Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment SAT or ACT?

Which is better?

Ds took the Explore in 5th grade so he chose to sign up for the ACT in 7th. He was already comfortable with it, it's slightly shorter than the SAT and has a science section.

On the other hand...wasn't the SAT at one time considered the better of the two tests? it does have a writing component, that when ds is ready for it, he'll most likely blow out of the water (but he's not ready for it at this point).

Also...a bit of a drag that because he's grade-skipped his scores won't look quite so stellar. Will that eventually matter?

While colleges will accept either one and say they don't care which you submit, a lot of folks on the East and West Coasts consider the SAT to be superior. It doesn't really matter but the ACT is an achievement test, while the SAT used to be more of an aptitude test. Unfortunately, the SAT is now closer to an achievement test (making it easier, at least in my opinion).

In the end, my eldest had very similar scores on the two tests. She did some prep for the SAT but took the ACT after trying just one practice test - she will tell you the ACT is easier.

I can't say which is better, but due to personal experience, I highly recommend that everyone take both before they complete those college applications. Years ago, when I was applying for college, I did well enough on the SAT to qualify for a scholarship, but was only 10 points away from the next scholarship level. I tried the ACT, and not only did I hit the next scholarship level, I went up an additional level. Fast forward several years and my DD took both the SAT & ACT, one through Duke TIP & one through CTY. Her ACT scores were state award level on everything but math. Then, we got her SAT scores - state award level only on math. For what it's worth, this DD has dysgraphia type issues, with a very low visual/motor integration score and she didn't have accommodations on either test.

DD has taken both.

Her SAT scores are not that awesome (well, okay-- for anyone else they might be, but frankly, she had a really bad day and it just isn't a test format that favors her).

The math section on the SAT is very... er... peculiar. It's pretty coachable, IMO, but it's also got some quirky stuff that isn't a realistic assessment of math skills, IMO.

The sections on the SAT are much shorter-- most about 25 minutes. It was far less about reading speed and time pressure, but DD calls it the "ADD version of a standardized test" because of all of that hopping around.

It also means that a speedy test taker will spend MOST of that 5 hours hurrying up and then waiting.

The math and writing sections were the only places where DD had any time pressure to speak of on the SAT.

ACT-- well, we don't have her scores yet, but we expect her math score to very likely go from 90th percentile to 98th, and for everything else to climb to (or stay at) 99th.

She found the ACT much easier, even though the math section on it is technically more demanding. It's much more about conceptual understanding, not single-method "trick" questions like on the SAT. In other words, it didn't matter if she knew the "right" way to work a problem as long as she knew A valid way of doing so, if that makes sense.

Writing sections-- this is a 30 minutes-to-longhand-write-an-essay thing. Same on both tests, but it comes FIRST in the SAT and last with the ACT. You can still take the ACT without that section. For younger kids who aren't yet ready for the writing section, that might sway me right there.

Science section is only on the ACT-- and it requires a LOT of reading and processing speed.

From what I can tell, while both tests include time as a pressor, the ACT is far more extreme in this respect. The sections are longer, true-- but they get 60 math questions to complete in as many minutes. All in one shot.

DD was one of only two people in her exam room who were easily finishing all of the sections with time to spare.

For example, that science section involves reading about experimental design or results, and then answering insight-related questions about it. 40 questions, 35 minutes.

My personal recommendation is to do a full length practice test for each one (check a local library for official test-prep books) and then decide which format and style suits you better.

Oh-- and when deciding, pay attention to the practice of "super-scoring."

THIS is how all those people foaming at the mouth for elite schools report scores that are 740, 760, 800...

what they ARE NOT telling you is that the scores are really:

1st time: 680, 720, 700
2nd time: 650, 760, 680
3rd time: 690, 700, 800
4th time: 740, 690, 700
5th time: 690, 730, 650

Both ACT and SAT engage in this, with the cooperation of colleges and universities.

This is just the kind of info I wanted. Thanks so much. When my ds24 took the SAT through Duke Tip, he did really well but he was a math-strong kid. I don't think the ACT was an option or if it was, he was advised to take the SAT.

When ds11 took the Explore, his weakest section, though still strong, was math. Time is an issue for him-particularly in math.

It is for my DD, too-- her computational speed is REALLY slow relative to her overall ability.

The ACT was way better for her that way because it allowed her to use her own methods and to only have to get into that zone once (as opposed to two or three sections for the SAT).

HK, were you ever concerned about your dd being scored by grade rather than by age? I realize she's super-high even when compared to two or three grades above, but I'm wondering if this concerned you initially.

Well, it has certainly crossed our minds.

I'm not sure that it matters. It's not like she finds anything about either test "hard" at this point, and with the SAT in particular, she seemed to have some trouble reading "down" in the literacy questions even last June. I suspect that this problem would be likely to get worse rather than better, in fact. She made the same claim about the practice SAT Lit that she tried.

The AP Lit and CLEP questions were much easier, which probably reflects the fact that she tends to read questions too deeply.

My long explanation for "maybe-- but probably not really given that her LOG still means that she has to adjust/read a more NT mindset in multiple choice questions."

I'm not sure that she's going to get enough better at that skill (which is, realistically, what such things are testing for most EG/PG kids who are at college-readiness levels) that it would matter by the time she were 17.

My hypothesis is that if anything, taking it age-normed may make it even harder to do. Adolescents aren't exactly known for their tremendous mad skilz at perspective-taking, KWIM?

HK, thanks. Yes, I do know what you mean. Ds usually overthinks things as well.

That said, what I'm also concerned about is that he'll be taking the test with his grade, not his age-peers, and may miss out on cutoffs and opportunities that he might not had he been taking it with his age-peers(and I'm talking about above-level testing here, not necessarily when he's expected to for colleges because by then it would be the achievement test it's intended to be). But then the alternative, the risk of keeping things the same, would not have been better...

I fear I'm not being clear, but my concern is that we've taken AWAY opportunities by trying to GIVE him opportunities.

For instance, ds was a DukeTip participant in 4th and 5th grade. This year, because he skipped 6th, he'll need to take the ACT for 7th graders in order to remain in DukeTip. I have no idea if he will qualify now.