Design Framework for the ACT® Enhancements February 2026 © 2026 by ACT Education Corp. All rights reserved. | R2519 ACT Research | Research Report | February 2026 6 Authors Introduction Jeff Allen, PhD; Jay Thomas; Stacy Dreyer; Scott Johanningmeier; and Dana Murano, PhD Chapter 1 Jay Thomas, Stacy Dreyer, and Scott Johanningmeier Chapter 2 Jay Thomas, Stacy Dreyer, and Scott Johanningmeier Chapter 3 Jay Thomas, Stacy Dreyer, and Scott Johanningmeier Chapter 4 Jeff Allen, PhD; Ty Cruce, PhD; Xin Li, PhD; Ed ...

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry or the companies involved Core Insights - The study confirms a strong conceptual alignment between ACT's WorkKeys Talent assessment and WorkKeys Essential Skills assessment, indicating that the validity evidence from the Talent assessment can support the interpretation of the Essential Skills assessment [11][39] - Five of the six WKES constructs (Work Ethic, Collaboration, Resilience, Creativity, and Leadership) achieved strong pairings with their corresponding Talent constructs, while Integrity did not show significant alignment [39][40] Summary by Sections Alignment Analysis - Eleven subject matter experts evaluated 72 pairings of Talent and WKES constructs, with high alignment scores observed for Collaboration with Cooperation (2.9), Creativity with Creativity (3.0), Leadership with Influence (2.9), Resilience with Stability (3.0), and Work Ethic with Discipline (3.0) [16][21] - The average-measure intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the overall alignment was excellent at .946, indicating stable consensus ratings among experts [27][43] Constructs Overview - The Talent assessment measures 12 personality traits linked to workplace performance, while the WKES assessment measures six essential skills, with five aligning with the Big Five personality model [2][9] - Constructs such as Work Ethic, Resilience, and Collaboration showed strong alignment with their Talent counterparts, while Integrity and Savvy did not achieve high alignment [39][40] Reliability and Validity - The study highlights that the WKES framework is well-aligned with the Talent framework, providing a potential pathway to leverage the validation research of the Talent assessment for the WKES [39][44] - Notable discrepancies were found in the alignment of Integrity and Savvy, suggesting a need for further review and potential refinement of these constructs [33][40]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry Core Insights - PreACT-tested students scored higher on the ACT and were more likely to be ready for college courses, with an average ACT Composite score of 20.86 for PreACT takers compared to 19.86 for non-takers [5][11] - College enrollment rates were higher for PreACT-tested students across the graduating cohorts of 2022, 2023, and 2024 [17][20] - Average gains from PreACT to ACT varied across subjects, with an overall average Composite gain of 1.64 points [27] - Average gains increased with course rigor and performance, indicating a correlation between academic preparation and test score improvement [30] - Gains from PreACT to ACT were lower for underrepresented racial/ethnic groups, with the average Composite gain ranging from 0.93 points for Native American students to 2.72 for Asian students [33][41] - Average gains increased with family income level, but much of the increase was explained by course performance and school characteristics [41][43] Summary by Sections PreACT Testing Status - Over 467,000 students took PreACT tests before the ACT, with a total of 1,380,130 students in the 2025 ACT-tested graduating class [4] - The average ACT score for PreACT-tested students was higher, with differences in readiness for college courses also favoring this group [5][11] College Enrollment Rates - College enrollment rates were consistently higher for PreACT-tested students, with statistical adjustments showing smaller differences [17][20] Score Gains - The average gain from PreACT to ACT varied by subject, with the highest gain in English at 2.67 points and the lowest in reading at 0.54 points [27] - Gains were positively correlated with high school grades and course rigor [30] Racial/Ethnic and Income Disparities - Average gains from PreACT to ACT were lower for underrepresented racial/ethnic groups, with adjustments showing smaller differences [33][37] - Gains also increased with family income, but adjustments for academic performance reduced the observed differences [41][43]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry or company Core Insights - The CRASE5 scoring engine was developed to enhance automated scoring capabilities for ACT writing essays, incorporating new functionalities such as detecting off-topic essays and providing confidence levels in scoring [3][4] - The report aims to validate the performance of the CRASE5 models against the previous CRASE+ models, ensuring that the new models maintain similar scoring accuracy and reliability [4][30] - The CRASE5 engine was trained using a dataset of approximately 14,000 hand-scored essays, ensuring a representative sample for effective model training and validation [12][18] Summary by Sections Introduction - The CRASE scoring engine has been operational since October 2022 for various ACT programs, with CRASE5 set to be used starting September 2025 [1][3] Background: Automated Scoring and CRASE5 - Automated scoring utilizes algorithms to replicate human scoring behavior, with CRASE being a long-standing system since 2007, now enhanced for broader applications [6][7] Methods for Engine Training and Validation - The training sample consisted of essays from multiple ACT administrations, ensuring diversity and representativeness in the data used for model training [12][14] - The validation process involved comparing the new CRASE5 scores with those from human raters to assess accuracy and reliability [30][32] Results for Engine Training and Validation - The CRASE5 models demonstrated comparable performance to the original CRASE+ models, with agreement rates exceeding ACT's operational thresholds [32][41] - Distributional metrics for the first writing domain showed that the mean scores and standard deviations were consistent across raters and the CRASE5 engine [31][33] - The report includes detailed metrics for various writing domains, confirming that CRASE5 meets or exceeds the required standards for operational use [42][68] Baseline Results on the 1–6 Scale - The CRASE5 models achieved high exact agreement rates (over 71%) with human raters, indicating strong reliability [32][41] - The quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) values for CRASE5 were above the industry standard of 0.70, supporting its operational viability [27][32] Baseline Results on the 2–12 Scale - The CRASE5 models on the 2–12 scale showed promising distributional metrics, with a QWK of 0.91, suggesting suitability for operational use [55][59] - Exact agreement rates for the 2–12 scale were lower than for the 1–6 scale, but still within acceptable ranges for stakeholders to consider [53][55]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry Core Insights - High school grades are increasingly viewed as the most important factor in college admissions, with 74% of colleges considering them significantly important, up from 52% a decade ago [1] - Concerns about grade inflation and the accuracy of high school grades as indicators of student achievement are rising, with studies showing a weak correlation between grades and actual performance on standardized assessments [2][3] - The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in high school coursework is growing, with 26% of students aged 13-17 using AI tools like ChatGPT for schoolwork in 2024, a significant increase from 2023 [6] Summary by Sections College Readiness Indicators - Approximately 69% of high school students believe grades are very important in the college application process, more so than essays (53%), admissions test scores (51%), and letters of recommendation (43%) [9] - The mean importance rating for high school grades is 2.62, while supplemental materials received a lower rating of 1.87 [11] Perception of AI's Influence - 71% of students agree that high school grades no longer accurately reflect student performance due to the potential for AI-assisted cheating [11] - 81% of students believe it is easy to use AI to cheat on assignments, and 59% think that students using AI achieve better grades [11] - 70% of students feel that AI provides an unfair advantage in the college application process [15] Differences by Academic Performance - Students with higher ACT scores are less likely to believe that AI leads to better grades or that grades accurately reflect performance due to AI [17][26] - The study indicates a significant difference in perspectives on AI's influence based on academic achievement levels [26] Implications for College Admissions - The increasing reliance on AI tools raises questions about the reliability of grades as indicators of college readiness, necessitating careful consideration in the admissions process [20][24] - The report highlights the need for ongoing monitoring of AI's effects on college readiness indicators and fairness in admissions [24]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry or company Core Insights - The enhanced ACT test aims to better meet student needs by allowing more flexibility and time per question compared to the legacy ACT test [1][2] - The enhanced ACT includes embedded field test items and is designed to reflect high school academic achievement and college readiness [9][30] - Reliability coefficients for the enhanced ACT are expected to be slightly lower than those for the legacy ACT due to a decrease in the number of items [11][51] Summary by Sections Test Specifications - The enhanced ACT consists of 142 scored items and 29 field test items, with a total testing time of 170 minutes, compared to the legacy ACT's 215 scored items and 175 minutes [5][6] Reliability - Reliability estimates for the enhanced ACT are anticipated to be approximately 95% to 99% of the legacy ACT's reliability coefficients [15][51] - The expected decrease in reliability may lead to slightly lower correlations among test scores and with other academic measures [54][76] Concurrent Validity - The enhanced ACT scores show correlations with high school grades and prior ACT scores, indicating concurrent validity [21][60] - Correlations for the enhanced ACT with high school GPA were slightly lower than those for the legacy ACT, but not statistically significant [63][67] Predictive Validity - Predictive validity evidence for the enhanced ACT is provisional, as most students in the June 2024 Linking Study had just completed 11th grade [30][34] - Historical data suggests that the predictive validity of the enhanced ACT scores will be comparable to that of the legacy ACT [78][84] Comparability of Scores - The report examines the implications of removing the science score from the Composite score starting in 2025, indicating that this change may not significantly impact interpretations of ACT scores [43][44] - Comparisons of scores with and without science show that the relationships with college outcomes remain stable [78][84]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry Core Insights - The study investigates the association between developmental education and 6-year degree completion, focusing on differences between STEM and non-STEM majors [1][3] - Developmental courses are linked to lower likelihood of completing a degree within 6 years, with an odds ratio of 0.71 indicating that students enrolled in these courses are less likely to graduate compared to those who are not [17][26] - The impact of developmental education does not significantly differ between STEM and non-STEM majors, suggesting that both groups face similar challenges regarding degree completion [26][27] Summary by Sections Introduction - Degree completion within 6 years is a critical concern, with developmental education aimed at supporting underprepared students [1] - Mixed findings exist regarding the effectiveness of developmental courses in promoting degree attainment [1][2] Methodology - The study analyzed a sample of 10,229 students from a southern state, primarily consisting of White, female, non-STEM majors who had not taken developmental courses [6][8] - Key demographic factors such as gender, race/ethnicity, and family income were examined to understand their moderating effects on degree completion [3][9] Findings - Students taking developmental courses had lower high school GPAs, ACT scores, and first-year college GPAs, leading to lower persistence and degree completion rates [6][10] - The odds ratio for students taking developmental courses was 0.71, indicating a reduced likelihood of graduating within 6 years [17][26] - No significant three-way interactions were found between demographic factors and developmental course enrollment, suggesting uniform outcomes across different demographic groups [24][27] Implications - The findings suggest a need for higher education institutions to reconsider the structure and placement of developmental courses to better support diverse student populations [4][5][28] - Institutions should explore alternative support mechanisms to enhance the effectiveness of developmental courses and improve graduation rates [28]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry being studied Core Insights - The study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the learning and skill development of over 900 students from historically underserved backgrounds enrolled in the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) and using the Career & College Clubs (CCC) curriculum [3][4] - Findings indicate that students developed their college and career readiness skills despite pandemic disruptions, highlighting the effectiveness of the CCC curriculum [5] Summary by Sections About the Study - The research was conducted in collaboration with the National Council for Community and Education Partnerships (NCCEP) and Alliance College-Ready Public Schools, focusing on a cohort of students from 2018 to 2022 [3][8] Research Questions - The study explored five key questions related to students' experiences with remote learning during the pandemic, including their feelings about remote learning, perceived resources and support, changes in work habits, social and emotional skills, and impacts on postsecondary planning [10][21] Findings - **Remote Learning Preferences**: A significant majority of students preferred in-person learning over remote learning, with 80% to 83% expressing this preference [11][84] - **Resources and Support**: 91% to 95% of students felt they had the necessary resources for remote learning, and reported high levels of support from families and teachers [12][89] - **Work Habits**: Students reported spending more time studying during online learning compared to traditional schooling, with agreement rising from 47% to 67% [13][63] - **Social and Emotional Skills**: Most social and emotional skills remained consistent, with a notable decrease in Worry Management and an increase in Managing Feelings during remote learning [14][94] - **Postsecondary Plans**: Approximately 66% of students reported that the pandemic did not change their college plans, while 76% planned to enroll in a four-year college or university [15][81] Implications - The findings suggest that educators should enhance in-person learning experiences, emphasize social and emotional skills, and understand the unique needs of high school students, particularly those from first-generation college-bound backgrounds [16][17]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry Core Insights - The rise of statewide school-day ACT testing programs has significantly increased participation rates, with an average increase of 28 percentage points in the first year of implementation across various states [4][10] - The ACT is now part of the statewide assessment program in twenty-three states, providing a more inclusive picture of college readiness by allowing more students from low-income and underserved populations to participate [2][5][6] - School-day testing has led to a more representative testing population, with 78 percent of the ACT 2024 graduating class participating in at least one school-day ACT administration [4] Summary by Sections Statewide School-Day ACT Programs - Since 2001, the implementation of statewide school-day ACT testing has allowed for a more inclusive assessment of student readiness, with significant increases in participation from diverse demographics [4][5][6] - The average participation rate in states with school-day testing rose by 28 percentage points in the first year, indicating a substantial shift in accessibility [10] Insights from a More Representative ACT Graduating Class - The expansion of school-day testing has revealed that 43 percent of students in the ACT graduating class of 2024 did not meet any College Readiness Benchmarks, highlighting the need for improved academic and workforce readiness [21][22] - Among students who reported no education or training plans after high school, 26 percent still enrolled in college, suggesting that school-day testing can influence students' postsecondary plans [25][26] - Students who completed a core curriculum scored an average of 2.6 points higher on the ACT compared to those who did not, emphasizing the importance of academic preparation [27][28] Conclusion - The implementation of statewide school-day ACT programs has transformed the understanding of postsecondary readiness, providing educators and policymakers with better data to drive interventions and resource allocation [29][30] - These programs represent a critical step toward ensuring that all students, regardless of background, have the opportunity to demonstrate their potential and succeed [31]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry or company Core Insights - The ACT enhancements aim to improve college and career readiness for students while maintaining the validity and predictive value of the test [10][15] - The enhanced ACT will feature a shorter format, with a total testing time of 125 minutes compared to the legacy ACT's 175 minutes, allowing for more time per question [12][33] - The science section will become optional starting in April 2025, allowing students to choose whether to include it in their Composite score [11][54] - The overall number of questions has been reduced, and the test will now include embedded field-test items that do not count toward scores, enhancing the testing experience [12][36] - The enhancements are based on stakeholder feedback and evidence collected through various studies, ensuring alignment with college readiness standards [17][63] Summary by Sections Introduction - The report outlines the enhancements made to the ACT test, focusing on changes to both the test structure and content to better meet the needs of students and stakeholders [15][16] Chapter 1: Identifying Potential Areas for Revision - The chapter discusses the rationale behind potential enhancements, including testing time, student choice, and accessibility [59][60] Chapter 2: Panels and Revisions - This chapter details the feedback process from expert panels and the revisions made to the initial blueprints based on their input [62] Chapter 3: Validity Evidence - The chapter presents evidence supporting the validity of the enhanced ACT, focusing on alignment with state content standards and cognitive processes of test-takers [63][64] Chapter 4: Psychometric Evidence - This chapter summarizes psychometric studies that validate the enhanced ACT's reliability and comparability with the legacy ACT [66][68]