

A star *URM student, you might add.

Anyone else not submitting ACT/SAT probably get their applications thrown to trash can.