ACT VS. SAT COMPARISON \doc\web\98\08\actsat.txt Date sent: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:12:03 -0400 To: "ClearingHouse" From: "George K. Cunningham" Subject: [education-consumers] Re: School spin doctors had better ax this fast Send reply to: "ClearingHouse" ===================================================================== At 05:10 PM 10/12/98 -0500, you wrote: >===================================================================== > > >Richard, could you tell us the explicit differences between the SAT and >the ACT test questions themselves? It is my understanding that the ACT >does not have any vocabulary on it and that the ACT is not as rigorous as >the SAT in testing other verbal skills. Could you give us your >professional opinion on the merits of the SAT and ACT questions when >compared to each other? > >Thanks for sharing with us your expertise. > >Donna Garner >dggarner@swbell.net I know this was addressed to Richard Innes, but let me jump in with my .02 cents worth. The SAT was commissioned by the College Board as a way of eliminating the need for having each college administer their own test. This started in the 1920's. The test got a big boost in the 1950s when Harvard and other Ivy League schools wanted to use it to promote social mobility by admitting a wider range of students from more diverse backgrounds. Who your family was and where you were from became secondary to the magnitude of the scores. This is all outlined in a wonderful two-part series that appeared in Atlantic magazine several years ago. The ACT was developed by the Iowa Test Bureau in competition with the SAT and is used in the midwest. A little over a million students take the SAT each year while a little less than a million take the ACT. The ACT was originally intended to be quite different from the SAT. It was supposed to be an achievement test assessing what students had learned in high school while the SAT was intended to measure aptitude for college. The many subscales provided by the ACT was supposed to be used for guidance as well as admissions purposes. It didn't work out that way. The ACT subscale have little value for reporting valid student profiles and that use has largely been abandoned. Because there is no national curriculum the ACT had to measure only those skills to which all students have been exposed. As a result the ACT measures pretty much what the SAT measures which is academic aptitude. They do this equally well and the predictive validity of the two tests are almost identical. Bottom line, there is little difference, except for the superficial between the tests. The ACT reports scores on a 1 - 36 scale and the SAT uses a scale with a mean of 500 and a standard deviation of 100. Put them on the same scale, which can be done, and there would be little difference between the two. ===================================================================== EDUCATION CONSUMERS CLEARINGHOUSE networking and information for parents and taxpayers on the internet Subscriptions & Archives: http://education-consumers.com or You are currently subscribed to education-consumers as: arthurhu@halcyon.com TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Send a blank email to leave-education-consumers-989462S@lists.dundee.net ===================================================================== For less mail, click on the following link and choose 1) a daily digest, 2) a daily list of subjects, or 3) no mail (read postings on Web) http://lists.dundee.net/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=education-consumers For more help & info: http://www.lyris.com/help or Ditto from me, they are both essentially curriculum based IQ tests, they are norm-referenced (that is scores are reported relative to a curve centered on average) so that questions vary from 4th grade up to trig and precalculus. In order to get 99th percentile, you pretty much need to get every question right. These tests are hated by educationalists because they were not designed with politics in mind, so the result is some groups do spectacularly better and worse than others. The most common criticism, that they are not valid for minorities, is not supported by studies - every study of outcomes show that test scores over, not under-predict minority performance. It is also said that tests do not exercise "higher order thinking". But while you don't have to "construct" a response, and responses are only right or wrong, there are many more questions, and scoring accuracy is pretty much 100% as long as you fill in the right bubbles. There are no "subjective" scoring problems and it is much cheaper to score than "performance-based" tests. Performance based tests actually show a race gap that is just as wide as the college-oriented SAT, much larger than norm-referenced elementary grade tests because open response questions are more difficult for unprepared students, and questions often deliberately test for skills which are not taught, which puts the disadvantaged in an especially bad position compared to kids who probably get 80% of what they know from their homes and parents, not school. Some states are investigating turning their graduation tests into college tests since, in theory, CIM passing is a standard good enough for all well-paying jobs and all colleges. However, Stanford told at least one parent a standard that nearly all are expected to pass is completely useless to an institution that only takes the top 1% or 2%. So maybe one standard for all is one standard that is simply useless for all. The SAT and ACT have no pass-points. Each college in essence sets its own pass / fail point, and even these are pretty soft depending on things like race, legacy, and whether you are good at free throws. Date sent: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:12:03 -0400 To: "ClearingHouse" From: "George K. Cunningham" Subject: [education-consumers] Re: School spin doctors had better ax this fast Send reply to: "ClearingHouse" > ===================================================================== > > > At 05:10 PM 10/12/98 -0500, you wrote: > >===================================================================== > > > > > >Richard, could you tell us the explicit differences between the SAT and the > >ACT test questions themselves? It is my understanding that the ACT does > >not have any vocabulary on it and that the ACT is not as rigorous as the > >SAT in testing other verbal skills. Could you give us your professional > >opinion on the merits of the SAT and ACT questions when compared to each > >other? +OK 17496 octets Received: from smtp6.nwnexus.com (smtp6.nwnexus.com [206.63.63.45]) by mail1.halcyon.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA31009 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripple.dundee.net (ripple.dundee.net [206.249.104.12]) by smtp6.nwnexus.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id DAA01502 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: X-Lyris-Type: post-failed From: Lyris Reply-To: Lyris To: arthurhu@halcyon.com Subject: Re: SAT vs ACT Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:12:12 -0400 Status: Sorry, your message was not sent out to 'education-consumers' because the first line of the message is identical to a message you sent to education-consumers recently. If you believe you are receiving this message in error, resend your message with a different first line. The matching message and your message are reproduced below. --- The matching message, from the list archives: (MESSAGE-ID:94924) Return-Path: Received: from exchange.raima.com ([198.206.247.237]) by ripple.dundee.net with SMTP (Lyris Server version 3.0 beta 3); Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:06:54 -0400 Received: from arthurhu (dhcp35.raima.com [198.206.247.146]) by exchange.raima.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.1960.3) id 4ZPVANV3; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:08:51 -0700 From: "arthur hu" To: education-consumers@ripple.dundee.net Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:08:47 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: SAT vs ACT Reply-to: arthurhu@halcyon.com Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b) Ditto from me, SAT and ACT is basically Ford vs. Chevy. they are both essentially curriculum based IQ tests, they are norm-referenced (that is scores are reported relative to a curve centered on average) so that questions vary from 4th grade up to trig and precalculus. In order to get 99th percentile, you pretty much need to get every question right. These tests are hated by educationalists because they were not designed with politics in mind, so the result is some groups do spectacularly better and worse than others. The most common criticism, that they are not valid for minorities, is not supported by studies - every study of outcomes show that test scores over, not under-predict minority performance. It is also said that tests do not exercise "higher order thinking". But while you don't have to "construct" a response, and responses are only right or wrong, there are many more questions, and scoring accuracy is pretty much 100% as long as you fill in the right bubbles. There are no "subjective" scoring problems and it is much cheaper to score than "performance-based" tests. Performance based tests actually show a race gap that is just as wide as the college-oriented SAT, much larger than norm- referenced elementary grade tests because open response questions are more difficult for unprepared students, and questions often deliberately test for skills which are not taught, which puts the disadvantaged in an especially bad position compared to kids who probably get 80% of what they know from their homes and parents, not school. Some states are investigating turning their graduation tests into college tests since, in theory, CIM passing is a standard good enough for all well-paying jobs and all colleges. However, Stanford told at least one parent a standard that nearly all are expected to pass is completely useless to an institution that only takes the top 1% or 2%. So maybe one standard for all is one standard that is simply useless for all. The SAT and ACT have no pass-points. Each college in essence sets its own pass / fail point, and even these are pretty soft depending on things like race, legacy, and whether you are good at free throws. Date sent: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:12:03 -0400 To: "ClearingHouse" From: "George K. Cunningham" Subject: [education-consumers] Re: School spin doctors had better ax this fast Send reply to: "ClearingHouse" > ===================================================================== > > > At 05:10 PM 10/12/98 -0500, you wrote: > >===================================================================== > > > > > >Richard, could you tell us the explicit differences between the SAT and the > >ACT test questions themselves? It is my understanding that the ACT does > >not have any vocabulary on it and that the ACT is not as rigorous as the > >SAT in testing other verbal skills. Could you give us your professional > >opinion on the merits of the SAT and ACT questions when compared to each > >other? arthur hu kirkland WA arthurhu@halcyon.com "fairness in diversity" http://www.leconsulting.com/arthurhu --- Your message: (INMAIL-ID:268964) Return-Path: Received: from exchange.raima.com ([198.206.247.237]) by ripple.dundee.net with SMTP (Lyris Server version 3.0 beta 3); Thu, 15 Oct 1998 06:11:41 -0400 Received: from arthurhu (dhcp35.raima.com [198.206.247.146]) by exchange.raima.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.1960.3) id 4ZPVANV4; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:08:52 -0700 From: "arthur hu" To: education-consumers@ripple.dundee.net Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 17:08:49 -0700 X-Distribution: Moderate MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: SAT vs ACT Reply-to: arthurhu@halcyon.com BCC: 73633.2665@compuserve.com, ahandfhand@aol.com, aimcpa@email.msn.com, ajandak@centuryinter.net, alayton@icdc.com, angusalfie@msn.com, anneagle@htc.net, annehuff@juno.com, apc@americanpolicy.org, AustintK@aol.com, BagB17@aol.com, barb@pacifier.com, barbgail@shentel.net, bcbnpne@nponline.net, belindasm@usa.net (Linda Magginnis, LA), berit@best.com, bernie@binghamton.edu, bettyp100@aol.com, Beverly@thnet.com, bill_carlson@eee.org, bmulert@pacifier.com, bonville@cdsnet.net, bpbethan@theramp.net, breedf@aol.com, brendonnell@eurekanet.com, brucec76@ix.netcom.com, bryceinman@aol.com, btennison@jb.com, cbaa@primenet.com (Barbara Ayash, CA), cchandler@usa.net, Celestcom@aol.com, CGHVNBOUND@aol.com, CH64858@NAVIX.NET, chldcare@startext.net, criston@wworld.com, Cinnerst1@aol.com, circle@harborside.com, cklitg8r@aol.com, claire@icdc.com, cmr1234@aol.com, coachtb@aol.com, compjrk@aol.com, cpr@Eurekanet.com, criston@wworld.com, curtannie@aol.com, custom@westbyserver.westby.mwt.net, cvk101@aol.com, CynMaui@metro.net, darb@taconic.net, davetncle@aol.com, davids@wdata.com, dburns@ticz.com, debrawick@juno.com (Debra Wick, VT), Dennis.A.Wicks@cpmx.saic.com, dino@drdino.com, dinomig@aol.com (Mike Jimenez, CA), djdavid@online.dct.com, dlmg57b@prodigy.com, dlsmith@pe.net, donklick@flash.net, dschultz@bright.net, DStarr8537@aol.com, DStein1995@aol.com, dutchland@netstep.net (Barbara Patrick, NY), east5871@ix.netcom.com (Steve), edubabe@aol.com, educ8or43@qnet.com (Sue Stokka, CA), efox@road.emmaus.org, egoldis111@aol.com (Ellen Goldis, RI), ejankoski@aol.com, elittle1@aol.com, emu95@fls.infi.net, ewoolery@cris.com, ezekiel18@aol.com, family@ptialaska.net, FamilyR@aol.com, forusjf@ix.netcom.com, frdm2000@wi.net, frodoleo@MO.net, fwatch@pei.edu, fwr@netins.net, ghoffman@bellatlantic.net (Gloria Hoffman, PA), glheur7893@aol.com, gto34@hotmail.com (Carol Brackin, AR), gygax@redstone.army.mil, hardenx@aol.com, hinman@pcmagic.net, hlustig@harborside.com, hmd900@aol.com, hwy@bcl.net, icemom@flash.net (Mary McGarr, TX), integrity@earthlink.net, jdbarto@ix.netcom.com, jenih80939@aol.com, jgilstad@netusa1.net, jhg@hoflink.com, jimmyk5@swbell.net, jjbecker@ctlnet.com, jkwomack@eclipseinc.com, jlhoffm@ibm.net, jlund@domainenergy.com, jmboyes@whidbey.net, jmwr32a@prodigy.com, joannefb@aol.com, job@beau.lib.la.us, joymart@datastar.net, jroberts@coax.net, jsettle563@aol.com (Jamie Settle, FL), jsood@aol.com (Susan O'Donnell, CA), JSSC79B@prodigy.com, jvinci@cybergate.net, kaygill@juno.com, kglover@sturgis.com, KHolg10296@aol.com, kimfuga@flash.net, kupisch@juno.com, kurts@vr-net.com (Tamara Schwartz, OR), kwbcm@sssnet.com, kwilmot@nde4.nde.state.ne.us, kybubba@aol.com, LAING6@aol.com, lammert@txdirect.net, ldobson@aldus.northnet.org, lin@clark.net, linden@oregon.uoregon.edu, ldjdds@indy.net (Dan/Lisa Barnett, IN), jshepard@gslink.com, lmstuter@icehouse.net (Lynn Stuter, WA), LoisS41729@aol.com, lscheffers@sprintmail.com, ltwright@jps.net, lytk73a@Prodigy.com, LZJOSHUA@aol.com, m.peeters@cne.be, macihms@iquest.net, maggie@capstonebank.com, martinangell@mymail.net, max@terragon.com (Lois Maxwell, OR), Mcquillen@misslink.net, michaeloliver@msn.com, MICKEWERS@aol.com, mildda@worldnet.att.net, millace@hotmail.com, mjacques@omnifest.uwm.edu, mkfields@rma.edu, MoneyMinds@aol.com, morrell@nltc.net, morrisa@txdirect.net, mpoeppel@freenet.columbus.oh.us, mrshorn@aol.com, msiegel@theschool.com, nanbecky@classic.msn.com (Nancy Beckly), ngjc52a@prodigy.com, orion1@staffnet.com, ourphonic@aol.com, pachy001@aol.com, paescc@wave.net, pamkuhn@aol.com, pcen@isat.com, philgraf@dsp.com, pjanu@lightstream.net, PPIE176@aol.com (Camille Wagner, KY), professor@tricon.net, qqss05b@prodigy.com, QUCX72A@prodigy.com, rcrmp@aol.com, Redyarrow@aol.com, republican@worldnet.att.net, retlawman@aol.com, rneill@flash.net, rwiseman@bright.net, ryl@worldnetla.net, sakcpa@sprynet.com, sakossor@voicenet.com, sammiek@midusa.net, sawhite@flash.net, scwatson@bright.net, sepschool@psnw.com, sgluch@earthlink.net, shafer305@aol.com, shifhope@ix.netcom.com (Jo Ann Shiffer, WI), sitler@plix.com, skurnow@ibm.net, sleeper@warwick.net, snyboyblu@webtv.net (Tom Heide, WA), sorock@mcs.com, srg@theriver.com, starseed47@aol.com (Ruth Benjamin, CA), stewartdeuchar@compuserve.com (Stewart Deuchar, UK), study@ionet.net, susanh9876@aol.com, swhynes@aol.com, tamlamb101@aol.com, tawright@wrightmark.com, TeresaSLSD@aol.com, theloop@adirondack.fidonet.org, thomsen@magiclink.com, thyde@cococo.net, tobefree@alaska.net (Jeff Fenske, AK), tunkel@icx.net, txreadinst@earthlink.net, VLDZ64A@Prodigy.com, VOCALIOWA@AOL.com, willypete@juno.com, witchypooy@aol.com (Marlene Tobin, PA), yajn69d@prodigy.com, Zorrofrr@aol.com, education-consumers@ripple.dundee.net, gkcunn01@ulkyvm.louisville.edu, mike_mckeown@qm.salk.edu, arthurhu@halcyon.com Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b) Ditto from me, SAT and ACT is basically Ford vs. Chevy. they are both essentially curriculum based IQ tests, they are norm-referenced (that is scores are reported relative to a curve centered on average) so that questions vary from 4th grade up to trig and precalculus. In order to get 99th percentile, you pretty much need to get every question right. These tests are hated by educationalists because they were not designed with politics in mind, so the result is some groups do spectacularly better and worse than others. The most common criticism, that they are not valid for minorities, is not supported by studies - every study of outcomes show that test scores over, not under-predict minority performance. It is also said that tests do not exercise "higher order thinking". But while you don't have to "construct" a response, and responses are only right or wrong, there are many more questions, and scoring accuracy is pretty much 100% as long as you fill in the right bubbles. There are no "subjective" scoring problems and it is much cheaper to score than "performance-based" tests. Performance based tests actually show a race gap that is just as wide as the college-oriented SAT, much larger than norm- referenced elementary grade tests because open response questions are more difficult for unprepared students, and questions often deliberately test for skills which are not taught, which puts the disadvantaged in an especially bad position compared to kids who probably get 80% of what they know from their homes and parents, not school. Some states are investigating turning their graduation tests into college tests since, in theory, CIM passing is a standard good enough for all well-paying jobs and all colleges. However, Stanford told at least one parent a standard that nearly all are expected to pass is completely useless to an institution that only takes the top 1% or 2%. So maybe one standard for all is one standard that is simply useless for all. The SAT and ACT have no pass-points. Each college in essence sets its own pass / fail point, and even these are pretty soft depending on things like race, legacy, and whether you are good at free throws. Date sent: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:12:03 -0400 To: "ClearingHouse" From: "George K. Cunningham" Subject: [education-consumers] Re: School spin doctors had better ax this fast Send reply to: "ClearingHouse" > ===================================================================== > > > At 05:10 PM 10/12/98 -0500, you wrote: > >===================================================================== > > > > > >Richard, could you tell us the explicit differences between the SAT and the > >ACT test questions themselves? It is my understanding that the ACT does > >not have any vocabulary on it and that the ACT is not as rigorous as the > >SAT in testing other verbal skills. Could you give us your professional > >opinion on the merits of the SAT and ACT questions when compared to each > >other? .