DPM43 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Hi~ My daughter just received results of her first ACT test, which we viewed as a trial run of sorts. However, she was disappointed to see that not all of the points in a couple of sections -- math and reading -- were included in her composite score. We thought that, like her sample tests scores, the composite would be just a simple average of the four subscores. This didn't happen to her cousin or her brother, when their tests were scored. Can anyone explain this? Thank you, Desiree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrixieB Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 On this page, ACT says subscores don't necessarily add up to section scores. The composite is the average of the 4 section scores. Say she got 21 English, 22 math, 23 reading, 25 science = 91. Divide by 4 = 22.75, rounds up to 23 composite. Did something different happen with your dd's section scores & composite? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPM43 Posted June 25, 2015 Author Share Posted June 25, 2015 Yes -- for some reason six points of her math and two points of her English weren't included . The points are there in those sections when they were subdivided, but they weren't added into the total subsection scores, and therefore didn't make it to the composite. So, perhaps I should've said that we can't make sense of how her divided subsection scores aren't accounted for in the subsection totals, and therefore not reflected in the composite. I read the link you included ( thank you) and frankly, I think their method stinks. If a student earned the points, those points need to be credited to them, period. I mean -- talk about fuzzy math. Some points actually aren't points?! They don't really bother to explain that one, do they? Thank you for your answer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joules Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Yes -- for some reason six points of her math and two points of her English weren't included . The points are there in those sections when they were subdivided, but they weren't added into the total subsection scores, and therefore didn't make it to the composite. So, perhaps I should've said that we can't make sense of how her divided subsection scores aren't accounted for in the subsection totals, and therefore not reflected in the composite. I read the link you included ( thank you) and frankly, I think their method stinks. If a student earned the points, those points need to be credited to them, period. I mean -- talk about fuzzy math. Some points actually aren't points?! They don't really bother to explain that one, do they? Thank you for your answer! They are standardized scores on a scale from 1-36 for the scores and 1-18 for the subscores, so none of them are actually "points" that she is losing or gaining. You are seeing the normed score for each subsection individually. All of her "points" (right answers) are definitely included in the final scores, because the final scores are independent of the subscores. Order the copy of the test and you'll be able to see exactly what she missed on each section. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendall Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I'm not sure if this is what you are asking, but for example an 18 16 18 in the math sections doesn't equal a score of 46 it equals a 29. There are 60 questions on the math but the high score is 36. If you look at an old test(there are some online or in the REAL ACT prep book) you can see the conversion of questions answered correctly to actual score. It varies for each test. So some years 46 correct on math would have been a 27 or 28. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EKS Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Yes -- for some reason six points of her math and two points of her English weren't included . The points are there in those sections when they were subdivided, but they weren't added into the total subsection scores, and therefore didn't make it to the composite. So, perhaps I should've said that we can't make sense of how her divided subsection scores aren't accounted for in the subsection totals, and therefore not reflected in the composite. I read the link you included ( thank you) and frankly, I think their method stinks. If a student earned the points, those points need to be credited to them, period. I mean -- talk about fuzzy math. Some points actually aren't points?! They don't really bother to explain that one, do they? Thank you for your answer! Is this what you mean? I'm looking at my son's ACT score report and I see English as divided up into usage/mechanics and rhetorical skills. There is a score for each of those and then one for English. The usage/mechanics and rhetorical skills scores don't add up to the English score. With math there are three subtests--prealgebra/elem. algebra, algebra/coord. geometry, and plane geometry/trig. Again, the scores don't add up to the math score. Actually, in my son's case, when you add them up, they go well over 36. The English, math, and reading scores aren't obtained by adding the subtest scores--and none of my son's scores were the same as the added subtest scores, they were all lower. It sounds like it was just a fluke that your daughter's reading score was the same as the added subtest scores. It's not fuzzy math. It's just that we don't know the details of how the scoring system works. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.