The ACT® Science section often includes questions that require you to formulate conclusions and predictions. These questions typically appear in the 1 "reading" passage, which usually contains minimal graphs and charts but consists mostly of text with several hypotheses.
Understanding the Question Types
You'll encounter various question types that test your ability to formulate conclusions and predictions. Here are some common examples:
- "The data show you can do this thing..."
- "Is this hypothesis consistent with scientist 1's hypothesis?"
- "Does this conclusion agree with the data?"
These questions may seem different, but they all require you to analyze the information provided in the passage and draw logical conclusions.
Approaching These Questions
When tackling these questions, follow these steps:
- Read the entire passage from start to finish (if time allows).
- Look at a specific question.
- Go back to the relevant part of the text.
- Answer the question for yourself based on the information in the passage.
- Return to the question and select the answer that best matches your conclusion.
Remember, the key is to base your answers on evidence from the passage, not your own outside knowledge.
Dealing with New Information
Sometimes, the ACT® will present a variation of these questions by asking how new evidence would impact an experiment or hypothesis. These can be more challenging as they require additional steps to justify your answer.
For example, imagine a question about three scientists debating whether a celestial body was a meteor or a comet. Each scientist has their own hypothesis based on reasons given in the passage. The question might then ask, "What if a new finding showed that the celestial body exploded at 15,000 feet? Which explanation would this support?"
To answer this type of question:
- Note the new information (explosion at 15,000 feet).
- Review each scientist's hypothesis, focusing on what they say about the explosion height.
- Determine which hypothesis is most consistent with the new information.
In this case, if Scientist 3 hypothesized that the object was a comet that exploded at a lower altitude, the new finding would support their hypothesis.