Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry Core Insights - The ACT enhancements aim to improve college and career readiness by modernizing the test structure and content while maintaining the validity and predictive value of the ACT [12][17] - 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 [34][36] - The science section will become optional, and the Composite score will reflect only English, mathematics, and reading, providing greater flexibility for students [13][56] Summary by Relevant Sections Introduction - The report outlines enhancements to the ACT test, emphasizing the need for periodic review and revision to meet evolving educational standards and stakeholder needs [17][19] Chapter 1: Identifying Potential Areas for Revision - The chapter discusses the rationale for enhancements, focusing on testing time, student choice, modernization, and accessibility while ensuring continuity in score interpretation and validity [61][62] Chapter 2: Panels, Initial Studies, and Revisions - Expert panels evaluated proposed changes, providing feedback that led to minor revisions in the blueprints for the ACT enhancements [63] Chapter 3: Validity Evidence Based on Test Content - This chapter presents evidence supporting the validity of the test content and response processes, ensuring alignment with college readiness standards [3][4] Chapter 4: Additional Psychometric and Validity Evidence - The chapter includes findings from linking studies and mode comparability studies, demonstrating the reliability and validity of the enhanced ACT [4][5] Chapter 5: Plans for Additional Research - Future research plans are outlined, including a National Curriculum Survey and cognitive process research to further validate the enhancements [5][6] Chapter 6: Revision of the PreACT Suite of Assessments - Enhancements to the PreACT assessments are discussed, focusing on goals and rationales for updates to better align with the ACT enhancements [6][7]

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 - 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]