New perspectives on the correlation of SAT scores, high school grades, and socioeconomic factors

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 23-45

  Zwick, Rebecca ^a   Greif Green, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249103355     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: 17453984     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2007.00025.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Betts, J. R., Rueben, K. S., & Danenberg, A. (2000). Equal resources, equal outcomes? The distribution of school resources and student achievement in California. San Francisco : Public Policy Institute of California.
2. Braswell, J. S., Dion, G. S., Daane, M. C., & Jin, Y. (2005). The Nation's report card: Mathematics 2003 (NCES publication 2005-451). Washington, DC : National Center for Education Statistics.
3. Braswell, J. S., Lutkus, A., Grigg, W. S., Santapau, S. L., Tay-Lim, B., & Johnson, M. (2001). The Nation's report card: Mathematics 2000 (NCES publication 2001517). Washington, DC : National Center for Education Statistics.
4. California Department of Education (2005). Overview of the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE). Available from : http://www.cde.ca.gov/ ta/tg/hs/overview.asp accessed January 25, 2006.
5. Camara, W. J., & Schmidt, A. E. (1999). Group differences in standardized testing and social stratification (College Board Report 99-5). New York : College Entrance Examination Board.
6. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1996). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. [Reprint of a 1959 Psychological Bulletin article]. In A. W. Ward, H. W. Stoker, & M. Murray-Ward (Eds Educational measurement: Origins, theories and explications, Vol. 1 (pp. 225 234). Lanham, MD : University Press of America.
7. College Entrance Examination Board (2004). 2004 college-bound seniors: A profile of SAT program test-takers. New York : (Available from : http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2004/ 2004_CBSNR_total_group.pdf accessed November 11, 2005 accessed November 11, 2005 Studley, R. (October 29, 2001). UC and the SAT: Predictive validity and differential impact of the SAT I and SAT II at the University of California. Berkeley : University of California Office of the President Available from : http://www.ucop.edu/sas/research/researchandplanning/pdf/sat_study.pdf accessed November 11, 2005).
8. Kohn, A. (March 9, 2001). Two cheers for an end to the SAT. Chronicle of Higher Education, p. B12.
9. National Center for Education Statistics (1996). National household education survey Available from : http://nces.ed.gov/nhes/ accessed November 11, 2005).
10. Owings, J., McMillen, M., & Burkett, J. (1995, April). Making the cut: Who meets highly selective college entrance criteria? (NCES 95-732) Washington, DC : National Center for Education Statistics Available from : http://nces.ed.gov/pubs95/95732.pdf accessed November 11, 2005).
11. Perie, M., Grigg, W., & Dion, G. (2005). The nation's report card: Mathematics 2005 (NCES publication 2006-453). Washington, DC : National Center for Education Statistics.
12. Rothstein, J. M. (2004). College performance predictions and the SAT. Journal of Econometrics, 121, 297 317.
13. Rothstein, J. M. (2005, April). SAT scores, high schools, and collegiate performance predictions. Presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal.
14. Sacks, P. (1997). Standardized testing: Meritocracy's crooked yardstick. Change, 29, 25 31.
15. Willingham, W. W., Pollack, J. M., & Lewis, C. (2002). Grades and test scores: Accounting for observed differences. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39, 1 37.
16. Williams v. State of California. First amended complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief (sf-942871), filed August 14, 2000. (Available from : http://www.decentschools.org/ accessed November 11, 2005).
17. Williams v. State of California. Notice of class action settlement, filed August 13, 2004 Available from : http://www.decentschools.org/ accessed November 11, 2005).
18. Zwick, R. (2004). Is the SAT a "wealth test?" The link between educational achievement and socioeconomic status. In R. Zwick (Ed. Rethinking the SAT (pp. 203 216). New York : RoutledgeFalmer.
19. Zwick, R. (April, 2005). Evaluating the association between socioeconomic status and educational achievement measures: The role of methodological and societal factors. Presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal.
20. Zwick, R., Brown, T., & Sklar, J. C. (July 1, 2004). California and the SAT: A reanalysis of University of California admissions data Berkeley : Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley (Research and Occasional Papers Series, CSHE.8.04). (Available from : http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=1032@context=cshe accessed November 11, 2005).