ACT Science: Conflicting Viewpoints
ACT Science: Conflicting Viewpoints
The ACT Science section is less a test of memorized facts and more a test of scientific reading. Nowhere is that clearer than in the Conflicting Viewpoints passage type. Instead of charts and experiments, you are given a dispute: multiple students, scientists, or researchers offer different explanations of the same phenomenon. Your job is to compare those perspectives, track what each person claims, and answer questions that reward careful, neutral analysis.
Conflicting Viewpoints passages can feel unfamiliar because they resemble a short debate more than a lab report. The good news is that the skills required are consistent and learnable. If you can identify what each viewpoint believes, why they believe it, and how their claims relate to one another, you can score well without being an expert in the topic.
What “Conflicting Viewpoints” Means on the ACT
A Conflicting Viewpoints passage presents two to four distinct explanations, hypotheses, or theories about a single scientific issue. The issue might involve astronomy, biology, chemistry, Earth science, or physics, but the passage is written so that you can answer questions using the text provided.
What makes this format “unique” within the ACT Science section is that it emphasizes:
- Comparing claims across perspectives
- Evaluating points of agreement and disagreement
- Following reasoning, evidence references, and assumptions
- Applying one viewpoint to a new scenario described in a question
Unlike some other passage types, you typically will not be asked to interpret graphs or compute results. You are being tested on scientific argument comprehension: who says what, and what follows from it.
Typical Structure of a Conflicting Viewpoints Passage
Most Conflicting Viewpoints passages follow a predictable pattern:
- A brief setup introduces the phenomenon or question (for example, what causes a certain climate trend, or how a geological feature formed).
- Viewpoint A explains the phenomenon and often mentions a mechanism or key factor.
- Viewpoint B provides a different explanation, sometimes directly critiquing Viewpoint A.
- Optional additional viewpoints add variations or hybrid interpretations.
Each viewpoint usually gets its own paragraph or labeled section. That labeling is a major advantage because it allows you to anchor details to the correct person.
The Core Skill: Mapping Perspectives Without Getting Lost
The fastest way to improve on Conflicting Viewpoints is to treat it as a mapping exercise. You are not trying to “solve” the science problem; you are tracking each argument.
A practical mental checklist for each viewpoint:
- Claim: What does this person say is true?
- Cause or mechanism: What do they say produces the effect?
- Evidence or reasoning: Do they cite observations, prior findings, or logic?
- Limits: What do they deny, ignore, or consider unlikely?
When you read, you should be able to summarize each viewpoint in one or two sentences. If you cannot, reread until you can. Many questions are simply testing whether you can attribute a statement to the right viewpoint.
How ACT Questions Test Conflicting Viewpoints
Conflicting Viewpoints questions tend to fall into a few recurring categories. Knowing these categories helps you anticipate what to look for while reading.
1) Agreement and disagreement questions
These ask what two viewpoints would both accept, or where they differ. They might be phrased as:
- “Which of the following statements would both Student 1 and Student 2 agree with?”
- “Student 3 would most likely disagree with which claim made by Scientist 1?”
To answer, you must compare specific statements rather than rely on general impressions. A common trap is picking an answer that sounds reasonable scientifically but is not explicitly supported by the passage.
2) “According to” questions
These focus on accurate attribution:
- “According to Viewpoint B, the main cause of X is…”
- “Scientist 2 suggests that if Y increases, then Z will…”
These are often the most straightforward if you have a clean map of each viewpoint.
3) New information or hypothetical scenarios
These questions introduce an additional observation and ask which viewpoint it supports, or how a viewpoint would interpret it. For example:
- “If a new measurement showed ___, which viewpoint would be strengthened?”
- “Under conditions of _, which viewpoint predicts _?”
This is where many students overthink. The ACT usually expects you to match the new detail to the mechanism described in the viewpoint, not to bring in outside knowledge.
4) Assumption and reasoning questions
Sometimes you are asked to identify an underlying assumption:
- “Viewpoint 1’s explanation depends on the assumption that…”
- “Student 2’s argument is based on the idea that…”
These questions reward paying attention to what must be true for the explanation to work. If a viewpoint claims “X causes Y,” it often assumes X is present and capable of producing Y under the conditions described.
A Reliable Reading Strategy
A strong approach is “read once for structure, then answer by returning to lines.”
Step 1: Read the setup for the basic question
Identify the central phenomenon. You do not need full technical mastery. You just need the shared topic that everyone is trying to explain.
Step 2: For each viewpoint, write a short label
Not on the test booklet if you cannot write, but mentally. Examples:
- “A: caused mainly by sunlight changes”
- “B: caused mainly by atmospheric composition”
- “C: caused mainly by ocean circulation”
Keep the labels simple. Your goal is retrieval speed when a question asks, “Which student would agree…?”
Step 3: Mark contrast words
Words like “however,” “in contrast,” “unlike,” “because,” and “therefore” signal the logical joints of the argument. Conflicting Viewpoints passages often hide the real difference inside one sentence that begins with a contrast.
Step 4: Answer questions with text-based evidence
Treat each question like an open-book quiz. If an answer choice seems plausible but you cannot point to a sentence that supports it, it is likely wrong. The ACT rewards text fidelity.
Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
Confusing similar-sounding viewpoints
Two viewpoints may both mention the same variable but assign it different roles. One may say it is the primary cause; another may say it is a minor contributor or merely correlated. When you summarize, include the role: “main driver” vs “secondary effect.”
Importing outside science knowledge
Students with strong science backgrounds sometimes lose points by answering based on what they know rather than what the passage says. The ACT is not asking you to adjudicate who is correct in real life. It is asking you to represent each perspective accurately.
Answering from memory instead of rechecking
Because the passage is short, many students try to answer from a vague recollection. That invites trap answers that twist wording. Recheck the relevant viewpoint section, especially for agreement or disagreement questions.
Missing “would most likely” language
Questions often ask what someone would “most likely” say. This typically means the answer must be consistent with their mechanism and assumptions, even if the exact statement is not quoted. Choose the option that aligns tightly with their stated reasoning.
Practical Ways to Build Skill Before Test Day
- Practice summarizing: After reading a viewpoint, force yourself to state its claim and mechanism in one sentence.
- Drill comparison questions: Focus on items that ask who agrees or disagrees. These train you to notice the exact points of conflict.
- Check your evidence: For every question, ask, “Where is that in the passage?” This habit improves accuracy quickly.
- Time intelligently: Conflicting Viewpoints passages can be fast if you map viewpoints early. A clear map reduces rereading across multiple questions.
Why Conflicting Viewpoints Matters for Your ACT Score
Conflicting Viewpoints passages compress a key part of real scientific literacy: understanding competing explanations. Scientists often interpret the same observations differently based on models, assumptions, and what evidence they prioritize. The ACT mirrors that process in a simplified form.
If you approach this passage type as a structured reading task, not a science trivia contest, it becomes one of the most predictable parts of the Science section. Read for claims, track differences, and let the passage do the work.