Reflections on a century of college admissions tests

Educational Researcher

Volumn 38, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 665-676

  Atkinson, Richard C ^a   Geiser, Saul ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Achievement; Admissions; Assessment; Colleges; Educational policy; Testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 77951479499     PISSN: 0013189X     EISSN: 1935102X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X09351981     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. ACT. (2009a). College readiness standards for the ACT. Iowa City, IA: Author. Retrieved July 26, 2009, from http://www.act.org/standard/guides/act/index.html
2. ACT. (2009b). Educational planning and assessment. Iowa City, IA: Author. Retrieved July 26, 2009, from http://www.act.org/epas/index.html
3. Agronow, S., & Studley, R. (2007, November). Prediction of college GPA from New SAT test scores-A first look. Paper presented at annual meet- ing of the California Association for Institutional Research, Monterey, CA.
4. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
5. Atkinson, R. (2001). Standardized tests and access to American universities. The 2001 Robert H. Atwell Distinguished Lecture, American Council on Education, Washington, DC. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://www.rca.ucsd.edu/comments/satspch.html
6. Atkinson, R. (2004, April). College admissions and the SAT: A personal perspective. Invited address at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. (Republished in Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, Observer, 18, 15-22, 2005).
7. Atkinson, R., & Geiser, S. (2008). The new SAT: A work in progress. Observer: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science. 21(10), 23-24.
8. Bowen, W., Chingos, M., & McPherson, M. (2009). Crossing the finish line: Completing college at America's public universities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9. Bridgeman, B., Burton, N., & Cline, F. (2001). Substituting SAT II: Subject tests for SAT I: reasoning tests: Impact on admitted class composition and quality (College Board Research Rep. No. 2001-3). New York: College Board.
10. Brown, R., & Conley, D. (2007). Comparing state high school assessments and standards for success in entry-level university courses. Educational Assessment, 12, 137-160.
11. Burton, N., & Ramist, L. (2001). Predicting success in college: SAT studies of classes graduating since 1980 (College Board Research Rep. No. 2001-2). New York: College Board.
12. Camara, W., & Echternacht, G. (2000). The SAT I and high school grades: Utility in predicting success in college (College Board Rep. No. RN-10). New York: College Board.
13. Camara, W., & Schmidt, A. (2006). The New SAT facts [PowerPoint presentation]. New York: College Board. Retrieved March 7, 2009, from http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/forum/forum06/the-new-sat_a-comprehensive-report-on-the-first-scores.PPT
14. College Board. (2009a). College Board standards for college success. New York: College Board. Retrieved March 10, 2009, from http://profes- sionals.collegeboard.com/k-12/standards
15. College Board. (2009b). Frequently asked questions about SAT Subject Tests. New York: College Board. Retrieved March 6, 2009, from http://www.compassprep.com/subject_faq.shtml#faq2
16. College Board. (2009c). SAT validity studies. New York: College Board. Retrieved July 22, 2009, from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/data-reports-research/sat/validity-studies
17. Cornwell, C., Mustard, D., & Van Parys, J. (2008). How does the New SAT predict academic performance in college? (Working paper). Athens: University of Georgia. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://www.terry.uga.edu/~mustard/New%20SAT.pdf
18. Crouse, J., & Trusheim, D. (1988). The case against the SAT. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19. Darling-Hammond, L. (2003, February 16). Standards and assessments: Where we are now and what we need. Teachers College Record. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://www.tcrecord.org (ID No. 11109)
20. Geiser, S. (with Studley, R.). (2002). UC and the SAT: Predictive validity and differential impact of the SAT I and SAT II at the University of California. Educational Assessment, 8, 1-26.
21. Geiser, S. (2009). Back to the basics: In defense of achievement (and achievement tests) in college admissions. Change, 41(1), 16-23.
22. Geiser, S., & Santelices, M. V. (2006). The role of Advanced Placement and honors courses in college admissions. In P. Gandara, G. Orfield, & C. Horn (Eds.), Expanding opportunity in higher education: Leveraging promise (pp. 75-114). Albany: State University of New York Press.
23. Geiser, S., & Santelices, M.V. (2007). Validity of high-school grades in predicting student success beyond the freshman year: High-school record vs. standardized tests as indicators of four-year college outcomes. Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved November 18, 2009, http://cshe.berkeley.edu/publications/publications.php?id=265.
24. Hammond, G. (2008). Advancing beyond AP courses. Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(34), B17.
25. Hupp, D., & Morgan, D. (2008). The SAT as a state's NCLB assessment: Rationale and issues confronted. Paper presented at the National Conference on Student Assessment, Orlando, FL. Retrieved July 29, 2009, from the College Board website: http://professionals.college-board.com/data-reports-research/cb/other-conf/nclb-state-assmt
26. Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates. (1997). Statement of competencies in mathematics expected of entering college students. Sacramento: California Education Round Table. Available at http://www.certicc.org
27. Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates. (1998). Statement of competencies in English expected of entering college students. Sacramento: California Education Round Table. Available at http://www.certicc.org
28. Kirst, M., & Venezia, A. (Eds.). (2004). From high school to college: Improving opportunities for success in postsecondary education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29. Kobrin, J., Camara, W., & Milewski, G. (2002). The utility of the SAT I and SAT II for admissions decisions in California and the nation (College Board Research Rep. No. 2002-6). New York: College Board.
30. Kobrin, J., & Kimmel, E. (2006). Test development and technical information on the writing section of the SAT reasoning test (College Board Research Rep. No. RN-25). New York: College Board.
31. Kobrin, J., Patterson, B., Shaw, E., Mattern, K., & Barbuti, S. (2008). Validity of the SAT for predicting first-year college gradepoint average (College Board Research Rep. No. 2008-5). New York: College Board.
32. Lawrence, I., Rigol, G., Van Essen, T., & Jackson, C. (2003). A historical perspective on the content of the SAT (College Board Research Rep. No. 2003-03). New York: College Board.
33. Lemann, N. (1999). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
34. Lindquist, E. F. (1958, November 1). The nature of the problem of improving scholarship and college entrance examinations (Paper presented at Educational Testing Service invitational conference on testing problems). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
35. Morgan, R. (1989). Analysis of the predictive validity of the SAT and high school grades from 1976 to 1983 (College Board Rep. No. 89-7). New York: College Board.
36. National Association for College Admissions Counseling. (2004). National school counselor survey. Alexandria, VA: Author.
37. National Association for College Admissions Counseling. (2008). Report of the Commission on the Use of Standardized Tests in Undergraduate Admissions. Arlington, VA: Author.
38. Noeth, J., & Kobrin, J. (2007). Writing changes in the nation's K-12 school system (College Board Research Rep. No. RN-34). New York: College Board.
39. Princeton Review. (2009). Prep for SAT Subject Tests. Framingham, MA: Author. Retrieved July 26, 2009, from http://www.princetonreview.com/college/sat-subject-test-prep.aspx
40. Rothstein, J. (2004). College performance predictions and the SAT. Journal of Econometrics, 121, 297-317.
41. Sackett, P., Kuncel, N., Arneson, J., Cooper, S., & Waters, S. (2009). Does socioeconomic status explain the relationship between admissions tests and post-secondary academic performance? Psychological Bulletin, 135, 1-22.
42. University of California. (2002). The use of admissions tests by the University of California. Oakland, CA: UC Board of Admissions and Relations With Schools. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/committees/boars/admissionstests.pdf
43. Venezia, A. (2000). Connecting California's K-12 and higher education systems: Challenges and opportunities. In E. Burr, G. C. Hayward, B. Fuller, & M. Kirst (Eds.), Crucial issues in California education 2000: Are the pieces fitting together? (pp. 153-176). Berkeley: Policy Analysis for California Education.
44. Zwick, R., Brown, T., & Sklar, J. (2004). California and the SAT: A reanalysis of University of California admissions data. Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://cshe.berkeley.edu/ publications/publications.php?id=68