Differential Validity and Prediction of the SATʼ : Examining First-Year Grades and Retention to the Second Year / Jessica P. Marini, Paul A. Westrick and Linda Young.
This study examines the validity of the current SATʼ as a predictor of first-year academic performance and retention to the second year by student and institutional subgroups across more than 223,000 students from 171 four-year institutions. Results show that institutions can feel confident using SA...
Saved in:
| Online Access: |
Full Text (via ERIC) |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
| Corporate Author: | |
| Format: | eBook |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[Place of publication not identified] :
Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,
2019.
|
| Subjects: |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a22000002u 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | b11018998 | ||
| 003 | CoU | ||
| 005 | 20200512140013.0 | ||
| 006 | m o d f | ||
| 007 | cr ||||||||||| | ||
| 008 | 190701s2019 xx |||| ot ||| | eng d | ||
| 035 | |a (ERIC)ed597325 | ||
| 035 | |a (MvI) 8B000000576826 | ||
| 040 | |a ericd |b eng |c MvI |d MvI | ||
| 099 | |a ED597325 | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Marini, Jessica P. | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Differential Validity and Prediction of the SATʼ : |b Examining First-Year Grades and Retention to the Second Year / |c Jessica P. Marini, Paul A. Westrick and Linda Young. |
| 264 | 1 | |a [Place of publication not identified] : |b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, |c 2019. | |
| 300 | |a 1 online resource (51 pages) | ||
| 336 | |a text |b txt |2 rdacontent. | ||
| 337 | |a computer |b c |2 rdamedia. | ||
| 338 | |a online resource |b cr |2 rdacarrier. | ||
| 500 | |a Availability: College Board. 250 Vesey Street, New York, NY 10281. Tel: 212-713-8000; e-mail: research@collegeboard.org; Web site: http://research.collegeboard.org. |5 ericd. | ||
| 500 | |a Abstractor: As Provided. |5 ericd. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Higher Education. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Postsecondary Education. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: High Schools. | ||
| 500 | |a Educational level discussed: Secondary Education. | ||
| 516 | |a Text (Reports, Research) | ||
| 516 | |a Numeric (Numerical/Quantitative Data) | ||
| 520 | |a This study examines the validity of the current SATʼ as a predictor of first-year academic performance and retention to the second year by student and institutional subgroups across more than 223,000 students from 171 four-year institutions. Results show that institutions can feel confident using SAT scores and HSGPA for admission, scholarship, and advising/retention decisions across various student and institutional subgroups. Similar to previous research, we found that the SAT and HSGPA tend to have slightly stronger predictive relationships with FYGPA for female students, Asian and white students, students with higher parental education levels, and students whose best language is English Only. Across institutional subgroups, SAT and HSGPA tended to have slightly stronger predictive relationships with FYGPA at private institutions and small institutions. Also, compared to HSGPA, SAT scores tended to have stronger relationships with FYGPA at more selective institutions. However, the reverse was true at less selective institutions. As previously found, SAT scores and HSGPA tended to overpredict FYGPA for underrepresented minority students, male students, and students with lower parental education levels; SAT and HSGPA slightly underpredict FYGPA for female students. SAT scores showed clear positive relationships with retention to the second year across all student and institutional subgroups examined. Additional retention analyses indicated that monitoring student underperformance (calculated using the difference between the actual FYGPA and a predicted FYGPA based on SAT scores and HSGPA) can be a useful approach in identifying which students may be less likely to return, across all student and institutional subgroups. In general, we find that the utility of the SAT, and its added informational value above HSGPA to predict FYGPA and retention, holds across the student and institutional subgroups examined in this study. | ||
| 524 | |a College Board. |2 ericd. | ||
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Predictor Variables. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Test Validity. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Academic Achievement. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Academic Persistence. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a College Students. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a College Admission. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Scholarships. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Academic Advising. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Gender Differences. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Racial Differences. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Ethnicity. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Parent Background. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Educational Attainment. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a English. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Language Usage. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Private Colleges. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Selective Admission. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Scores. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Minority Group Students. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Progress Monitoring. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Grade Point Average. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a High School Students. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a College Entrance Examinations. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Enrollment. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Undergraduate Study. |2 ericd. |
| 700 | 1 | |a Westrick, Paul A., |e author. | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Young, Linda, |e author. | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ng, Helen, |e author. | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Shmueli, Doron, |e author. | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Shaw, Emily J., |e author. | |
| 710 | 2 | |a College Entrance Examination Board. | |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED597325.pdf |z Full Text (via ERIC) |
| 907 | |a .b11018998x |b 06-28-22 |c 05-21-20 | ||
| 998 | |a web |b 05-21-20 |c f |d m |e - |f eng |g xx |h 0 |i 0 | ||
| 956 | |a ERIC | ||
| 999 | f | f | |i 76c87f41-350f-580c-afbd-a80c4d997dd7 |s ca5cce82-f660-5ad8-a32e-b2ceaee9df9e |