The Act

Even after a healthy eight hours of sleep, plenty of preparation, and a well balanced breakfast, it is not uncommon to find your palms sweaty in nervous ambition minutes before you take the test. You come in confident until you reach the room where the test is being held, and suddenly you've never felt this nervous for an exam before. Why is this test making you more nervous than any other previous exam? Is this test really more important than your past exams? The answer is yes, of course. The ACT is very intimidating; however, it may very well help to ensure one's success in advancing his or her education. According to ACT.org, "the more education you get the better chances you have for a great paying job" (1). Compared to getting a perfect score on a history test one took in the tenth grade, getting a perfect or near perfect on the ACT will help him or her gain recognition from colleges and universities and help tremendously with financial aid. It is also a requirement to attend all major universities. These factors play a huge role in adding stress to students taking it because it makes them realize that it is time to get serious about college and their future.

The ACT or American College Test was carefully designed by psychologists in the mid 1980's and is prepared according to several national councils. Because this test was so carefully designed throughout years of research, it is the leading test in college admission to see what one is ready for in the academic sense. Ecampustours.com, a popular and reliable website about college planning states that this test "Ð'...allows colleges to see where you stand academically in relation to other students" (1). It is accepted by virtually all colleges and universities and can help and assure students to decide the college that he or she should attend. In terms of education, the ACT should be required to go to college because it improves the accountability of students and schools, it is unbiased and fair, and it better prepares students for a higher level of education by forcing them to utilize their cumulative knowledge.

First, the ACT is a great way to improve the accountability of students and schools. Unless one is a genius, virtually all students sometimes need a push to study and do their best. Unfortunately, schools and teachers throughout America have relaxed their standards for two main reasons. One reason is to end the disparity between the highest achieving students and the lowest. Another reason is for the teachers to be more popular. In other words, teachers want to be well-liked by their students and don't want the bottom part of the class to feel bad. Unfortunately, these relaxing of standards dissuade students from doing their best. If a student can do very little studying and still get an A, why would they try harder? Mandatory tests like the ACT ensures that students are required to learn a minimum amount of material no matter whom their teachers are, what school they attend, or what college or university they plan to go to. Senator Paul Wellstone holds education with very high regards. He claims that "making students accountable for test scores works wellÐ'... by saying that they will not tolerate failure" (Denslow 1). This, of course, puts a lot of pressure on the student. In reality, however, it is the way one performs under pressure that sometimes defines their character. Being a timed exam, it is easy to see why it can be very stressful and frustrating. Thomas M. Johnson, in response to a ridiculous attempt to abolish the grading system, points out that most people ignore the fact that one of the principal rationales for a timed ACT is "that is tests the student's ability to perform well under pressure. Such discipline is a valuable predictive indicator of success both in college and life" (25).

The ACT also improves the accountability of schools indefinitely by seeing if the teachers have "done their job." Author Alfie Kohn points out that "state mandated accountability tests, such as the ACT, must be useful to educators concerned about improving the instruction of children" (1). If a considerable amount of students from a certain school do very poorly on the exam, it can get parents very angry at the school and its programs, giving the government an idea where it should concentrate its time and resources. The government, as well as the everyday average citizen can find poor or under funded schools. Since teachers are required to obtain a degree from a college, then this must mean that the more recent ones had to take the ACT. "Performance in education means the mastery of both knowledge and skills. This is why it is reasonable to test teachers to make sure they know their subject matter" (Ravitch 27). When it comes to performance, the government can also reward and rank the best teachers, students and schools. If a very large majority of students did exceptionally well on the ACT, then the schools that the students attended would have something to be very proud about. Simply publishing the ranks of certain schools would give parents an idea which schools are best. Colleges and universities would offer more money or scholarships to the students depending on the scores they received on their ACT. Since college today is virtually unaffordable to pay up front for most Americans, every parent would prefer to pay less by preparing their children to do well on this standardized test. This would lead to competition, and we all know that competition is always better for the consumer, in this case the student. (Give a case of a student or school)

Next, ACT should be looked at fair and unbiased to all Americans. All Americans are quite aware that hard work simply pays off. For some people, however, this is not the case. There are also a large number of people who simply do not have the ability to do well academically. With this in mind, the ACT has been looked at recently as biased and unfair to minorities and those of lower income levels. According to a news article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, poorer minority student are "the ones most likely to struggle and fail" (Minneapolis 1). In order to come to the conclusion that this would make the ACT biased and unfair to poorer people, someone would have to say that large companies care more about your race than your intelligence. If this is true, then wouldn't one also say it is biased and unfair to have to dress up or look nice at a job interview? Just as one has to meet the requirements for a nice job, so does someone who is seeking a higher education through a nice college. This test is also very fair considering every student takes the test under the same conditions over the course of the same amount of time. In response to an article against standardized tests,

...