ACT scores

mike1979 said:
31 was sufficient for LOA. I think admissions are using it to measure applicants ability to handle the curriculum.
Click to expand...
Maybe this is true for your candidate. But you cannot make a blanket statement of this, for all applicants.

It’s about the slate competition your candidate is competing on, his WCS and resume/applicatiin (including intangibles, teacher evaluations, etc).

And, even your own resume/scores may not have the same outcome in a different years application cycle.
 
Last edited:
mike1979 said:
I respectfully disagree. DS got his LOA in September at this point there is plenty of time for the admissions to wait and see if someone with the higher ACT would appear out of the same district (that is if higher ACT would’ve made a big difference here). However, they’ve opted not to. That tells me that higher ACT score would’ve not made a big difference here.
Click to expand...
In your sons case. Maybe it was his potential leadership that they said ‘hey we want this kid’. Maybe he fit a demographic that said ‘yep, LOA’. Maybe it was that he took his football team to a state championship win. Maybe it was his whole package. Only admissions knows, and they won’t disclose.

Lots of my spectacular resume candidates over the years have had higher scores than a 31, and have not been appointed.

Congrats on the LOA. But it’s specific to you. It doesn’t translate into the same outcome for others. It’s a WCS that matters, not one standardized test. And your son must have done well.
 
Last edited:
justdoit19 said:
Maybe this is true for your candidate. But you cannot make a blanket statement of this, for all applicants.

Its about the slate competition your candidate is competing in.

And, even your own resume/scores may not have the same outcome in a different years application cycle.
Click to expand...
.
The OP question context was around ACT averages/quantiles … not about any particular slate competition

The discussion took a turn on LOA criteria among other turns …

Anyway SAT 1450 and above is in the +98/99 percentile nationally …
.
 
I believe I read somewhere that USNA only focuses on Math and English for ACT. Not sure if this is true anymore. It appears that they total the score for English and Reading now for consideration?
 
Waitandsee said:
I believe I read somewhere that USNA only focuses on Math and English for ACT. Not sure if this is true anymore. It appears that they total the score for English and Reading now for consideration?
Click to expand...
If they used the other scores from the ACT, it would leave a big hole for the MAJORITY of candidates who take the SAT and not the ACT.
 
justdoit19 said:
In your sons case. Maybe it was his potential leadership that they said ‘hey we want this kid’. Maybe he fit a demographic that said ‘yep, LOA’. Maybe it was that he took his football team to a state championship win. Maybe it was his whole package. Only admissions knows, and they won’t disclose.

Lots of my spectacular resume candidates over the years have had higher scores than a 31, and have not been appointed.

Congrats on the LOA. But it’s specific to you. It doesn’t translate into the same outcome for others. It’s a WCS that matters, not one standardized test. And your son must have done well.
Click to expand...
We are in a competitive district so my son took the ACT one more time so that he could go from a 34 to a 35. MOC warned him the at it only takes one person stronger than him to make an appointment that much riskier. My son is trying to do anything in his control to help. But someone else could have everything equal but a 36 ACT.
 
Nytoga330 said:
We are in a competitive district so my son took the ACT one more time so that he could go from a 34 to a 35. MOC warned him the at it only takes one person stronger than him to make an appointment that much riskier. My son is trying to do anything in his control to help. But someone else could have everything equal but a 36 ACT.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree to an extent, but not everything else will ever be equal. Every human being/candidate is different. Personality, leadership traits etc. which will be revealed and discovered throughout the process in interviews etc. ACT is just one number and one factor that obviously needs to be competitive.
 
Waitandsee said:
I don't disagree to an extent, but not everything else will ever be equal. Every human being/candidate is different. Personality, leadership traits etc. which will be revealed and discovered throughout the process in interviews etc. ACT is just one number and one factor that obviously needs to be competitive.
Click to expand...
Very true..that’s why he’s not shooting for a 36 even though he thinks he could get it eventually.
 
Dr. Strange Love said:
.
Ballpark 50th percentile on the SAT is 675/675 for 1350 combined …. 75th percentile is somewhere around 1400 combined …

The SAT & ACT are marathons …. If you can do well on 1 test date without having to Superscore … it shows that you can “FOCUS” for many hours at a time.

I think Admissions appreciates candidates that are able to deliver a respectable score in 1 sitting …
.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I assume they look at your "scores" and are unaware if they were in 1 sitting or super-scored. This is just my opinion. I wouldn't strive for a better score just because you super-scored.
 
gniyji said:
Not true at all. It really depends on SA / slate competition / other many unknown factors

DS scored SAT 1580 (convert to ACT 36 ) TD from USNA, no prep, no foundation, no wait list -- Nada

But he did get LOA from West Point fortunately !!!
Click to expand...
SAs still require standardized test scores because studies portray them as a predictor of how they can handle the curriculum. A great ACT/SAT score is helpful but it isn't going to guarantee someone an appointment. A different candidate with better leadership, GPA, class rigor, or better performance on the interview can quickly beat a great score. WP saw the potential in your DS. Congrats on WP!
 
Last edited:
nedmac28 said:
I disagree. I assume they look at your "scores" and are unaware if they were in 1 sitting or super-scored. This is just my opinion. I wouldn't strive for a better score just because you super-scored.
Click to expand...
Official BGO training guidance, in my BGO training, is to take them as often as you want. As they super score. Even between SAT and ACT.

I tell my candidates that imo at least do them twice as historically, there is an improvement in simply retesting.

A score is dumped in your records. They don’t know (or focus) on whether it was a one time test, or not.

Test until you are satisfied with your score.
 
nedmac28 said:
SAs still require standardized test scores because studies portray them as a predictor of how they can handle the curriculum. It must've been bad luck or WP saw something in the application that USNA didn't. Congrats on WP!
Click to expand...
Thanks, I have not seen anyone with very strong academics being turned down by West Point. I have some private compunctions indicating USMA loves strong academics (some ACT 36 with 15 AP got LOA etc). Maybe DS's leadership is lacking --but West Point will do its job to make him better, my guess ?
 
Waitandsee said:
ACT is just one number and one factor that obviously needs to be competitive
Click to expand...
Having had multiple kids apply and attend an SA, it's more than just ONE number. If you don't have a hook (diversity, captain of 5 sports, starting a business when you were 5....) then it is THE number. It's unfortunate, but it is.
 
jebdad said:
Having had multiple kids apply and attend an SA, it's more than just ONE number. If you don't have a hook (diversity, captain of 5 sports, starting a business when you were 5....) then it is THE number. It's unfortunate, but it is.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I got into USAFA and USNA with a 27 ACT. That wasn't the "hook" that got me in, I had a lot in other places. No doubt, a 30+ is a lot more promising and impressive but in my case, I didn't need it.
 
justdoit19 said:
Official BGO training guidance, in my BGO training, is to take them as often as you want. As they super score. Even between SAT and ACT.

I tell my candidates that imo at least do them twice as historically, there is an improvement in simply retesting.

A score is dumped in your records. They don’t know (or focus) on whether it was a one time test, or not.

Test until you are satisfied with your score
Click to expand...
DD CONFIRMED this with admissions tonight during a meeting. Asked specifically "I was only focusing on Science during my last ACT attempt and skipped other sections. Will this invalidate the test or section score or can it still be used in Superscore?" and was told they simply take best section from all tests and superscore...they don't invalidate if one section was super low or not (i.e. "tanking") or penalize for multiple tests. YMMV but what we were told in an open admissions forum.
 
Many schools don’t superscore, so IMHO the logic of purposefully focusing or tanking an area of the test isn’t wise.
 
nedmac28 said:
Agreed. I got into USAFA and USNA with a 27 ACT. That wasn't the "hook" that got me in, I had a lot in other places. No doubt, a 30+ is a lot more promising and impressive but in my case, I didn't need it.
Click to expand...
Hey! I got a 29 ACT and was TW from all three service academies--but I know they look at the whole person. My academics aren't too competitive compared to everyone else's, though that's not to say they're bad either. Do you mind explaining what you think set you apart from other candidates?
 
Waitandsee said:
Many more do than don't these days. It's becoming rare to find schools that don't superscore.
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing. Ultimately, it’s the student’s risk to take. Just seems common sense to attempt all sections of the test with the best effort (understand studying/prep might focus on one area more than another).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top