Students coached for an admission test perform less well throughout a medical course

Internal Medicine Journal

Volumn 43, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 927-932

  Griffin, Barbara ^a   Yeomans, N D ^b,d   Wilson, I G ^c  

^a MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG   (Australia)

^d AUSTIN HEALTH   (Australia)

Author keywords

Medical students; Student selection; UMAT coaching

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIAN; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HIGH SCHOOL; HUMAN; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL SCHOOL; MEDICAL STUDENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; COHORT ANALYSIS; EDUCATION; MALE; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS; TRENDS; MEDICAL STUDENTS; METHODOLOGY; STANDARD; STUDENT SELECTION; UMAT COACHING;

COHORT STUDIES; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SCHOOL ADMISSION CRITERIA; SCHOOLS, MEDICAL; STUDENTS, MEDICAL;

MEDICAL STUDENTS; STUDENT SELECTION; UMAT COACHING;

EID: 84896564906     PISSN: 14440903     EISSN: 14455994     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/imj.12171     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Lievens F, Sackett PR. The validity of interpersonal skills assessment via situational judgment tests for predicting academic success and job performance. J Appl Psychol 2012; 97: 460-8.
2. Griffin B, Harding DW, Wilson IG, Yeomans ND. Does practice make perfect? The effect of coaching and retesting on selection tests used for admission to an Australian medical school. Med J Aust 2008; 189: 270-3.
3. Anastasi A. Coaching, test sophistication, and developed abilities. Am Psychol 1981; 36: 1086-93.
4. Hausknecht JP, Halpert JA, Di Paolo NT, Moriarty Gerrard MO. Retesting in selection: a meta-analysis of coaching and practice effects for tests of cognitive ability. J Appl Psychol 2007; 92: 373-85.
5. Wong CXJ, Roberts-Thomson RL. Does practice make perfect? The effect of coaching and retesting on selection tests used for admission to an Australian medical school [letter]. Med J Aust 2009; 190: 101-2.
6. Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). About UMAT: structure and content [cited 2013. Jan 9]. Available from URL: http://umat.acer.edu.au/about-umat/structureand-content/
7. Griffin B, Carless S, Wilson I. The effect of commercial coaching on selection test performance. Med Teach 2013; 35: 295-300.
8. Mercer A, Chiavaroli N. A review of the underlying constructs and an analysis of the content of the Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test. Paper presented at: UMAT Consortium, Australian Council for Educational Research; 2006; Melbourne, Australia.
9. Carroll J. Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of the Factor-Analytic Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1993.
10. Nijenhuis JT, Voskuijl OF, Schijve NB. Practice and coaching on IQ tests: quite a lot of g. Int J Select Assess 2001; 9: 302-8.
11. Poole P, Shulruf B, Rudland J, Wilkinson T. Comparison of UMAT scores and GPA in prediction of performance in medical school: a national study. Med Educ 2012; 46: 163-71.
12. Wilkinson DZ, Zhang J, Parker M. Predictive validity of the Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test for medical students’ academic performance. Med J Aust 2011; 194: 341-4.
13. Hunter JE, Schmidt FL, Huy L. Implications of direct and indirect range restriction for meta-analysis methods and findings. J Appl Psychol 2006; 91: 594-612.
14. Griffin B. Predictive validity of the UMAT for medical students’ academic performance [letter]. Med J Aust 2011; 195: 102.
15. Jones RF, Vanyur S. A comparison of the predictive validity of the MCAT for coached and uncoached students. J Med Educ 1986; 61: 335-8.
16. Armitage P, Berry G. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1987; 179-85.
17. Dweck CS. Motivational processes affecting learning. Am Psychol 1986; 41: 1040-8.
18. Lievens F, Buyse T, Sackett PR, Connelly BS. The effects of coaching on situational judgment tests in high-stakes selection. Int J Select Assess 2012; 20: 272-82.