A very quick psychinfo/eric search and google search produced these findings (of which I find none to the contrary), however, the one of the abstracts below--the canadian journal--did indicate that caution needed to be exercised for their data as SES factors might interact:
http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/a5/0e.pdf also found at: http://www.act.org/research/researchers/reports/pdf/ACT_RR2004-4.pdf The incremental variance problem: Enhancing the predictability of academic success in an Urban, commuter institution. Weissberg, Norman C.; Owen, David R.; Jenkins, Adelbert H.; Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, Vol 129(2), May 2003. pp. 153-180. [Journal Article] Grade Inflation and University Admissions in Ontario: Separating Fact from Perception. . By: Casas, Francois R.; Meaghan, Diane E.. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, v25 n3 p49-70 1995. (EJ523119) The American Freshman: National Norms for Fall 1994. . By: Astin, Alexander W.; And Others. 1994 246 pp. (ED377784) Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---- Original message ---- >Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 12:17:51 -0400 >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [tips] SAT for selection >To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@acsun.frostburg.edu> > > I am wondering if we have an empirical basis > (research of some type) for the claim that high > school GPAs are inflated. > > Nancy Melucci > Long Beach City College > Long Beach CA > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > <tips@acsun.frostburg.edu> > Sent: Wed, 28 May 2008 9:11 am > Subject: Re: [tips] SAT for selection > > But if you toss on the SAT then what will you use to made admissions > decisions? > Clearly high school GPAs are so inflated as to be nonsensical. > > Regardless of effect sizes, at leat for our freshmen, the SAT-V is the best > predictor we have at the moment. > > Annette > > > Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. > Professor of Psychology > University of San Diego > 5998 Alcala Park > San Diego, CA 92110 > 619-260-4006 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ---- Original message ---- > >Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 00:36:33 EDT > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: [tips] SAT for selection > >To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" > ><tips@acsun.frostburg.edu> > > > > I use the relationship of SAT to College vs HS GPA > > in my stats class as an example of the importance in > > considering effect sizes. Both the College Board > > and Fair Test use the same correlations and > > regressions. They each characterize the magnitudes > > (effect sizes) differently. The College Board uses > > language that makes the effect sizes look larger > > than they are. Fair Test actually reports effect > > sizes and characterizes them as small. Imagine if > > you used prediction models like this to make > > financial decisions. You may as well invest your > > money at the Blackjack Table. > > > > From the College Board: > > The SAT has proven to be an important predictor of > > success in college. Its validity as a predictor of > > success has been demonstrated through hundreds of > > validity studies. These validity studies > > consistently find that high school grades and SAT > > scores together are substantial and significant > > predictors of achievement in college. In these > > studies, although high school grades typically are > > slightly better predictors of achievement, SAT > > scores add significantly to the prediction. These > > findings tend to hold for all subgroups of students > > and for all types of measures - freshman grades, > > course grades, cumulative grades, and measures of > > persistence. > > > > From Fair Test: > > Validity research at individual institutions > > illustrates the weak predictive ability of the SAT. > > One study looked at the power of high school class > > rank, SAT I, and SAT II in predicting cumulative > > college GPAs. Researchers found that the SAT I was > > by far the weakest predictor, explaining only 4% of > > the variation in college grades, while SAT II > > scores accounted for 6.8% of the differences in > > academic performance. By far the most useful tool > > proved to be class rank, which predicted 9.3% of > > the changes in cumulative GPAs. Combining SAT I > > scores and class rank inched this figure up to > > 11.3%, leaving almost 90% of the variation in grades > > unexplained. > > > > It's all about effect size. The bottom line is that > > for a variety of reasons, we cannot predict success > > in college with any reasonable accuracy. My > > proposal is that we use a very rough cut-off based > > on High School grades or rank to make an initial > > selection and then run a fair lottery to determine > > who gets accepted. We may as well operate on the > > truth rather than lies. Have you ever counseled a > > student who was rejected from college or graduate > > school. They believe they did not work hard enough > > or did not have some necessary credential. The > > truth is that they likely fell into the 90% random, > > unaccounted for error in prediction. The situation > > is even worse for applications to graduate and > > professional schools. It is all a lottery posing as > > some sort of scientific selection process. > > > > Mike Williams > > http://mindcampus.learnpsychology.com > > > > ************** > > Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch > > "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food. > > (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002) > > > > --- > > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > > > Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Stay informed, get connected and more with AOL on > your phone. > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
