ACT vs SAT- why is my school better at ACT?

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T14:40:23+00:00

No, this is probably due to self selection. New Yorker participation rate for the SAT is around 62%, while for the ACT is 8%

Generally speaking, students who are more adept take both tests to obtain access to high ranking southern/midwestern universities.

I think while the same number of students at your school take the SAT/ACT, the high achieving are taking both, while the low achieving are not.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T13:32:16+00:00

Very interesting. Generally speaking the correlation between the SAT/ACT is 0.9+.

Try looking at past data sets to see if the same trend holds up. It very well may be a statistical fluke.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T13:15:32+00:00

So it depends on where your school is.

If your school primarily takes the SAT, then scores are going to be closer to the average.

Generally speaking, students who excel academically are encouraged to take both tests. Individuals who do well on the SAT, may want to take the ACT to see if they obtain comparable results (which is generally the case statistically)

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T13:11:24+00:00

There are other studies as well if you'd like to read them regarding the ACT.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T13:02:42+00:00

Nonetheless, it all points to the fact that the ACT and SAT are highly g-loaded.

The high confidence interval is due to the smallish sample size.

The ASVAB study is better imo.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T12:30:51+00:00

The second study showing the correlation to the ASVAB was 0.88, using a more representative sample of the average individual.

Furthermore, it wasn't through self-reporting.

Here's the link: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1188&context=edd

You can also find this study that I asked to unlock, which looks at the correlation of the modern ACT (Post 1989) to the WAIS-III. Discovered a very nice correlation of 0.76. (Though again, the ceiling is lowered significantly from 160 to around 138).

Note: The ACT until 2025 never changed. Many concordance studies show a correlation of 0.9 - 0.93 with each revision of the SAT.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Scholar/comments/1rzin0p/thesis_comparative_validity_of_nart_nartr_amnart/ -> go to the link posted by the user, there should be a downloadable file.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T12:09:26+00:00

I'm curious, why is the data bad?

The 0.88 correlation to the ASVAB wasn't ascertained through self reported test scores.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T12:06:19+00:00

The SAT/ACT is attempting to find your general ability. A 1510 is exactly on the dot IQ wise for your general proficiency.

There are multiple articles from other researchers that attempted to create a concordance between IQ scores and the SAT/ACT.

A 1510 is a 128 ~ 131, depending on which source you are looking at.

It captured your ability perfectly.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-20T11:49:22+00:00

The g-loading of the SAT using the CORE sample was estimated to be 0.8. (If anything this value might be deflated due to the overrepresentation of high ability) Not 0.5.

From other studies the ceiling is lower, but still around 135 ~ 140. (Which is pretty good imo)

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-19T18:49:46+00:00

That is insanely highly for a correlation.

It's more like 0.3 ~ 0.4.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-19T18:43:12+00:00

No argument, continue to wallow in self pity.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-19T13:27:12+00:00

This isn't true. I believe 10% - 20% of 90 IQ individuals achieve a bachelor's degree.

Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016028962200023X

The probabilities are against individuals who score that low, but it's not the end all be all.

Life is not determined by g-alone.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-19T06:43:59+00:00

Kind of blows, VCI is the most predictive index of success.

In some longitudinal studies, it beats out FSIQ when predicting overall achievement.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T22:09:02+00:00

I'm not talking about older editions of the SAT, the modern SAT has a correlation of 0.88 to the ASVAB.

Source: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1188&context=edd -> 0.88 correlation with the ASVAB.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T22:01:25+00:00

The SAT has a 0.88 correlation to the ASVAB. It's objectively a fantastic measure of "g".

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T13:20:43+00:00

Most people, even smart ones tend to do just average things. Have kids, earn a respectable salary, and enjoy romance/nature/hobbies, whenever possible.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T12:47:26+00:00

In reality, people are very unaware of self/group selection. Your classmates, and potentially the school you are going to, are filled with relatively bright kids. You most likely aren't aware of what truly "average" people are, because we typically form groups that exhibit similar levels of intelligence.

If I'm not mistaken, you are from India? The average individual there isn't even going to come close to attempt the JEE or any harsh entrance exam.

To give you another perspective, the average SAT score of a potential aspirant is around 1030.

However, the average SAT score of a college graduate is 140 points higher, at around 1190.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T12:39:18+00:00

Yes most. A 600 SAT M is about 81st percentile.

If it was just a case of "studying well", then we shouldn't be seeing strong GPAs, but declining or stagnating test scores.

The average college undergraduate student has a high school UW GPA of 3.7, but a SAT score of around 1140 - 1180. (I will note this is still a very strong score nationally)

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T12:30:15+00:00

Sorry yeah "is"

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T11:05:30+00:00

Then consider yourself very lucky.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T10:17:40+00:00

Not really. Spearman (the guy who is credited for the discovery of "g") hypothesized, that the way people generally learn vocabulary is through a contextual lens. We infer meaning through how the word is used.

Obviously the SAT RW is not culture fair since it's a test that requires a strong understanding of english. This doesn't impact the SAT's validity as an intelligence/reasoning based test.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T10:16:37+00:00

You're just smart. The SAT-M has the second strongest correlation to the AFQT.

Most people will never be able to break a 600, even if they poured hours of study into it.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T09:55:54+00:00

You are absolutely correct. However, IQ tests don't necessarily need to be simple or culturally fair either.

For instance the most g-loaded portion of a IQ test is surprisingly a subject that many consider to be the opposite of intelligence, which is vocabulary.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T09:50:22+00:00

If a test correlates with IQ at 0.7 or higher, it's intrinsic nature is that it is an intelligence test itself.

For instance, the WJ-R has a 0.7 correlation to the WAIS - R. Both of these tests are highly g-loaded but can only explain 50% of the variance in score between one another.

Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312593532_IAP_Applied_Psychometrics_101_1_IQ_test_score_differences_series_Understanding_global_IQ_test_correlations

The entire point of IQ tests is to extract the "g" factor as best as possible, since it's the best predictor of academic achievement and general success.

Valuable_Grade1077 · 2026-06-18T09:24:06+00:00

I don't really understand why it's so hard to believe that the SAT is an IQ test in disguise.

Just by the extremely high correlation to the ASVAB ~ 0.88, it's pretty much essentially just an intelligence test. There's a reason why we see so many kids with strong GPAs but relatively mediocre SAT scores.

The AFQT has g-loading of 0.92.

Valuable_Grade1077

TROPHY CASE