Deciding Between the ACT and SAT: What's the Difference?

[Quincy]

Which one is more difficult? ACT or SAT?

 

[Mk]

I like the ACT better. I never could have done well on the SAT. On the ACT I got a 15 in writing (perfect, how bout them apples), and a 30 composite.

But I think the ACT is harder.

Makes sense, see?

 

[Quincy]

Makes sense, see?

No... If it's harder, why do you like it more?

 

[Darkiekurdo]

Define 'difficult'.

 

[Quincy]

Define 'difficult'.

Requires more thinking, never an obvious answer choice, higher level of vocabulary/comprehension, etc.

 

[Moonbear]

Which one is more difficult? ACT or SAT?

Depends on which coast you're from.

 

[Darkiekurdo]

Requires more thinking, never an obvious answer choice, higher level of vocabulary/comprehension, etc.

Okay, thank you for the clarification.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I was rubbish at COG (Cognative Ability Tests) tests as a kid. So It kind of ruined me on any tests. Exams yes, but tests *shivers*.

Requires more thinking, never an obvious answer choice, higher level of vocabulary/comprehension, etc.

Hehe I was useless at that as a kid.

And as for maths, gifted in some areas beyond the norm, but in tests useless. I don't see them as much use for idiots like me.

 

[G01]

One big difference with the ACT and the SAT is that the ACT has a Science section. So, if you happen to be good at Science, the ACT may be good for you. Also, I believe the ACT has less Math, so if you happen to be less adept at Math, then the ACT may be a consideration.

 

[Math Jeans]

I find the ACT to be much easier than the SATs as the ACTs have no vocabulary section.

 

[binzing]

I'll inject my own question now. Which should I take and when? (I'm frosh now) I am thinking about starting taking them yearly next year as a sophomore, but input would be nice, also, its pretty expensive to do that each year.

 

[jhicks]

Are you a sophomore? I'd look into taking the SAT. Learning that test means you also learn the PSAT, which can mean big $$$'s for college, especially if you live in a state where the qualifying scores are low (like I was!). Poor mass/california kids.

 

[binzing]

I am a freshman this year. I live in New Mexico, which ranks pretty low, but I plan on going to school outta state, possibly Oregon State.

 

[jhicks]

Definitely get to be good buddies with the SAT then, binzing. (ambiguity in age was because I was actually addressing the OP). It doesn't matter which state you qualify in because universities ultimately offer the big part of the scholarship.

 

[binzing]

Sweet, so my plan was right on track. Now how to get the money to take both of those tests each year...

 

[Mk]

Now how to get the money to take both of those tests each year...

I'm sure you can get into the college you want to without having to pay extra money and learning time so you can get a good score on an extra standardized test.

 

[binzing]

No no, I mean where to get the money to take the tests. They are like $75 to take.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I've actually literally been unable to do IQ tests because I didn't understand what they were asking you to do. Another reason I find the tests to be pointless. I don't think they allow you to have extra time in those sorts of tests.

 

[tribdog]

If you are only taking one of the two take the SAT. It is just more recognized everywhere. I took the ACT and got good numbers, but no one knows what a 34 means. If probably doesn't matter much to a college which one you took, but when you are talking with other people it seems like everyone else took the SAT and it is much easier to prove your superiority if you are all on the same scale.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

To be frank I'm glad we don't have testing, A' level results and an interview are much better than some arbitrary test. Let's face it who the hell cares if you can do well on a one off test, I'd rather know you spent two years working your arse off to get 4 A's or some IB or whatever is the equivalent than 1000 on a SAT. I must admit though I think this won't be too popular amongst people who aced the SAT/ACT.

What if you can't do SAT's but are gifted at art?

 

[tribdog]

What if you can't do SAT's but are gifted at art?

Then you can always collect welfare

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Then you can always collect welfare

So artists are valueless?

I must admit SAT's just sound stupid to me, as unpopular as that will be I have to say it. People should study what they are good at and then be admited to University on the basis of that, not some test that rewards skill at maths and English and penalises artistic or creative ability. Who may I ask thought this was a good idea? He was an idiot btw.

 

[tribdog]

So artists are valueless?

You'll never hear me say that. I think artists are very important. Broke, but important.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

You'll never hear me say that. I think artists are very important. Broke, but important.

Precisely my point. Who thought it was a good idea to only reward those who are good at maths and English, despite, many people not studying something that revolves around maths and English? A cretin, perhaps?

The US has the finest University system in the world. So somehow these creative but linguistic and mathematical morons must slide in somehow? How does an artist with no ability at maths and English slide under your net? Or a musician? Or a sculptor, or a director?

 

[tribdog]

How does an artist with no ability at maths and English slide under your net? Or a musician? Or a sculptor, or a director?

by becoming a scientist. or an accountant, or a stock broker.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

by becoming a scientist. or an accountant, or a stock broker.

Can't they're rubbish at maths and English, you mean by going to some rubbish university and being unhappy at being forced into a career they have no interest in. Sounds a bit wasteful? hehe.

You don't need to be good at anything to be a stock broker to be frank. Does depend what you're doing though, that seems to me more about common sense than academic economic clout and mathematical skill.

 

[acolavin]

There's a lot of art in Physics. In fact, it was Feynman that said that an artist claims he can see beauty in a rose that a scientist cannot, but a scientist can understand the amazing patterns and complexity of processes required for there to be a rose, and therefor has a better understanding of the rose.

In any case, there is a nice compromise between doing what you want, and making a decent living. I'm lucky: I find physics fun, and should count my blessings.

Back on the subject, the ACT was a better test for me, despite having taken it only once, and the SAT twice. I hold a grudge against the exploiting monopoly that is College Board (they run the SAT). Honestly, I found the ACT easier. Its a long test, but chances are if you're decent at math & science, you'll look a lot better than on the SAT. The best bet is to take both!

Also, I believe you can have fees waived if you cannot afford them.
http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/sat/calenfees/feewaivers.html

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

There's a lot of art in Physics. In fact, it was Feynman that said that an artist claims he can see beauty in a rose that a scientist cannot, but a scientist can understand the amazing patterns and complexity of processes required for there to be a rose, and therefor has a better understanding of the rose.

In any case, there is a nice compromise between doing what you want, and making a decent living. I'm lucky: I find physics fun, and should count my blessings.

Back on the subject, the ACT was a better test for me, despite having taken it only once, and the SAT twice. I hold a grudge against the exploiting monopoly that is College Board (they run the SAT). Honestly, I found the ACT easier. Its a long test, but chances are if you're decent at math & science, you'll look a lot better than on the SAT. The best bet is to take both!

Also, I believe you can have fees waived if you cannot afford them.
http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/sat/calenfees/feewaivers.html

Yes I don't think that was quite what I was getting at. What I mean is you study for 18 years to have your future wealth decided by a test that doesn't even reflect what you want to study in any way shape or form, if it was me I'd move to another country to be frank. Luckily I'm good at maths not art especially or I'd be screwed over. Seems a bit pointless no? All it is saying is that if you want to study something that doesn't involve either of those, you are worthless.

 

[acolavin]

The SAT and ACT cover a huge amount of criteria, I agree. But if you suck at math, and you're applying to an art school, or music, then you're fine! Maybe the cream of the crop of schools (ivy league, etc) might reject you because you do badly on that part of the test, but generally schools don't just look at your SAT/ACT. They look at your extracurricular activities, and the classes you've taken, and the essays you submit. There is a huge amount of freedom in the states that isn't available in other more socialist countries.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

The SAT and ACT cover a huge amount of criteria, I agree. But if you suck at math, and you're applying to an art school, or music, then you're fine! Maybe the cream of the crop of schools (ivy league, etc) might reject you because you do badly on that part of the test, but generally schools don't just look at your SAT/ACT. They look at your extracurricular activities, and the classes you've taken, and the essays you submit. There is a huge amount of freedom in the states that isn't available in other more socialist countries.

Why not just test people on the subject they are applying for? I mean if they're good at that, and it involves maths and English then they know there going to be a good student? Why just test for two factors out of hundreds of factors for thousands of subjects? Who thought that was a good idea, you don't get the best of the best, you get the best at SAT tests? What's the point of that? You might as well admit students to university based on their IQ, surely?

If you have an IQ of 150+ you get into the Ivy league. 130-150, the next league, 100-130, crappy Universities, less than 100 some sort of community college, or your blue collar, tough luck. Same difference no?