INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While
the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it
is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as
received.

University Microfilms International
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 USA
St. John's Road, Tyler's Green
High Wycombe, Bucks, England HP10 8HR

7*15150

MAUROVICH# ROBERT LINCOLN
T H E e f f e c t i v e n e s s OF t h e H I G H s c h o o l r e c o r d
AS A P R E O I C T O R o f A C A D E M I C s u c c e s s f o r
FRES HM A N STUDENTS a t MICHIGAN STATE
UNIVERSITY.
M I C H I G A N S T A T E U N I V E R S I T Y # PH. D .. 1978

University
Microfilms
I n te r n a t io n a l

300 n z i c b h o a u , a n n a r b o h

miabk

*

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE HIGH SCHOOL RECORD AS A
PREDICTOR OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS FOR FRESHMAN
STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
By
Robert L . Maurovich

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Administration and Higher Education
1978

ABSTRACT
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE HIGH SCHOOL RECORD AS A
PREDICTOR OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS FOR FRESHMAN
STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
By
Robert L . Maurovich

The purpose of the study was to determine if any
significant difference existed between an academic and
total subjects high school grade-point-average (GPA) to
predict academic success for freshman students at Michigan
State University.

To accomplish this purpose, a historical

perspective was developed and a survey of the related
literature and a statistical study were conducted.
The historical perspective demonstrated that the
use of the college preparatory program to predict academic
success in college evolved from considerations of insti­
tutional expediency and convenience and a need for uni­
formity in college entrance requirements between insti­
tutions.

Intended as a quantitative measurement of the

high school curriculum, the college preparatory program
*i
gradually achieved so much importance that the GPA

Robert L. Maurovich
attained in college preparatory subjects was utilized by
most offices of admissions as the primary criterion of
admission.
The survey of the related literature revealed that
predicting college success from achievement in the high
school program of studies is a well-established principle.
It was also noted that there was much less than universal
support for the proposition that a GPA computed only for
academic subjects in high school served as a better pre­
dictor of success in college than did a GPA which incor­
porated all subjects taken in high school.
The statistical study was designed and conducted
to determine if any significant difference existed between
the use of an academic and total subjects high school GPA
to predict success in college.

For statistical purposes,

the null hypothesis to be tested was:
There is no significant difference between the value
of the all subjects record and the academic high
school record to predict the academic success of
freshman students for the Fall Term of 1975 at
Michigan State University.
A modified random sample of 1,140 freshman stu­
dents of the 7,086 freshman students who entered Michigan
State University for the Fall Term of 1975 was selected.
The statistical study consisted of a multiple correlation
and regression analysis.

Correlation coefficients were

determined for the academic high school GPA, the total

Robert L. Maurovich
subjects high school GPA, American College Test scores and
the collegiate academic GPA for the Fall Term of 1975.
Differences in correlation coefficients were also analyzed
in terms of sex and curriculum.

The level of significance

employed in this study was .05.

To determine significance

of the difference between the correlation coefficients, a
measured R SQUARE value equal to or less than .05 was
utilized.
The major finding of the study was that no sig­
nificant statistical difference existed between the aca­
demic and total high school subjects GPA to predict
academic success.

In addition, no significant statistical

difference existed when sex and curriculum were considered.
Accordingly, the null hypothesis was accepted.
In view of the above findings, it could be postu­
lated that the total high school GPA could be used in lieu
of the academic GPA as the major admissions criterion for
freshman students.

However, a replication of this study

for other freshman classes at Michigan State University
and other institutions of higher education with selective
admissions programs is required before the findings of
this study could be applied in actual practice.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF T AB L E S ...................................

iv

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

A STATEMENT OF THE P R O B L E M ...............

1

Perspective .............................
A Statement of the Problem ..............
Purpose of the S t u d y ....................
Methodology .............................

1
2
6
7

A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

.................

The Early Years: 1600-1700...............
1700-1800................................
1800-1850................................
1850-1900................................
1900-1920................................
1920-1940................................
1940-1950................................
1950-1960................................
1960-1970................................
The F u t u r e .............................
C o n c l u s i o n .............................

10
11
12
14
21
23
25
26
26
27
27

A SURVEY OF THE L I T E R A T U R E ..............

29

Conclusions ............
IV.

9

. . . . . .

METHODOLOGY................................
Perspective.............................
Purpose of S t u d y .......................
Selection of Data Elements...............
Definition of the Data Elements . . . .
Statement of Hypothesis and Methodology. .
Selection of the Modified Random Sample. .
Procedure................................

41
45
45
46
47
48
51
54
55

Chapter
V.

Page

A REPORT OF THE FINDINGS..................
Selection of the Modified Random Sample
.
Procurement of Data Elements............
Representativeness of the Modified
Random S a m p l e ........................
Profile of Total GPA Group Differences.
.
Analysis of Multiple Correlation Data
for Modified Random S a m p l e ............
Analysis of Multiple Correlation Data by
Sex...................................
Analysis of Correlation Data by College
.
College of Agriculture.................
College of Arts and L e t t e r s ...........
College of Business....................
College of Communication Arts...........
College of Education....................
College of Engineering .................
College of Human Ecology ..............
College of Human Medicine..............
James Madison C o l l e g e ..................
Justin Morrill College ..................
Lyman Briggs College.....................
College of Natural Science..............
College of Social Science ..............
College of Veterinary Medicine . . . .
University College .....................
Summary.................................
Disposition of the Hypothesis............

VI.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............
Overview of the S t u d y ..................
Summary of Findings.....................
Resolution of the Hypothesis............
Implications ...........................
Recommendations for Further Research .
.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

...........................

56
56
56
57
60
66
66
68
69
69
70
70
71
71
72
72
73
73
74
74
75
75
76
76
78
79
79
81
81
82
82
84

LIST OF TABLES
Table

Page

1. COMPARATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF ENROLLED STUDENTS
AMONG THE COLLEGES FOR THE POPULATION AND
MODIFIED RANDOMSAMPLE .

58

2. FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ACADEMIC AND ALL
SUBJECTS HIGH SCHOOL GRADE-POINT-AVERAGE
FOR MODIFIED RANDOMSAMPLE....................

61

3. SUMMARY DATA CHART FOR ACADEMIC AND ALL SUB­
JECTS HIGH SCHOOL GRADE-POINT-AVERAGE BY
COLLEGE...................................

67

CHAPTER I
A STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The next decade will be a difficult one for higher
education.

It appears that a significant problem will be

a decrease in the size of the college-bound population.
One forecast is for 15 percent fewer high school graduates
by 1985.^

This problem has many ramifications for higher

education.

The spectre of reduced enrollments will affect

every sector of college and university life.
Offices of admissions will be acutely affected,
for it is the responsibility of these offices to recruit
and matriculate the number of qualified students necessary
for the sustenance of an institution of higher education.
The task of admissions personnel will become even more
difficult as the potential number of prospective appli­
cants decreases and the competition for those students
intensifies.

Fred J. Beamer and Martin M. Frankel, "Projections
of Educational Statistics: 1980-1990," National Center
for Educational Statistics Publication, 1976, p. 81.

1

2
A thorough review and assessment of the philosophy,
policy and practices of offices of admissions is necessary.
Otherwise, the solution to this problem will be character­
ized by ineffectual recruitment and retention gimmicks.
A Statement of the Problem
Admission to a college or university is premised
upon some indication, usually evidence in the form of
documentation, that the applicant possesses the ability
or potential to succeed in college-level studies.

Some

form of evaluation, therefore, is integral to most admis­
sions programs to assess if the applicant possesses this
ability or potential.
The Office of Admissions and Scholarships at
Michigan State University adheres to the principle that
an applicant's achievement in high school academic sub­
jects is the most effective predictor of the student's
ability.

A review of the informational materials dis­

seminated by the Office of Admissions and Scholarships
illustrates the paramount importance of this principle.
The University Catalogue states that "the admission
decision takes into account all available information:
grades, class rank, test scores, principal-counselor
recommendations, caliber of high school program, leader­
ship qualities, citizenship record; but of these, the

most important item is always high school achievement."

2

The Information Brochure clarifies the meaning of high
school achievement; a prospective applicant is
. . . advised to pursue a solid background in aca­
demic areas, i.e., English, Social Studies, Science,
Mathematics, and Foreign \anguage. Art, Performing
Music, Physical Education, Commercial, Vocational,
and similar subjects will not generally be used in
our evaluation.^
If this assessment of high school achievement is
inappropriate, two major consequences are apparent.

First,

some students may be unnecessarily denied admission.
Whitney and Boyd have demonstrated that " . . . more selec­
tive colleges tend to make a lower proportion of correct
decisions than non-selective colleges."

4

Inappropriate

admissions criteria increase the probability of incorrect
decisions and admission may be denied to qualified appli­
cants.

In view of projected decreased enrollments, insti­

tutions can ill afford such a costly mistake.

Second, an

office of admissions may be administered inefficiently.

2

Michigan State University Publication, "Academic
Programs: 1974-1976," p. 5.
3Michigan State University Publication, "Infor­
mation Brochure for Prospective Freshman Students: 19741975," p. 4.
^Douglas R. Whitney and Norlin W. Boyd, "Limiting
the Effect of Predictive Validity on the Expected Accuracy
of Admissions Decisions," College and University 46 (Spring
1971) : 188.

4
Inappropriate admissions criteria perpetuate unnecessary
tasks and increase costs.
At Michigan State University, eight clericaltechnical personnel "compute an academic grade point
average for applicants which includes only those grades
earned in the academic subject matters of English, science,
social studies, mathematics and foreign language."

5

This

procedure is the most time-consuming activity associated
with the review of the application for admission.

If this

procedure were to be deemed inappropriate, the time
required to process the application could be reduced.
Applicants could be notified of the status of their
admission more expeditiously.

Such prompt notification

would enhance the image of an admissions office as
responsive, efficient and concerned with the applicant
as an individual.

Labor and cost savings could be

directed to other endeavors associated with the recruit­
ment, retention and matriculation of new students.

In

view of current budgetary constraints, efficient and
effective management of office personnel and resources
would be mandated.
Because of the importance attributed to the aca­
demic high school record as a determinant of admission,
one would assume this principle of assessment is premised
5
Letter from Director, Office of Admissions and
Scholarships, Michigan State University, to Principals,
Directors of Guidance and Counselors, September 1976, p. 2.

5
upon extensive research theory and evidence.

As Bloom

and Peters have indicated, "the problem of predicting
college success has probably received more public attention
than any other single problem in education."6
A survey of the literature indicates the pre­
eminence of the high school record as the best predictor
of success in college.

Lavin has concluded that "in

studies of academic achievement, the traditional criterion
of performance is the student's grades."

7

Despite the

use of other criteria, ". . . i n the overwhelming number
of cases, student grades are the sole index of perQ

formance."
Donahue and Coombs relate that "the value of high
school grades for predictive purposes is undoubtedly a
result of the fact that they represent a combination of
ability and motivational factors operating in much the
same way as they will operate in college."

9

As Rich and

Garrett concluded:

6Benjamin S. Bloom and Frank R. Peters, The Use
of Academic Prediction Scales for Counseling and Selecting
College Entrants (Illinois: The Free Press of Glencoe,
Inc., 1961), p . 6.
7

David E. Lavin, The Prediction of Academic Performance (Hartford: Connecticut Printers, Inc., 1963),
p.i t ;—
8Ibid.
g
Wilma T. Donahue, Clyde H. Coombs, and Robert M.
W. Travers, The Measurement of Student Adjustment and
Achievement (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,
1949) , p.“ 155.

6

The school record is not only the best single pre­
dictor, but it is the firm foundation in terms of
which all other variables can be interpreted. What
else is there which predicts as well the likelihood
that a student once admitted to college will operate
effectively in an academic atmosphere than a record
of his performance in a similar environment.10
However, Fryer and Henry have concluded that
. . . studies have failed to reveal any significant
relationship between particular secondary school
curricula followed and success in college. There
seems to be little or no evidence to support the
traditional college policy of requiring high school
subjects or fixed numbers of credits in such sub­
jects.11
If a survey of the literature reveals that the academic
high school record is not the most efficient and effective
predictor of success in college, then current admission
criteria, exemplified by the Office of Admission at
Michigan State University, is inappropriate.

To deter­

mine if admissions criteria which emphasize high school
achievement in academic subjects is appropriate or
inappropriate, a research study is warranted.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is twofold.

First, to

determine what difference exists between the academic sub­
jects high school record and the all subjects high school

Catherine R. Rich and Thomas A. Garrett, Phil­
osophy and Problems of College Admission (Washington, D.C.:
The Catholic University of America Press, 1963), p. 64.
^Douglas H. Fryer and Edwin R. Henry, Handbook
of Applied Psychology (New York: Rinehart and Company,
i95oTT ?. 4s i :-----

7
record to predict academic success for freshman students
at Michigan State University.

Second, to assess whether

the magnitude of this difference is so significant statis­
tically as to warrant the continued use of the academic
subjects high school record as the primary determinant of
admission.
Methodology
To accomplish the above purpose of this study, a
historical perspective will be presented and a survey of
the related literature and a statistical study will be
conducted.

For statistical purposes, the null hypothesis

to be tested will be:
There is no significant difference between the value
of the all subjects high school record and the
academic high school record to predict the academic
success of freshman students for the Fall Term of
1975 at Michigan State University.
The statistical study, to involve a modified
random sample of freshman students who entered Michigan
State University for the Fall Term of 1975, will consist
of a multiple correlation and regression analysis.

Cor­

relation coefficients will be determined for the academic
high school record, the all subjects high school record,
standardized test scores and the collegiate record for
the Fall Term of 1975.

A comparative analysis of these

coefficients will be conducted that will include a

8
determination of the magnitude and significance of the
two high school records in terms of the total random
sample, by sex and curriculum.

CHAPTER II
A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

The use of the academic high school record as a
primary determinant of admission derives from the impor­
tance attached to the high school college preparatory
program.

High school officials are advised by the Office

of Admissions at Michigan State University that the high
school record of each applicant will be evaluated via the
computation of a grade point average "which includes only
those grades earned in the academic subject matter areas
of English, science, social studies, mathematics and
foreign language."

12

A historical perspective of the high school college
preparatory program is, therefore, essential to the pur­
pose of this study.

An understanding of the origin of

the college preparatory program and its evolution as both
an admissions requirement and a predictive instrument is
essential if one is to comprehend how the college
12

Michigan State University Publication, "Letter
from the Director, Office of Admissions and Scholarships,
Michigan State University to Principals, Directors of
Guidance and Counselors," September 1974, p. 2.
9

10
preparatory program became a significant principle of
evaluation in admission programs.
The Early Years;

1600-1700

The genesis of higher education in America was
religious in nature.

The primary purpose of higher edu­

cation was to prepare men for leadership roles within the
church.

Harvard " . . . was conducted as a theological

institution, in strict coincidence with the nature of the
political constitution of the colony, having religion for
13
its basis and chief object."
Knowledge of Latin and Greek was essential to any
scholarship in colonial America.

Latin was the language

of the church, of law and of medicine.
language of the New Testament.

Greek was the

Because Latin, more than

Greek, was the language of scholarship, most scholarly
documents and educational materials, to include grammar
texts, were in Latin.
One author has cited that "getting into a college
or university has become a complicated and often a baffling
experience." 14 However, the admission requirement for

13Edwin C. Broome, A Historical and Critical Dis­
cussion of College Admission Requirements (New York;
Columbia University Press, 1903) , p. I"4.
14Benjamin Fine, Admission to American Colleges;
A Study of Current Policy~"and Practices (New York: Harper
and Brothers, 1946), p. 1.

11
Harvard in 1638 was relatively uncomplicated:

"When any

scholar is able to understand Tully or such like classical
Latine author extemplore, and make prose, sue ut aiunt
Marte, and decline perfectly the paradigms of nounes and
verbes in the Greek tongue; Let him then, and not before,
be capable of admission into the college."^
The procedure by which one was admitted was also
uncomplicated:
The catalogue for the University of Notre Dame in
1867 states that although the fall semester began
on the first Tuesday in September, prospective
students could enroll at any time during the year.
. . . The applicant simply described his previous
schooling in an interview with the director of
studies . . . who then assigned the student to the
proper level of achievement.
1700-1800
One hundred years elapsed before any subject other
than Latin and Greek comprised the admissions requirements
of any institution of higher education.

In 1745, elemen­

tary arithmetic at other institutions occurred gradually.
It was not until 1800 that elementary arithmetic was added
at Harvard.

Princeton, founded in 1748, did not add

arithmetic until 1760.
15Howard Greene and Robert Minton, Scaling the
Ivy Wall: Getting into the Selective Colleges (New York:
Abelard-Schuman, 1975), p. 31.
James W. Arnold and Ralph E. Weber, Admission to
College (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1964),
pp. vi-vii.

12
The addition of arithmetic did not represent a
significant change in the philosophy of admissions
requirements.

It simply acknowledged the need for

familiarity with elementary computations.

Ministers,

for example, required this knowledge to maintain church
financial records and to monitor personal expenses.
Columbia was the first institution of higher
education, in 1785, to quantify admissions requirements.
No candidate shall be admitted into the College,
after the second Tuesday in April 1786, unless he
shall be able to render into English Caesar's Com­
mentaries of the Gallic War, the four Orations of
Cicero against Catiline, the four first books of
Virgil's Aeneid, and to explain the government and
connection of the words, and to turn English into
grammatical Latin, and shall understand the four ^
first rules of Arithmetic, with the rule of three.
The College of William and Mary added French to
its admissions requirements in 1793. 18 However, foreign
language would not be added by most other colleges and
universities as an admissions requirement until fifty
years later.
1800-1850
Although geography was added to the admissions
requirement at Harvard in 1807, it did not represent any
significant change in Harvard's commitment to a classical
17Broome, p . 41.
18Frederick Rudolph, The American College and Uni
versity (New York: Random House, Inc., 1962), p. 3IT

13
education, i.e., the study of Latin and Greek.

By

geography, Harvard meant ancient geography and it was
intended to aid a student's understanding of biblical
studies.
In 1819, English grammar was added to the admis­
sions requirements at Princeton.
Harvard in 1820.

Algebra was added at

Columbia included French in 1830 and

Harvard added geometry in 1844. 20
The admissions requirements for the University of
Michigan in 1841 were representative of the changes, though
minimal, which had evolved in admissions requirements since
1638.

"Geography, arithmetic, the elements of algebra,

the grammar of English, Latin and Greek languages, of the
exercise and reader of Andrews, Cornelius Nepes, Vita
Washingtonii, Sallust, Cicero's Orations, Jacobs' Greek
Reader, and the Evangelists."

21

In 1847, ancient history was added to the admis­
sions requirements at Harvard.

By 1869, United States

history and, in 1870, physical geography were added at
the University of Michigan.
. .

English composition.

Princeton, in 1870, added

22

19Broome, p. 44.
20
21

Fine, p. 17.
Broome, p . 44.

22Greene and Minton, p. 35.

14
1850-1900
After the Civil War, veterans entered colleges and
universities in large numbers.

Their need for a more

pragmatic rather than classical education evolved several
changes in admissions requirements.

By 1870, eight sub­

jects were formally added to the admissions requirements
of most colleges and universities.

In addition to Greek

and Latin, admissions requirements included geography,
English grammar, algebra, geometry, ancient history,
physical geography, English composition and United States
,. .
23
history.
Syracuse University, in 1873, added natural phil­
osophy to its requirements for admission.

The gradual

changes in admissions requirements affected Harvard which
added physical science in 1872, English literature in
24
1875 and physics m 1876.
The most significant event in the evolution of
admissions requirements occurred in 1886 when Harvard
eliminated Greek from its admissions requirements.
action led one Harvard trustee to comment:

This

"Mr. Eliot,

more than any other man, is responsible for the greatest

23Broome, p. 45.
24Ibid., p. 46.

15
educational crime of the century against American youth—
depriving him of his classical heritage." 25
By 1890, several institutions of higher education
offered three different curricula:

a full classical

course of study, a semi-classical course of study and a
scientific course of study.

While these curricula, termed

the parallel courses, did not affect admissions require­
ments, they were viewed by the classically oriented faculty
as inferior.

The parallel courses represented the cur­

ricular vanguard of what later became known as the track­
ing system in high schools (i.e., the college preparatory
courses, the technical courses and the noncollege prepara\ 26
tory courses).
The Annual Report of Harvard, 1870-1871, charac­
terizes the patronizing attitude of the classically oriented
academic community toward the parallel courses and its
reluctance to oversee any further erosion in the pre­
eminence of the classical curriculum.
In many parts of the country it is impossible for
young men, however able and studious, to obtain the
thoroughness of instruction in the classics which
is required for a creditable admission into Harvard
College. This fact, taken in connection with the
recognition scheme of studies to the truly liberal
character of a course of study predominantly scien­
tific, led the Faculty last year to seek some means

^Rudolph, p. 286.
26

Broome, p. 84.

16
by which, without lowering the standard of its
admission examinations, the college might be
opened to young men whose superior training in
mathematics compensated for their deficiencies
in the classics.2?
The classical orientation would dominate admis­
sions requirements for almost another seventy-five years.
In 1900, 402 (or 93 percent) of 432 colleges surveyed
required Latin. 28 By 1945, the classical orientation
was in full decline; only 13 percent of the colleges sur29
veyed required Latin as an admissions requirement.
In 1870, the University of Michigan established
an accreditation system to complement its admissions pro­
gram.

High schools which satisfied the accreditation

requirements of the University could, upon the principal's
recommendation, have their graduates admitted to the Uni.. 30
versrty.
One of the accreditation provisions listed high
school graduation requirements identical to the admissions
requirements of the University.

Therefore, no articulation

problem existed between the University and the high

27Ibid., pp. 89-90.
28Fine, p. 368.
29Ibid.
39Broome, p. 107.

17
school; the University was assured of the proper prepar­
ation of its applicants.^*
The accreditation system, in retrospect, was the
conceptual prototype for the college preparatory program
in the high school.

The accreditation requirement for a

certain grouping of courses in the high school constituted
a prerequisite or prescribed course of study for an appli­
cant.

As the accreditation system was adopted by colleges

and universities, this concept of a prescribed course of
study as a prerequisite for admission was also adopted.
By 1872, state universities in Michigan, Minnesota,
Iowa and Wisconsin developed accreditation or certification
systems with high schools.

By 1873, Indiana and Illinois

developed accreditation programs and were joined by Ohio
in 1874 and Texas, Missouri and California in 1890.

By

1900, forty-two state universities and land-grant colleges
and at least 150 private institutions had adopted some
32
type of accreditation or certification program.
In 1874, a court decision in Kalamazoo, Michigan
gave impetus to the growth and expansion of the high school
system.

The court ruled that high schools could be estab­

lished and supported by public funds.

The high school,

as we know it today, did not exist prior to 1874.

"^Rudolph, p. 284.

During

18
the early colonial period, each college maintained a
preparatory school.

Students deficient in a certain

subject would attend the preparatory school, a part of
the college, to remove the deficiency.

A few private

preparatory (or "feeder") schools were later established
to educate students for college.

The Maryland Act of

1696 was among the first of such legislation to establish
such schools.

As the number of colleges increased,

"academies" were formally established and gradually
replaced the "feeder" schools.

High schools were later
to supplement the academy system. 33
Public demands for a more practical education
prompted high schools to provide a curriculum for the non­
college bound student.

Curricula were designed, for

example, to prepare students for a technical career or
for life as useful citizens.

The college preparatory

course of studies, however, still conformed to the
entrance requirements for most colleges and universities.
As Fred Harcleroad notes, however, the development of
the high school curriculum, especially the college
preparatory course of studies, did not evolve from any
philosophy of education.

"A philosophy of education

does not appear and, as contrasted with the rooted con­
victions on the purpose of a secondary education to be

33

(New York:

I.

L. Kandel, History of Secondary Education
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1930), p. 450.

19
found in Europe at that time, the development of the cur­
riculum [of the high school] seems to have been haphazard,
vague and opportunistic." 34
Similarly, the occasions upon which admissions
requirements were established or circumvented illustrates
more their function as devices of self-interest, con­
venience and expediency rather than as instruments of
educational philosophy.
Some efforts of the colleges to increase enrollment
were more availing than others, but one that did not
work was the offer of the University of Arkansas in
1892 to pay $25.00 to the agricultural student who
made the best five pounds of butter. More effective
was the almost complete abandonment of admissions
standards. In the absence of rural high schools,
the colleges merely said: "Come, and we will do
what we can." At Ohio State in 1877, for example,
by dropping algebra from the entrance requirements,
the college immediately picked up twenty students.35
By 1875, the proliferation of high schools and
the growth and expansion of colleges and universities,
each with different admissions requirements, created sheer
chaos in higher education. 36 For example, the University
of California had thirty different subjects required for
admission, Yale and Princeton had thirteen and Harvard
twenty-two. 37
34Ibid., p. 399.
33Rudolph, p. 260.
36
Broome, p. 109.

20
In 1879, secondary school and college representa­
tives convened to discuss the need for some standardization
in entrance requirements in English for the New England
colleges.

The meeting culminated in the adoption of

uniform admissions requirements for English.

In 1881-1882,

this group adopted uniform admissions requirements for
mathematics.

This group, in 1885, founded itself offi­

cially as the New England Association of Colleges and
Preparatory Schools. 38
In 1892, the National Education Association pub­
lished several guidelines to establish standardized defi­
nitions of a credit as a unit of academic work.

Kendal

characterized these efforts to quantify the high school
curriculum as the creation of a "national educational
currency." 39
However, it was the colleges and universities
themselves which initiated and developed uniform admis­
sions requirements. In 1898, Harvard established the
point system. 40 A point was one-half year's academic
work in one academic subject.
Harvard required at least twenty-six points for
admission.

Pour points were required in Latin or Greek,

38Kandel, p. 465.
39Ibid., p. 471.
40 Broome, p. 93.

21
four points in English, four points in an ancient language,
two points in a modern language, two points in elementary
history, two points in algebra, two to three points in
geometry or plane geometry, two points in one or more of
the following subjects:

elementary physics, chemistry,

anatomy or physiography and two credits in astronomy.
The balance of points required was comprised of electives
41
in academic courses of the student's choree.
In 1899, the Association of Colleges and Secondary
Schools of the Middle Atlantic States and Maryland adopted
similar uniform college admissions requirements.

By 1900,

the North Central Association recommended that no college
admit students without a four-year secondary school edu­
cation.

The Association also recommended that admissions

requirements be affixed at sixteen credits.

A credit was

defined as a year's work in a subject for four periods a
week.

It recommended a student have two years of English,

two years of mathematics, one year of science and one
42
year of history to be admitted to college.
1900-1920
In 1906, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advance­
ment of Teaching in association with the College Entrance
Examination Board devised the Carnegie unit.

41Ibid.
4^Kandel, p. 467.

The Carnegie

22
unit was defined as one year's course of study in a major
academic subject for five periods a week.

A conference

on entrance requirements, convened by the Carnegie Foun­
dation in 1908, officially adopted the Carnegie unit as
the measure of coursework in the high school curriculum.
Rudolph characterized this action as ". . . the ultimate
in organization, the epitome of academic accountancy,
the symbol of the search for standards." 43
These efforts toward uniformity did not evolve
from educational philosophy, theory and practice.

They

evolved from a need to bring order to a setting of con­
flicting policies and practices.

The Carnegie Unit,

therefore, was the result of a synthesis of common
practices.

It became a universal symbol to define a

system of credits or to evaluate a diploma.
The uniformity was accomplished by several means.
In some cases it evolved through discussion and compromise.
In some instances it was incorporated into contractual
agreements.

As Bowles notes, the Carnegie Unit " . . .

became firmly embedded in our system when the Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of teaching used it as one
of their criteria in defining a college for the purpose of
44
their pension program" eligibility requirements.
^Rudolph, p. 428.
44
F. H. Bowles, "The Evolution of Admissions Re­
quirements," Journal of the Association of College Admis­
sion Counselors 17 (1965): 30.

23
It soon became the norm to require fifteen to six­
teen Carnegie units for admission to a college or a uni­
versity.

The core of the Carnegie unit system was four

years of English, one year of Algebra, one year of plane
geometry, two years of foreign language, one year of
natural science (to include biology, chemistry or physics),
one year of social studies (to include history, economics
or geography) and four years of elective courses in aca45
demic subjects of the student's choice.
1920-1940
Three educational developments in the 1920s began
to erode the rigidity the unit system imposed upon the
high school curriculum.

First, the emergence of the con­

cept of individual differences evolved the need for person­
alized and flexible learning in the high school curriculum.
Second, the use of standardized, tests provided educators,
especially admissions officers, with additional information
to select applicants.

Third, the influx of veterans from

World War I had, as it did after the Civil War, a liberal­
izing effect upon admissions requirements.
However, educational developments were not the
only reason for the partial dissolution of the unit sys­
tem.

As Frank Bowles notes, the erosion of the unit

system began " . . .

for the far simpler reason that

45Fine, p. 16.

24
colleges could no longer enforce their 60-year-old entrance
requirements and at the same time get freshman classes of
acceptable size.”46 During this period, a small collegebound population, a shrinking national economy and the
proliferation of small colleges across the nation created
many vacancies in entering classes.

As Frederick Rudolph

noted "between 1890 and 1925 enrollment in institutions
of higher education grew 4.7 times as fast as the popu­
lation. ”47
College entrance requirements were relaxed further
during the 1930s.

In 1932, Union College abandoned the

requirement for a certain distribution of courses in the
high school program as an entrance requirement.

The Uni­

versity of Chicago followed with a similar policy shortly
thereafter.

Again, the primary factor in the discontinu­

ation of the unit system of admissions requirements at an
increasing number of college and universities occurred
for very pragmatic reasons; "during the next seven years
a good many colleges, driven more by a need for student
enrollments than by any theoretical considerations,
indulged in vaguely worded rewritings of entrance examinations which more or less eliminated unit requirements." 48
46

Bowles, p. 31.

4^Rudolph, p. 442.
48

Bowles, p. 30.

25
1940-1950
The next significant impact upon college entrance
requirements, spanning the 1940s, evolved from United
States involvement in World War II.

Most colleges and

universities modified or abandoned many policies, espe­
cially those related to entrance requirements, to serve
the war effort.
In cooperation with the Federal Government and
the military services, colleges and universities provided
the training, expertise and technology to conduct a modern
war.

To absorb the large number of personnel to be trained

for a variety of educational purposes, colleges and uni­
versities suspended entrance requirements.

The selection

of these individuals was accomplished by standardized
tests, inventories and interviews.

These selection

devices were employed by the military services to assess
general aptitude as well as the ability to undertake
college-level study in particular fields.
After the war, entrance requirements remained
suspended at most institutions as tens of thousands of
veterans enrolled in colleges and universities.

The

reasons for the continued relaxation of entrance require49
ments varied from institution to institution.
Some
colleges and universities realized an opportunity to
expand their size and enrollment.
49

Ibid., p. 32.

Other institutions

26
responded to the demand for an education and society's
debt of gratitude for service during the war.
1950-1960
The orbiting of the Russian satellite, the Sputnik,
in 1957 was a primary reason for the full resurrection of
the unit system.

The ability of the Soviet Union to sur­

pass the United States in space technology was attributed
to a laxness in the educational system in the United States.
Accordingly, significant changes were effected in the high
school curriculum.

Unit requirements were reinstituted

and expanded to include additional preparation in mathema­
tics, science and foreign languages.
1960-1970
During the early 1960s, the unit requirements
remained in effect.

By the late 1960s and early 197 0s,

however, several factors weakened the dominance of the
college preparatory program in the high school curriculum.
The involvement of the United States in Vietnam, the civil
strife in the cities and campus unrest disillusioned many
Americans regarding the ability of education to solve
societal problems.

The emergence, although brief, of a

counter-culture brought about many changes in the edu­
cational system.
Amidst allegations of rigid administration, irrel­
evant curricula and impersonalized learning processes.

27
many secondary schools developed more flexible and relevant
programs of study.

Educational requirements were modified;

for example, new courses (e.g., ethnic studies, environ­
mental science) were added to the curriculum.

Although

most high schools retain a policy regarding the number of
credits required for graduation, the high school curriculum
is no longer characterized by the college preparatory unit
system.
The Future
As for the future?

It would appear that entrance

requirements, as they exist today, will undergo change.
Yet this change may not evolve from genuine educational
reform so much as from the realities of enrollment-related
concerns.
If there is further decline or if there is no sub­
stantial increase during the next several years,
the period ahead may be an especially appropriate
time for high schools and colleges to discuss
admission policy. When applications are fewer,
colleges are likely to be in a better position
to examine their own admission practices and to
be somewhat more receptive to curricular innovation
at the secondary school level.
Conclusion
It can be concluded, in view of the historical
perspective provided, that college requirements have often
evolved from institutional patterns related to convenience,
circumstance and expediency.

50Ibid., p. 31.

As one author noted, "it

28
became clear that rigorous admissions criteria were often
merely administrative devices to reject able students,
rather than genuine educational instruments to determine
who would benefit most from the institution's program." 51

^^Alvin C. Eurich, "College Admissions in the 21st
Century," College Board Review 51 (Fall 1963): 19.

CHAPTER III
A SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE

It was noted in the previous chapter that the
high school college preparatory program has served as a
major criterion of college entrance requirements.

How

useful has this criterion been?
The ability to predict academic success in college
based upon academic achievement in a high school program
of studies has been a widely researched subject of study.
Fishman and Pasanella have cited that "admission to col­
lege and selection of applicants has probably become the
most intensively explored topic in educational-psychologi­
cal research.
In a review of almost three hundred articles on
this subject, Donahue, Coombs and Travers concluded:
At the present time, the evidence indicates that the
best single measure for the selection of the college
student is his average grade in high school. Study
after study has indicated that the average high

52Joshua A. Fishman and Ann K. Pasanella, "College
Admission-Selection Studies," Review of Educational
Research 30 (1960): 298.

29

30
school grade is a better predictor of college
grades than either subject matter or psycholog­
ical tests.53
Bloom and Peters have also concluded that " . . .
in the long history of attempts to improve predictions
of college success, high school grades have consistently
been found to be the best evidence from which to predict." 54
The high school record provides historical con­
tinuity? it links the future with the past.

The ability

of the high school record to predict success in college
has evolved from "the principle that the best predictions
of future behavior can be made from long and careful
observation and analysis of relevant past behavior."
Jencks and Riesman observed:

55

As

"For colleges are much like

[high] schools, and the student who was adept at picking
up what was expected of him in school is a good bet to do
the same in college, while a student who did not pick up
such skills in school is not very likely to do so in
college either."3*’

53Donahue, Coombs and Travers, p. 154.
54Bloom and Peters, p. 4.
55Ibid., p. 155.
■^Christopher Jencks and David Riesman, The
Acaddmic Revolution (Garden City: Doubleday and Company,
Inc., 1968) , p. 123.

31
How strong is the evidence to support the pre­
dictive ability of the high school record?

A survey of

the literature indicates it is conclusive.
Approximately two hundred studies, concerning this
subject, were conducted from the 1930s through the 1950s.
During the 1960s, more than five hundred studies were pub­
lished.^
One of the earliest studies was conducted by
Lincoln, in 1917, in which he reported a correlation of
.69 between high school standing and freshman college
standing.

Jordan, in 1922, reported a correlation of .50

between high school grades and college freshman grades.
A study by Segal, in 1933, revealed a median value of .55
for the prediction of college achievement based upon
average high school achievement.

Crawford and Burnham,

in their 1946 review of the literature on academic pre­
diction, concluded that .50 was an average correlation
between high school and college grades.
Recent studies reveal no significant differences
in the conclusions formed in earlier studies.

Fishman

and Pasanella, in their review of some 260 studies,
reported a correlation value of .50 between high school
58
and college grades.
Donahue, Coombs and Travers, in

57

Fishman and Pasanella, p. 290.

58Ibid., p. 300.

32
their survey of some three hundred articles, conclude
that "in general, correlations between high school grades
59
and first year college grades are between 0.5 and 0.7."
Cosand, in his review of the literature, reports that
correlation values ranging from .50 to .65 "tend to bear
out that the average grade is the best single criterion
for predicting success." 6 0

It is no wonder that Fishman

and Pasanella conclude that "academic grades . . . are
strongly entrenched as the criteria of selective and
guided admission in American higher education."61
As noted above, the high school record can be a
useful predictor of success in college.

Yet the question

posed by a parent to the President of the College Entrance
Examination Board illustrates how the college preparatory
program may be a barrier to a student's access to higher
education.
We had thought that our daughter was in the college
preparatory course but now find, after two years,
that she was in what the school calls the general
course which colleges won't accept. She has been
making good grades and the school says she is
college material, if only she had taken the right
courses. What do we do to prepare her for college?®^
59Donahue, Coombs and Travers, p. 155.
60J. P. Cosand, "Admissions Criteria: A Review of
the Literature," California Journal of Secondary Education
28 (1953): 14.
61Fishman and Pasanella, p. 306.
62Bowles, p. 31.

33
Several studies suggest that the ability of a
student to succeed in college may not be due so much to
the traditional college preparatory curriculum as to
factors such as aptitude and motivation.
ton has concluded that " . . .

Aymer J. Hamil­

there is no evidence to

prove that students who came to college with traditional
63
subjects do better work than those who do not."
His
study of 774 students at Ohio State University indicated
that students without the traditional college preparatory
program (i.e., preparation in six academic subject areas
as recommended by the college) did not differ in their
academic achievement from students with the traditional
college preparatory curriculum.
J. A. Yates, in a study of 706 graduates of the
Universities of Cincinnati, Kentucky and Indiana, reviewed
the academic progress of these students while in college
in terms of their high school curricula.

The curricula

of these students were comprised of the four general high
school courses of study:
and vocational.

academic, general, scientific

He concluded:

There is no evidence that the traditional academic
subjects either singly or in groups have any
greater educational value for the individual
either for life or for college preparation as
compared with vocational and other subjects, and
prescriptions in them for college entrance should
be reduced to what can be justified. . . . Colleges

^Fine, p. 85.

34
are surprisingly slow to change entrance requirements
even in view of the evidence? and they are themselves
not doing enough research to develop and perfect
improved methods of selecting students.64
Donahue, Coombs and Travers have similarly con­
cluded :
Study after study has shown, however, that there is
practically no relation between pattern of high
school credits and success in college. . . . Simi­
larly, the advantage of studying certain subjects
in high school as background for specific college
courses seems to have been greatly overemphasized.
. . . Consequently, it may be said that the practice
of college admissions officers of requiring certain
high school courses, or certain prescribed sequences,
lacks support of any kind from careful systematic
investigation.66
Another study, conducted at the University of
Florida, concluded:

"Our experience in the past ten years

has demonstrated to our satisfaction that the most important
factors in judging the high school record was level of
achievement in subjects attempted than in the presentation
of any set p a t t e r n . A s Fine observed, ". . . it is not
altogether evident that a student who has taken a voca­
tional or a commercial program will not be able to fit
67
into the college life."

64

Ibid., p. 98.

^5Donahue, Coombs and Travers, p. 159.
66Fine, p. 179.
67Ibid., p. 99.

35
Alexander Astin, in his discussion of predicting
academic performance in college, noted:
Students majoring in business, education and physical
education tend to get lower freshman GPA's than stu­
dents majoring in other fields. However, when high
school grades, aptitude test scores and college
selectivity are controlled, these relationships dis­
appear. In other words, the lower grades received
by students majoring in the three fields can be
attributed entirely to their somewhat lower average
ability and not to any "difficulty" inherent in the
fields themselves.68
Similarly, Paul Dressel notes, "the pattern of
courses taken in high school seems to have little bearing
on college success, and a number of authorities have, for
69
years, recommended abandoning this requirement.”
It is interesting to note that many studies
utilize the grade-point-average reported by the high
school.

For example, Fryer, in his study, used "the cor­

relation between average secondary school marks and
average college marks at the close of the first year of
college."^

Because these averages reflect achievement

in all coursework attempted, it appears most studies do
not control for academic coursework only.

68

Alexander W. Astin, Predicting Academic
formance in College (New York: The Free Press, 1971),
p. 13.
^Paul L. Dressel, Evaluation in Higher Education
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961), p. 316.
70Fryer and Henry, p. 450.

36
In a study on academic prediction for selecting
college entrants, Bloom and Peters concluded,
. . . there have been a large number of efforts to
include or exclude other variables to predict
academic success in college. For example, in
using average grades to determine success, marks
in such courses as physical education or military
training are often excluded. . . . With a few
exceptions, such attempts have led to little
improvement in the effectiveness of predictions.
Probably the most often quoted study of the value
of the traditional versus the nontraditional academic
program of study as a predictor of success in college is
the Eight Year Study which was conducted for entering
freshman classes from 1936 through 1940 {with longitudinal
studies extended through 1944).

It involved a study of

some 3,500 students from thirty secondary schools who
attended some three hundred colleges and universities.
The study controlled for matching groups of students in
terms of aptitude, socio-economic status, individual
interests (to include sports and hobbies, etc.), academic
preparation and achievement in high school and courses
of study pursued in college.
The study was designed to determine if the tra­
ditional academic program (that exemplified by the 15-16
Carnegie unit system) would prepare students better for
college success than students who did not take a college
preparatory program.

As the study asked:

71Bloom and Peters, p. 26.

37
Is the traditional college-entrance program the only
safe and sound plan of preparation for college? Or
can boys and girls be equally well— or possibly even
better— prepared for college through a considerable
variety of widely different programs, devised by
competent secondary school teachers, with their eyes
fixed primarily on the conditions and demands of
modern life and the individual capacities and inter­
ests of particular students, with only incidental
references to the impending college experience?
Would students coming up through such a heterogeneous
system be able to hold their own in a major college,
or would they be foredoomed to failure?
The rationale for the study was further described
as follows:
The secondary schools doubted that success in
college depends upon the study of certain subjects
for a certain length of time. They questioned the
basic assumption upon which college-school relations
were based: that only by the study of English,
foreign language, mathematics, science, and history
could a student be prepared for the work of the
liberal arts college.
The schools believed that there are many dif­
ferent avenues of study and experience by way of
which young people could develop the skill, under­
standing, and intellectual maturity necessary for
satisfactory achievement at the college level.
They were convinced that work in school should have
meaning for each student because of its pertinence
to his concerns and that such work would develop
the powers needed in college.73
The three hundred colleges agreed to accept stu­
dents from the thirty secondary schools upon only the
recommendation of the principal that the student could
succeed in college-level studies.

The thirty schools

72
Dean and Enid Chamberlin and Associates, Did
They Succeed in College? (New York: Harper and Brothers,
1942), p. xix.
73Ibid., pp. 22-23.

38
comprised public and pri.vate institutions.

They included

the Beaver Country Day School in Chesnut Hill, Massachu­
setts; Milton Academy in Milton, Massachusetts; the Junior
and Senior High Schools of Denver, Colorado; Des Moines,
Iowa and Tulsa, Oklahoma.

The three hundred colleges and

universities included Ohio State University, the University
of Michigan, Oklahoma A. and M. College, Yale, Amherst,
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University
of Denver, Bennington College and Bryn Mawr College.
The general conclusions of the study were that the
students without the traditional program when compared to
students with the traditional program:
' 1.
2.

Earned a slightly higher total grade-point-average
Earned higher grade-point-averages in all subject
fields except foreign languages

3.

Did not differ in times placed on probation

4.

Received more academic honors

5.

Did not differ in withdrawal rates from college

6.

Demonstrated, in terms of nonachievement factors,
more intellectual curiosity, objectivity, moti­
vation and resourcefulness
The study demonstrated that

. . . strict reliance on units as a basis for
admission to college cannot be considered a valid
procedure. The empirical data show either that
(1) sheer exposure over a specified period of time
to certain courses does not guarantee the

39
development of basic skills, or (2) that the skills
supposedly developed are not essential to successful
work in college.7^
Moreover, as the study concluded, "no college can be
justified in setting up requirements for admissions
which have been shown to be unnecessary in preparing
students to do college work." 75
One would have postulated that the significant
findings of the Eight Year Study would have had a major
impact upon college entrance requirements.

In a study

conducted ten years after the conclusion of the Eight
Year Study to assess its impact, William Emanuel noted:
Suffice it to say that the profoundness of the
Eight Year Study should well have been a powerful
force in molding entrance-requirement policy in
the last ten years. Is this, however, the case?
For the present at least, a negative answer must
be reported.76
Ralph Berdie, in his study of 25,000 high school
seniors in Minnesota, indicates that " . . .

the student's

curriculum in high school also bears a relationship to
77
the outcomes of these plans to attend college."
His
data revealed:

74Ibid., p. 122.

75Ibid.

76William H. Emanuel, "College-Entrance Require­
ments Ten Years After the Eight-Year Study," The School
Review 61 (December 1953): 522.
77Ralph F. Berdie, After High School— What?
(Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1954),
p. 217.

40
Of those metropolitan boys planning on and
attending college, 79 per cent had taken the
college preparatory course and only 17 per cent
had taken the general course. Only 4 per cent
had taken vocational curricula. Of those planning
on college but not attending, only 56 per cent had
taken the college preparatory course while 33 per
cent had taken vocational courses.
In conclusion, if a student was in a high
school course appropriate for her after-high-school
plans she was more likely to realize these plans
than if she was in an appropriate course . . .78
Patricia Cross has cited additional evidence to
indicate the college preparatory program is not an abso­
lute measure for one's ability to succeed in college.
she noted,

As

. . 4 1 percent of the men who had taken

vocational courses of study in high school were actually
enrolled in college one year after high school graduation." 79 As Chamberlin and his associates noted in the
Eight Year Study,
. . . perception of subjects, units, and requirements
of entrance examinations based upon predetermined
subject matter have undoubtedly fixed the pattern of
secondary education for the great majority of young
people in the United States. Without intending to
do so, the colleges have handicapped schools in
their attempts at fundamental reconstruction.80
It is evident that a college preparatory program
may not be the only means by which a student may prepare

78Ibid., p. 220.
79 Patricia K. Cross, New Students and New Needs
in Higher Education (Berkeley! University of California
Press, 1972), p. ?F5.
an

Chamberlin, p. 121.

41
for college.

More importantly, it is evident that a col­

lege preparatory program may create or sustain a student1s
motivation to attend college whereas a general, vocational
or technical course of study may not afford a student an
equal opportunity for a higher education.

Of course, it

may be the encouragement of teachers, peer pressure from
other college-bound students and familial expectations
which account for such differences.
Conclusions
An examination of the origin and development of
the high school college preparatory program and an exami­
nation of the principle that the achievement of a student
in a college preparatory program of studies in high school
is the most significant determinant of success in college
have been conducted.

Several conclusions can be drawn

from this examination.
First, the fragile nature of predictive studies
concerning success in college should serve more to balance
our use of various admissions criteria than to apply any
one criterion, such as achievement in college preparatory
coursework, as the most significant selective determinant.
As Alvin Eurich, in his study of admissions practices,
concluded:
Colleges had no really reliable way of measuring
their entrants; the main reliance was on aptitude
tests which had little value in predicting whether
the student possessed the variety of human qualities

42
required for success in most occupations and pro­
fessions. Such characteristics as motivation,
creativity, perseverance, leadership, concentration,
and adaptability were plumbed hardly at all. In
fact, the entire admissions process, including the
tests, was none too successful at predicting success
in college.81
Second, college entrance requirements have often
evolved from institutional patterns related to convenience,
circumstance and expediency.

"It became clear that rig­

orous admissions criteria were often merely administrative
devices to reject able students, rather than genuine edu­
cational instruments to determine who would benefit most
82
from the institution's program."
Third, admissions policies and practices often are
unrelated to educational or societal purposes.

While

admissions practices emphasize the importance of achieve­
ment, " . . . grades don't seem to be related to much of
anything except the ability to make similar grades under
83
similar conditions."
An American College Testing Pro­
gram study cites that we should be "concerned with finding
students who will do outstanding things outside the

8^Eurich, p. 19.
82Ibid.
83
Cross, p. 25.

43
classroom and in later life as well as students who will
get satisfactory grades in college."^
Fishman and Pasanella have noted:
Perhaps it is typically American that the operational
routinization of selection and admission have de­
veloped more fully than have consideration for the
criteria or the educational-societal goals upon which
selection and guided admission must rest. The new
influx of intellectual forces in this area may
reduce this imbalance by anchoring selection and
guided admission in the philosophy of education at
one end and in social-science theory and methods at
the other.
As David Lavin continues, "to look mainly for stu­
dents whose academic performance will be high without
considering the reasons for our interest in high per­
formance may, in the long run, be unfair to society as
well as to the excluded students."

86

As Cosand concludes,

"all . . . admissions policies should be logical outgrowths
of the educational philosophy of the institution; and should
be made only after careful consideration of the results to
be anticipated with regard to the students, the college,
the secondary school, and the community or society in
general." 87 It makes little sense, as Alvin Eurich has

84American College Testing Programs Publication,
"ACT Research Report Number 23," February 1968, p. 8.
85Fishman and Pasanella, p. 308.
8 6_

,
Lavxn, p. 169.

87

Cosand, p. 13.

44
noted, to have standards unless we can "relate them to
the expected outcomes of higher education." 8 8
Fourth, it would appear there is no significant
difference between the value of the total high school
record and a high school record comprised of only college
preparatory subjects to predict success in college.

In

their appraisal of the continued use of the Carnegie unit
system, Traxler and Townsend have provided a characteri­
zation appropriate to the concept of the college prepara­
tory program.
It is a truism that educational practices frequently
continue in use long after the conditions which
brought them into being have changed, and after
more effective procedures have been evolved which
might well supersede the old ones. Yet outworn
practices continue, kept alive by custom, resist nee
to change, and inertia.89
A historical perspective, a survey of the
literature and an accompanying discussion cannot become
the means by which these conclusions are accepted or
change is effectuated.

While these conclusions may compel

us to examine current practices and evaluate their effec­
tiveness, only a research study can provide the evidence
to determine if a change in admissions policy and procedure
is appropriate.

88Eurich, p. 27.
89

Arthur E. Traxler and Agatha Townsend, Improving
the Transition from School to College (New York: Harper
and Brothers, Inc., 1^53), p. 6T.

CHAPTER IV
METHODOLOGY

To determine the admissibility of an applicant to
the freshman class at Michigan State University, the
assessment of the high school record is the primary cri­
terion.

The assessment of the high school record involves

a review of the high school transcript, the deletion of
all nonacademic subjects (e.g., music, art, religion) and
the computation of a grade-point-average.

The computation

of this grade-point-average includes the number of credits
taken and the grades achieved in the academic subjects
(i.e., English, mathematics, science, social studies and
foreign language) for the sophomore and junior years.

On

the basis of this academic subjects grade-point-average,
an admission counselor appraises the high school record
and, subsequently, determines the admissibility of the
student.

This procedure for the preparation of an admis­

sions application for review by an admissions counselor
conforms to the established policy of the Office of
Admissions of Michigan State University that the academic

45

46
subjects grade-point-average is a better predictor of
success at the University than the total (i.e., all sub­
jects included) high school record.
In the previous two chapters it has been suggested,
in terms of a historical perspective and a survey of
related research, that the assessment of the academic high
school record may not necessarily serve as a better pre­
dictor of academic success in college than the all sub­
jects high school record.

To evaluate the predictive of

both high school records, this study was proposed.
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study was threefold.

First,

to determine the predictive value of the academic high
school record for the college record earned at the end of
the first term.

Second, to determine the predictive

value of the all subjects high school record for the
college record earned at the end of the first term.
Third, to determine if any significant difference existed
between the predictive value of these two high school
records.
If there is no significant difference between the
predictive value of these two high school records or a
significant difference which favors the all subjects high
school record, then it may be appropriate to propose the
use of the all subjects high school record as the primary
criterion of admission.

Because the time and effort

47
presently expended to determine an academic grade-pointaverage for each applicant may be unnecessary, the pro­
cessing of the application for admission may be expedited
and various cost savings realized by the University.
Consequently, the applicant and the University are better
served by the Office of Admissions.
If there is a significant difference between the
two high school records which favors the academic high
school record, then it may be concluded that the use of
the academic high school record as the primary criterion
of admission is appropriate.

Accordingly, the Office of

Admissions may be assured it continues to serve the best
interests of its applicants and the University.
Selection of Data Elements
To determine the predictive value of the two high
school records, four data elements were required:

the

academic high school record, the total subjects high
school record, the college record at the end of the first
term and standardized test scores.

Because the admissi­

bility of an applicant is often determined by a review of
both the high school record and standardized test scores,
it was necessary to include both criteria.
Although the sex and intended curriculum of the
applicant are not factors in the determination of admissi­
bility, they were utilized for analytical purposes in

48
this study.

Because the academic grade-point-average

computed by the Office of Admissions is often utilized
for academic advisement purposes, it was essential to
determine if the use of an alternative assessment of the
high school record {i.e., the all subjects grade-pointaverage) would adversely affect the student or the college.
Definition of the Data Elements
The following data elements were utilized in this
study.

To insure a proper understanding of these terms

and their use, the following definitions are provided.
High School Record.— The grade-point-average (GPA)
achieved by the student in high school was reported as
the high school record.

The GPA appeared as a three-digit

number (e.g., 3.56) within a four-point system.

In some

instances, a GPA higher than 4.0 (e.g., 4.07) was reported
because honors courses possessed a higher point value
than nonhonors courses (e.g., an A earned in an honors
chemistry class has a value of five points while an A
earned in a regular chemistry class has a value of four
points).
Academic GPA.— This GPA included only "academic"
(i.e., English, mathematics, science, foreign language
and social studies) high school courses.

The GPA was

computed only for academic subjects which appeared on the

49
high school transcript and incorporated the number of
credits taken, the grades earned and the point value of
the grade (e.g., A = 4 points).
All Subjects GPA.— This GPA was reported by the
high school and appeared on the high school transcript.
It included all subjects and was computed by the high
school to include the number of credits earned and the
point value of the grading system (e.g., A = 4 points,
B = 3 points).
Test Scores.— Standardized test scores, the
Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) or the American College
Test (ACT), are required by the University for admissions
purposes.

Because the majority (86 percent) of entering

freshman students have ACT scores reported to the Uni­
versity, these test scores were used in this study.

They

provided the largest group of available data and were
the most representative test score of entering freshman
students.

Because the ACT Composite score is a weighted

average of the other four reported subject scores (English,
Mathematics, Natural Science and Social Science) and is
usually the test score determinant for admissibility, it
was used in this study.
Academic Success.— Academic success was defined
as the completion of the first term (Fall) of the freshman
year.

It was unnecessary to further restrict this

50
definition to the attainment of a specific GPA or to the
completion of the second or third terms of the freshman
year for two reasons.

First, academic dismissal will

not occur after the first term of study, regardless of
the GPA earned.

Second, various persistence studies of

freshman students at Michigan State University reveal no
significant difference between the GPA earned the first
term and at the end of the freshman year. 90
College Record.— The college record was the GPA
attained by freshman students at the conclusion of the
Fall Term of 1975.

The Fall Term of 1975 was selected

because it provided the most recent and accessible data
available (e.g., the high school transcript) and the size
of that entering class was typical of recent freshman
enrollments at Michigan State University.
Freshman Students.— The policy of the Office of
Admissions stipulates that qualified applicants are
admitted as freshmen when they have attempted either no
coursework at another college or university or that such
coursework attempted does not exceed twenty-four semester
hours or thirty-six quarter hours.

Freshman students are

assigned a student number at the time of admission.

90Charles H. Eberly, "Survey of Persistence Studies
of Freshman Students at Michigan State University," Office
of Evaluation Services (Internal) Report, Michigan State
University, 1971, p. 34.

51
Subjects were selected for this study on the basis of the
student number block existent for freshman students for
the Pall Term of 1975.
Curriculum.— The college of the declared major
rather than the major of the students for the Fall Term
of 1975 was selected for curricular analysis for two
reasons.

First, the admissibility of a student is not

determined by the intended major of study.

Any analysis

of data by major, for the purpose of this study, would
be irrelevant.

Second, the large number of majors (almost

two hundred) and the small if nonexistent number of fresh­
man students in any one major would provide little or no
data for analysis and such data as may be available would
be inconclusive.
Sex.— Students were designated as male or female.
Significant Difference.— This data element will
be defined following a statement of the hypothesis and
the statistical methodology to be employed to test the
hypothesis.
Statement of Hypothesis and Methodology
A statistical study requires the formulation of a
hypothesis and the construction of a methodology by which
the hypothesis is accepted or not accepted.

The hypothe­

sis, in this study, provided the framework within which

52
.t.

statistical measurement and analysis provided evidence
to determine whether there was any significant difference
between the predictive value of the academic GPA or the
all subjects GPA for academic success at Michigan State
University.
The hypothesis of this study, stated in null
fashion, was:
There is no significant difference between the value
of the all subjects high school record and the aca­
demic high school record to predict the academic
success of freshman students for the Fall Term of
1975 at Michigan State University.
The alternative hypothesis was that there is a significant
difference between the value of the all subjects high
school record and the academic high school record to pre­
dict the academic success of freshman students for the
Fall Term of 1975 at Michigan State University.
If the null hypothesis is accepted, the alterna­
tive hypothesis will not be accepted.

If the null

hypothesis is not accepted, the alternative hypothesis
will be accepted.
A statistical study also requires a methodology
by which the data available can be collected, quantified,
organized, presented, analyzed and interpreted.

Such a

methodology also provides the framework by which the
hypothesis is tested and subsequently accepted or not
accepted.

53
For the purpose of this study, the methodology
employed was a multiple correlation and regression analy­
sis.

For prediction studies of similar design, this is a
generally accepted methodology. 91
The analysis was developed in three steps.

First,

multiple correlation coefficients were computed to include
the academic GPA, the ACT Composite score and the Fall
Term 1975 GPA.

Second, multiple correlation coefficients

were established for the all subjects GPA, the ACT Com­
posite score and the Fall Term 1975 GPA.

Third, the magni­

tude and significance of the difference between multiple
correlation coefficients were determined.

In addition,

the multiple correlation coefficients were provided and
analyzed with respect to the total modified random sample,
by sex and curriculum.
The level of significance for this study was .05.
This is an acceptable selection for a research study of
92 Any less stringent level of significance
this design.
is unwarranted because there is a greater probability
then that the hypothesis may be correct but because it
cannot satisfy the greater level of significance, it will
be rejected unnecessarily.

Sidney J. Armore, Introduction to Statistical
Analysis and Inference for Psychology and Education (New
York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966), p. 445.
92Ibid., p. 349.

54
To assess the significance of any difference which
may exist between the correlation coefficients for the
academic and all subjects GPA groups, it was necessary
to develop a statistical test by which the hypothesis was
accepted or not accepted.

To evaluate the significance

of the difference between the multiple correlation coef­
ficients, an R SQUARES value was computed for each multiple
correlation coefficient.

The R SQUARES values for the all

subjects and academic GPA group multiple correlation coef­
ficients was compared and any difference in values
measured.

Because any difference measured will indicate

the degree of variance unaccounted for between the GPA
groups, the difference between the R SQUARES measures
provided a basis to evaluate if the magnitude of the dif­
ference was considered significant.

To determine the

significance of the difference between the R SQUARES
values, a measured value difference equal to or less than
.05 was determined as insignificant; any value exceeding
.05 was determined as significant.
Selection of the Modified
Random Sample
A systematic modified random sample methodology
was utilized to secure the group of subjects required
for this study.

To provide an adequate number of sub­

jects for analysis by sex and curriculum, an equal oppor­
tunity for each subject to be selected from the population,

55
a representative sample and a convenient method of
selection, it was decided to select every third student.
This use of modified random selection is an acceptable
technique for a study of this design. 93 The modified
random sample was selected from the population of fresh­
man students who had completed the Fall Term of 1975 at
the University and for whom ACT scores were recorded as
their standardized test scores at the time of their
enrollment.
Procedure
The following data were reported for each student
in the random sample:

sex, college, ACT Composite score,

Fall Term GPA, the high school all subjects GPA and high
school academic GPA as computed by the Office of Admis­
sions.

Data for each student were matched by student

number, a referent unique to each student.
Correlation coefficients were computed for the
all subjects GPA group and the academic GPA group.

The

correlation coefficients included three variables:

GPA,

ACT Composite score and Fall Term GPA.
The data were reported in three stages:
total random sample, by sex and by college.

for the

In each

stage the magnitude and significance of the difference
between the correlation coefficients for the GPA groups
were measured and analyzed.
93Ibid., p. 240.

CHAPTER V
A REPORT OF THE FINDINGS
Selection of the Modified
Random Sample
An alphabetical list of 4,230 students was obtained
from the University's Student Master File of the freshman
students who completed the Fall Term of 1975 and for whom
ACT scores were recorded.

The selection of every third

student produced a modified random sample of 1,410 students.
Procurement of Data Elements
The following data were reported for each student:
sex, college, ACT Composite score, Fall Term GPA, the
academic GPA as computed by the Office of Admissions and
the all subjects GPA as reported by the high school.
Data elements to include sex, college, ACT Composite
score, Fall Term GPA and the academic GPA as computed by
the Office of Admissions were obtained from the Student
Master File.

The all subjects GPA as reported by the

high school was obtained from the high school transcript
which accompanied the application for admission.

In

those instances where no GPA was provided by the high

56

57
school, a GPA was computed according to the grading scale
utilized by the high school (e.g., A - 5 points) and
included all subjects taken.

The high school GPA was

recorded on the transcript for 57.5 percent (811) of the
students and computed for 42.5 percent (599) of the stu­
dents .
Representativeness of the Modified
Random Sample
The modified random sample of 1,410 students was
representative of the entering class of 7,086 freshmen.
There was little difference between the random sample and
the population with respect to sex and curriculum.
For the Fall Term of 1975, 7,086 freshman students
enrolled in the University's sixteen colleges.

Of this

entering freshman class, 51.7 percent (3,663) were women
and 48.3 percent (3,423) were men.
The modified random sample was comprised of
52.8 percent (752) women and 47.2 percent (658) men.

The

difference between the ratio of men in the population
and the modified random sample was 1.1 percent.

This

same percentage also represented the difference between
the ratio of women in the population and the modified
random sample.
There was little difference between the total
enrollment of freshman students in any college and that
of the modified random sample.

As Table 1 indicates,

58
TABLE 1
COMPARATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF ENROLLED STUDENTS AMONG THE
COLLEGES FOR THE POPULATION AND MODIFIED RANDOM SAMPLE

College

Modified
Random Sample

Population
Number

%

Number

Difference
in
Percentages

%

Agriculture

382

5.4

73

5.2

.2

Arts and Letters

416

5.9

83

5.9

.0

Business

682

9.6

155

11.0

1.4

Communication

281

4.0

45

3.2

.8

Education

292

4.1

59

4.2

.1

Engineering

559

7.9

115

8.2

.3

Human Ecology

194

2.7

54

3.8

.1

Human Medicine

111

1.6

24

1.7

.1

James Madison

131

1.9

26

1.8

.1

Justin Morrill

116

1.6

18

1.3

.3

Lyman Briggs

292

4.1

52

3.7

.4

Natural Science

982

13.9

184

13.0

.9

Social Science

526

7.4

87

6.2

1.2

1,562

22.0

344

24.4

2.4

5

.1

2

.1

.0

555

7.8

89

6.3

1.5

7,086

100.0

1,410

100.0

University
Urban Develop­
ment
Veterinary
Medicine
Total

59
the largest percentage difference was 2.4 and the smallest
.1 including those differences which equalled zero.
In two colleges, no difference between the popu­
lation and modified random sample enrollment was recorded.
For eight colleges the percentage difference ranged from .1
to .4.
.9.

Two colleges had percentage differences of .8 and

The other four colleges had percentage differences

which ranged from 1.2 to 2.4.
In eight colleges the percentage enrollment of
the college was lower in the modified random sample than
in the population.

The lower enrollment percentages

ranged from ,1 to 2.4.

Six colleges had a modified random

sample enrollment percentage higher than that of the total
enrollment.

The higher enrollment percentages ranged

from .1 to 2.4.
These percentage ranges reflect nonsignificant
differences between the modified random sample and the
population when the number of students is considered.
While a difference of 2.4 percent may appear significant,
it represents, for example in the University College, a
change of only 31 students out of a college population
enrollment of 1,562 freshman students or a change of only
7 students out of a modified random sample enrollment of
344 freshman students.

60

Profile of Total GPA Group
Differences
To illustrate any difference between the academic
GPA as computed by the University and the all subjects GPA
recorded by the high school, a comparative profile of
these two GPA groups is provided.

Table 2 presents a

frequency distribution of the GPAs for both groups and
includes the total random sample of 1,410 students.
The profiles of the academic and all subjects GPA
groups were very similar.
was 3.00.

The mode GPA for both groups

The second most frequently achieved GPA for

both groups was 4.00.

The median academic subjects only

GPA was 3.20 and the median all subjects GPA was 3.29.
The lowest GPA achieved for the all subjects group was
1.68.

The highest GPA achieved for the all subjects

group was 4.15.

The lowest and highest GPAs attained

by the academic GPA group were 1.64 and 4.24, respectively.
The mean academic GPA was 3.22 and the mean for the all
subjects GPA was 3.29.
The standard deviation for the academic GPA group
was .4446 compared to .4228 for the all subjects GPA group.
The standard error for the academic and all subjects GPA
groups, respectively, was .013 and .012.

The variance for

the academic GPA was .232 compared with .208 for the all
subjects GPA group.

The standard error, standard devi­

ation and variance for the all subjects GPA and the
academic GPA groups were uniform and consistent for each

61
TABLE 2
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ACADEMIC AND ALL SUBJECTS HIGH
SCHOOL GRADE-POINT-AVERAGE FOR MODIFIED RANDOM SAMPLE
Academic

All Subjects

tar/I
Freq.
1.64
1.68
1.75
1.85
1.92
2.00
2.03
2.04
2.05
2.11
2.12
2.14
2.18
2.20
2.21
2.23
2.25
2.27
2.28
2.29
2.30
2.31
2.32
2.33
2.35
2.36
2.37
2.38
2.39
2.40
2.42
2.43
2.44
2.45
2.46
2.47
2.48
2.49
2.50
2.51
2.52

Pet.

Cum.
Pet.

1

0

0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

0

0

-

-

-

1
2

0
0

0
0

-

-

-

1
1
2
1

0
0
0
0

0
0
1
1

-

-

1
1

0
0

-

-

1

0

-

-

2

0

-

-

1

0

-

-

-

-

1
3
3

Freq.

Pet.

Cum
Pet

—m

1
1
1
1
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

0

1

-

-

-

1

0

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

0

1

-

-

-

1
2

0
0

1
1

-

-

-

2

0

1

-

-

-

1

0

1

1

-

-

-

0
0
0

1
1
2

-

-

-

1
3
2
1
3

0
0
0
0
0

2
2
2
2
2

2
1
1
1
1
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
1
1
2
2
2

-

-

-

0
0

-

-

-

1
2
2
3
2
6

0
0
0
0
0
0

2
3
3
3
3
3

0
0
0
0
1

2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4

-

-

-

4

0

4

1
1
1
1

2
3
1
2
3
2
1
10

-

62
TABLE 2— Continued
Academic

All Subjects

GPA
Freq.
2.53
2.54
2.55
2.56
2.57
2.58
2.59
2.60
2.61
2.62
2.63
2.64
2.65
2.66
2.67
2.68
2.69
2.70
2.71
2.72
2.73
2.74
2.75
2.76
2.77
2.78
2.79
2.80
2.81
2.82
2.83
2.84
2.85
2.86
2.87
2.88
2.89
2.90
2.91
2.92
2.93
2.94
2.95
2.96

1
1
2
4
5
1
3
3
2
6
4
6
7
5
5
6
5
9
7
5
4
3
18
8
7
3
5
10
10
7
9
8
10
13
5
9
7
10
8
9
10
7
12
15

Pet.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1

Cum.
Pet.

Freq.

4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
9
9
10
10
10
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
16
16
17
18
18
19
19
20
21
21
22
22
23
24

5
1
8
2
5
6
1
11
5
10
7
11
8
9
7
10
5
5
16
7
13
3
20
6
16
8
3
12
12
10
25
3
5
8
12
18
5
9
2
7
12
20
9
4

Pet.

Cum,
Pet,

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
0

4
4
5
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
13
14
15
16
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
22
24
24
25
25
25
28
28
29
29
29
30
32
32
33

63
TABLE 2— Continued
All Subjects

Academic
GPA
Freq.
2.97
2.98
2.99
3.00
3.01
3.02
3.03
3.04
3.05
3.06
3.07
3.08
3.09
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
3.16
3.17
3.18
3.19
3.20
3.21
3.22
3.23
3.24
3.25
3.26
3.27
3.28
3.29
3.30
3.31
3.32
3.33
3.34
3.35
3.36
3.37
3.38
3.39
3.40

8
4
4
35
2
7
8
11
17
12
9
10
8
24
5
12
11
3
11
13
10
7
11
15
6
10
10
11
16
8
13
7
17
13
7
12
12
9
10
15
9
10
10
18

Pet.
1
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Cum.
Pet.

Freq.

25
25
25
28
28
29
29
30
31
32
33
33
34
36
36
37
38
38
39
40
41
41
42
43
20
44
45
46
47
47
48
49
50
51
52
52
53
54
55
56
56
57
58
59

2
1

0
0

-

-

52

Pet.

4

Cum
Pet
33
33
37

-

-

-

-

-

-

5
2
11
20
24
9
2
5
11
25
7
7
5
17
5
19
2
11
9
7
5
9
20
7
3
9
10
5
8
5
10
-

8
5
8
5
7
13

0
0
1
1
2
1
0
0
1
2
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
-

1
0
1
0
1
1

37
37
38
39
41
42
42
42
43
45
45
46
47
48
48
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
54
55
55
56
57
57
59
58
59
-

59
60
60
61
61
62

64
TABLE 2— Continued
All Subjects

Academic
GPA
Freq.
3.41
3.42
3.43
3.44
3.45
3.46
3.47
3.48
3.49
3.50
3.51
3.52
3.53
3.54
3.55
3.56
3.57
3.58
3.59
3.60
3.61
3.62
3.63
3.64
3.65
3.66
3.67
3.68
3.69
3.70
3.71
3.72
3.73
3.74
3.75
3.76
3.77
3.78
3.79
3.80
3.81
3.82
3.83
3.84

8
12
10
13
13
7
10
9
3
25
4
13
5
9
14
8
8
12
14
18
7
11
10
9
12
5
20
9
7
15
6
6
7
3
18
5
9
5
7
10
7
8
13
6

Pet.
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
2
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0

Cum.
Pet.
60
60
61
62
63
63
64
65
65
67
67
68
68
69
70
71
71
72
73
74
75
76
76
77
78
78
79
80
81
82
82
83
83
83
85
85
86
86
86
87
88
89
89
89

Freq.
3
5
6
19
5
2
10
5
—

29
5
4
7
4
13
11
14
20
11
18
6
12
7
11
10
6
16
14
9
8
7
3
7
1
13
9
4
6
4
12
10
7
13
3

Pet.
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
-

2
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0

Cum
Pet
62
63
63
64
65
65
66
66
-

68
69
69
69
70
71
71
72
74
75
76
76
77
78
79
79
80
81
82
83
83
84
84
85
85
86
86
87
87
87
88
89
89
90
91

65
TABLE 2— Continued
Academic
GPA
Freq.
3.85
3.86
3.87
3.88
3.89
3.90
3.91
3.92
3.93
3.94
3.95
3.96
3.97
3.98
3.99
4.00
4.01
4.03
4.04
4.05
4.10
4.15
4.24

18
6
3
10
4
11
8
7
5
3
9
11
6
4
3
32
1

Pet.
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
0

All Subjects
Cum.
Pet.

Freq.

91
91
91
92
92
93
94
94
95
95
95
96
97
97
97
99
100

15
7
5
9
6
8
7
4
3
8
10
5
7
2
3
25

-

-

-

-

-

-

1
1
1
1

0
0
0
0

100
100
100
100

Pet.
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
2

-

-

1
1
1
2

0
0
0
0

—

-

—

Cum
Pet
92
92
93
93
94
94
95
95
95
96
97
97
97
98
98
100
100
100
100
-

100

66

dimension measured (sex, curriculum and total modified
random sample). These data are provided in summary
format for each of the colleges in Table 3.
Analysis of Multiple Correlation Data
for Modified Random Sample
A multiple regression coefficient was obtained to
establish the relationship between all subjects or academic
GPA and ACT Composite score and the Fall Term GPA.

A

multiple regression coefficient for each GPA group was
obtained for the modified random sample of 1,410 students.
The multiple correlation coefficient for the
academic GPA and ACT Composite score was .5092.

A cor­

relation coefficient of .5101 was obtained for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score.
The difference between the two multiple correlation
coefficients was insignificant.

An R SQUARE values of

.2593 and .2601 were computed, respectively, for the
academic and all subjects GPA groups (to include the ACT
Composite score). The difference in R SQUARE values of
.008 fell within the established range for a value which
must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered insig­
nificant.
Analysis of Multiple Correlation
Data by Sex
A multiple regression coefficient was obtained to
establish the relationship between the all subjects or

TABLE 3
SUMMARY DATA CHART FOR ACADEMIC AND ALL SUBJECTS HIGH SCHOOL GRADE-POINT-AVERAGE BY COLLEGE
Sample

University
Agriculture
Business
Engineering
Human Ecology
Natural Science
Veterinary
Medicine
Education
Communications
Arts and Letters
James Madison
Lyman Briggs
Justin Morrill
Social Science
Human Medicine
Urban Develop­
ment
Total

Academic

All Subjects

Mean

Median

SE

SD

Var.

Mean

Median

SE

SD

Var.

332
70
152
109
54
180

3.213
3.189
3.103
3.217
3.183
3.275

3.175
3.165
3.080
3.220
3.155
3.260

.025
.045
.034
.045
.054
.036

.447
.377
.422
.467
.394
.485

.200
.142
.178
.218
.155
.235

3.260
3.235
3.211
3.270
3.256
3.341

3.245
3.210
3.220
3.315
3.225
3.395

.023
.043
.032
.043
.054
.033

.432
.365
.399
.455
.398
.447

.187
.133
.159
.207
.159
.200

84
55
44
78
26
48
18
87
24

3.323
3.182
3.182
3.287
3.168
3.507
3.178
3.152
3.429

3.365
3.073
3.125
3.305
3.185
3.705
3.075
3.060
3.640

.045
.056
.064
.048
.087
.066
.077
.045
.101

.412
.413
.428
.428
.443
.454
.327
.416
.494

.170
.170
.183
.183
.196
.206
.107
.173
.244

3.386
3.294
3.225
3.347
3.198
3.565
3.214
3.208
3.459

3.412
3.270
3.250
3.358
3.175
3.695
3.130
3.200
3.505

.043
.052
.056
.044
.077
.060
.081
.041
.093

.401
.398
.376
.403
.393
.431
.345
.380
.457

.161
.158
.141
.162
.154
.185
.119
.145
.209

2

2.600

2.600

.050

.071

.005

2.660

2.660

.090

.127

.016

1,410

68
academic GPA and the ACT Composite score for male and
female students and the Fall Term GPA.

The male student

academic GPA and ACT Composite score produced a correlation
coefficient of .5008.

For the all subjects GPA and ACT

Composite score, a coefficient of .4980 was reported.
The female student academic GPA and ACT Composite score
produced a correlation coefficient of .5176.

A coefficient

of .5219 was achieved for the all subjects GPA and ACT
Composite score.
The difference in correlation coefficients for
males or females regarding the academic subjects only and
all subjects GPA groups was insignificant.

The value for

males was .24 80 for the all subjects GPA group and .2508
for the academic GPA group.

The difference in R SQUARE

values of .0029 fell within the established range for a
value which must be equal to or less than .05 to be con­
sidered insignificant.

The R SQUARE value for females

was .2724 for the all subjects GPA group and .2679 for
the academic GPA group.

The difference in R SQUARE

values of .0045 fell within the established range for a
value which must be equal to or less than .05 to be con­
sidered insignificant.
Analysis of Correlation Data
by College
An analysis, by college, of the relationship
between the academic and all subjects GPA and ACT

69

Composite score to the Pall Term GPA was conducted.
Multiple correlation coefficients were obtained for the
academic GPA and ACT Composite score or the all subjects
GPA and ACT Composite score in relationship to the Pall
Term GPA.
College of Agriculture
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .6225 was reported.
A coefficient of .6423 was provided when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .3875 for the academic
GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient and .4125 for
the all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.
The difference in R SQUARE values, .0250, was insignifi­
cant because it fell within the established range for a
value which must be equal to or less than .05 to be con­
sidered insignificant.
College of Arts and Letters
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .6091 was reported.
A coefficient of .6496 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .3710 for the academic
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient and .4220
for the all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score

70
coefficient.

The difference in R SQUARE values, .0510,

was insignificant because it fell within the established
range for a value which must be equal to or less than .05
to be considered insignificant.
College of Business
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .5414 was reported.
A coefficient of .5226 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .2931 for the academic
GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient and .2731 for the
all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.
The difference in R SQUARE values, .0200, was insignificant
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
College of Communication Arts
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .5925 was reported.
A coefficient of .5861 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .3510 for the academic
GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient and .3435 for the
all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.
The difference in R SQUARE values, .0075, was insignificant

71
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
College of Education
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .6670 was reported.

A

coefficient of .6211 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .4449 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .3958 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0491, was insignificant
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
College of Engineering
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .3753 was reported.

A

coefficient of .3786 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .1408 for the academic
GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient and .1433 for
the all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.
The difference in R SQUARE values, .0025, was insignificant

72
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
College of Human Ecology
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .4997 was reported.
A coefficient of .5242 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .2497 for the academic
GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient and .2748 for the
all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.
The difference in R SQUARE values, .0251, was insignifi­
cant because it fell within the established range for a
value which must be equal to or less than .05 to be con­
sidered insignificant.
College of Human Medicine
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .6328 was reported.

A

coefficient of .6250 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .4004 for the academic
GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient and .3906 for the
all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.
The difference in R SQUARE values, .0098, was insignificant

73
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
James Madison College
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .7047 was reported.

A

coefficient of .6753 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .4966 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .4560 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0406, was insignificant
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
Justin Morrill College
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .3533 was reported.

A

coefficient of .3851 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .1249 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .1483 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0234, was insignificant

74
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
Lyman Briggs College
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .6677 was reported.

A

coefficient of .6429 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .4458 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .4214 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0244, was insignificant
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
College of Natural Science
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .5397 was reported.

A

coefficient of .5422 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .2912 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .2940 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0028, was insignificant

75
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
College of Social Science
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .5166 was reported.

A

coefficient of .5202 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .2669 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .2706 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0037, was insignificant
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
College of Veterinary Medicine
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .6063 was reported.

A

coefficient of .6357 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .3676 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .4041 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0365, was insignificant

76
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
University College
When the academic GPA was combined with the ACT
Composite score, a coefficient of .5425 was reported.

A

coefficient of .5420 was produced when the all subjects
GPA was combined with the ACT Composite score.
The R SQUARE value was .2943 for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score coefficient and .2937 for the all
subjects GPA and ACT Composite score coefficient.

The

difference in R SQUARE values, .0006, was insignificant
because it fell within the established range for a value
which must be equal to or less than .05 to be considered
insignificant.
Summary
For eight of the colleges (Agriculture, Arts and
Letters, Engineering, Human Ecology, Justin Morrill,
Natural Science, Social Science and Veterinary Medicine)
the all subjects GPA and ACT Composite score correlation
coefficient was higher than that for the academic GPA and
ACT Composite score.

In seven of the colleges (Business,

Communication Arts, Education, Human Medicine, James
Madison, Lyman Briggs and University), the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score correlation coefficient was higher

77
than that for the all subjects GPA and ACT Composite
score.

For the College of Urban Development the coef­

ficients had a perfect correlation value of 1.00; however,
a modified random sample of two students and a total
freshman enrollment of five students for the college
indicates the data are too limited for any meaningful
analysis.

However, the difference between the correlation

coefficients, by college, as measured by the corresponding
R SQUARE values, was insignificant for all of the colleges.
The correlation coefficient for the all subjects
GPA and ACTComposite score with respect to the modified
random sample was higher than that for the academic GPA
and ACT Composite score.

However, the difference between

these correlation coefficients, as measured by the cor­
responding R SQUARE values, was insignificant.
The correlation coefficient for the all

subjects

GPA and the ACT Composite score for female students was
higher than that for the academic GPA group.

The cor­

relation coefficient for the academic GPA and the ACT
Composite score for male students was higher than that
for the all subjects GPA.

However, the difference between

the correlation coefficients for male or female students,
as measured by the corresponding R SQUARE values, was
insignificant.

78
Disposition of the Hypothesis
For statistical purposes, the null hypothesis
tested was:
There is no significant difference between the value
of the all subjects high school record and the aca­
demic high school record to predict the academic
success of freshman students for the Fall Term of
1975 at Michigan State University.
The difference between the correlation coefficients for
the all subject and academic GPA groups to include an
analysis of the modified random sample, by sex and cur­
riculum, was determined to be insignificant.

All of the

R SQUARE values were within the established range for a
value which must be equal to or less than .05 to be con­
sidered insignificant.

Difference in R SQUARES values

for the multiple correlation coefficients were, respec­
tively, .0008 for the modified random sample, .0028 for
males, .0045 for females and ranged from .0006 to .0510
for the colleges.
In view of the above finding, no significant dif­
ference between the correlation coefficients for the aca­
demic and all subjects GPA groups was determined.

There­

fore, it can be concluded the null hypothesis can be
accepted.

CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Overview of the Study
The purpose of this study was to determine if any
significant difference existed between an academic and
an all subjects high school GPA to predict academic
success for entering freshman students for Fall Term 1975
at Michigan State University.

To accomplish this purpose,

a historical perspective was developed and a survey of
the related literature and a statistical study were con­
ducted .
The historical perspective demonstrated that the
use of the academic high school GPA to predict academic
success in college evolved more from considerations of
institutional expediency and convenience and a need for
uniformity in college entrance requirements between
institutions than an educational philosophy or theory.
Intended as a quantitative measurement of the high school
college preparatory program, the Carnegie unit system
gradually achieved so much importance that the GPA

79

80
attained in the college preparatory subjects was utilized
by most offices of admissions as the primary criterion of
admission.
Evidence was provided in the survey of the related
literature that the predictive value of achievement in a
high school program of studies for academic success in
college has been well established.

It was also noted

that there was much less than universal support for the
proposition that a GPA computed only for academic subjects
in high school served as a better predictor of success in
college than did a GPA which incorporated all subjects
taken in high school.
The statistical study was designed and conducted
to determine if any significant difference existed between
the use of an academic and an all subjects high school
GPA to predict success in college.

For statistical pur­

poses, the null hypothesis to be tested was:
There is no significant difference between the value
of the all subjects high school record and the aca­
demic high school record to predict the academic
success of freshman students for the Fall Term of
1975 at Michigan State University.
A modified random sample of 1,410 freshman students of
the 7,086 freshman students who entered Michigan State
University for the Fall Term of 1975 was selected.

The

statistical study consisted of a multiple correlation
and regression analysis.

Correlation coefficients were

81
determined for the academic high school GPA, the all sub­
jects high school GPA, standardized test scores and the
collegiate academic record for the Fall Term of 1975.

A

comparative analysis of these coefficients was conducted
and included a determination of the magnitude and sig­
nificance of the two grade-point-average groups in terms
of the modified random sample, by sex and curriculum.
The level of significance employed in this study was .05.
To determine significance of the difference between the
correlation coefficients, a measured R SQUARE value equal
to or less than .05 was utilized.
Summary of Findings
The major finding of this study was that no sig­
nificant statistical difference existed between the use
of the academic and all subjects high school GPA to
predict academic success.

This finding was applicable

for an analysis of the data with respect to the modified
random sample, by sex and curriculum.
Resolution of the Hypothesis
The null hypothesis to be tested was:
There is no significant difference between the value
of the all subjects high school record and the aca­
demic high school record to predict the academic
success of freshman students for the Fall Term of
1975 at Michigan State University.

82
Because no significant statistical difference was estab­
lished between the correlation coefficients for the aca­
demic and all subjects high school record groups, the
null hypothesis was accepted.
Implications
Because no significant statistical difference
was established between the predictive use of the academic
and all subjects high school GPA, it could be postulated
that the all subjects GPA could be used in lieu of the
academic GPA as the major admissions criterion for fresh­
man students.

The use of this criterion of admission, it

is believed, would generate cost savings to the University
and enable the University to provide more efficient ser­
vice to its applicants.

In the very competitive environ­

ment within which offices of admissions are likely to
exist for the next five to ten years, these advantages
are significant.
Recommendations for Further Research
It was demonstrated in this study that there was
no significant difference between the academic and all
subjects high school grade-point-average to predict
academic success for freshman students for the Fall Term
of 1975.

To determine whether the all subjects high

school grade-point-average could be used as an admission

83
criterion at Michigan State University and other insti­
tutions, it is recommended that:
1.

This study be replicated for other entering
freshman classes at Michigan State University.
Therefore, it can be determined if the findings
for the entering class for the Fall Term of 1975
are applicable to other entering classes.

2.

This study be replicated in other institutions
of higher education which utilize a selective
admissions program.

Therefore, it can be deter­

mined if findings applicable at Michigan State
University are appropriate for other institutions
of higher education.
It could then be determined if the use of the
academic grade-point-average as the primary admissions
criterion of admission may represent what Benjamin Fine
has suggested as another indication that "college gates
are barred by artificial or arbitrary restrictions, by
the rigid guardians of tradition or by a host of outmoded
94
educational shibboleths."

94

Fine, p. 1.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aikin, Wilford M. The Story of the Eight-Year Study.
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1942.
American College Testing Program. MIDSTATE: A Model Use
of the ACT Assessment Program. Iowa City:
American College Testing Program, 1977.
_______ . ACT Research Report Number 23. Iowa City:
American College Testing Program, February 1968.
Anastasia, Anne; Mead, Martin J.; and Schneiders, Alexander
A. The Validation of a Biographical Inventory as
a Predictor of College Success. Princeton:
College Entrance Examination Board, 1960.
Armore, Sidney J. Introduction to Statistical Analysis
and Inference for Psychology and Education. New
York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966.
Arnold, James W., and Weber, Ralph E. Admission to
College. Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing
Company, 1964.
Astin, Alexander W. Predicting Academic Performance in
College. New York: Tne Free Press, 1971.
_______ . "The Myth of Equal Access.11 The Chronicle of
Higher Education, September 29, 1975.
_______ . Who Goes Where to College. Chicago:
Research Associates, Inc., 1965.

Science

Beamer, Fred J., and Frankel, Martin M. Projections of
Educational Statistics: 1980-1990. Washington,
D.C.: National Center for Educational Statistics,
1976.
Berdie, Ralph F. After High School— What? Minneapolis:
The University of Minnesota Press, 1954.

84

85

Bloom, Benjamin S., and Peters, Frank R. The Use of
Academic Prediction Scales for Counseling and
Selecting College Entrants. New York: The Free
Press of Glencoe, Inc., 1961.
Bowles, F. H. "The Evolution of Admissions Requirements,
Journal of the Association of College Admissions
Counselors 17, Association of College Admissions
Counselors, Washington, D.C. (1965): 24-36.
How To Get Into College. New York:
Dutton and Company, Inc., 1958.

E. P.

Broome, Edwin C. A Historical and Critical Discussion of
College Admission Requirements. New York:
Columbia University Press, 1903.
Burnham, Paul S., and Hewitt, Benjamin A. "Secondary
School Grades and Other Data as Predictors of
Academic Achievement in College." College and
University 48 (Fall 1972): 121-35.
Chamberlin, Dean and Associates. Did They Succeed in
College? New York: Harper and Brothers, 1942.
College Entrance Examination Board. Guide for High Schools
and Colleges. Princeton: College Entrance Exami­
nation Board, 1976.
_______ . Barriers to Higher Education. Princeton:
College Entrance Examination Board, 1971.
College Admissions Policies for the 1970s.
Princeton: College Entrance Examination Board,
1968.
_______ . A Guide for Counselors. Princeton:
Entrance Examination Board, 1961.

College

_______ . Manual of Freshman Class Profiles. Princeton:
College Entrance Examination Board,1962.
_______ . Report of the Commission on Tests:
Righting
the Balance on Tests. Princeton: College
Entrance Examinations Board, 1970.
Cosand, J. P. "Admissions Criteria: A Review of the
Literature." California Journal of Secondary
Education 28, California Secondary Education
Association Publication, Los Angeles (1953):
12-21 .

86
Crawford, Albert B., and Burnham, Paul S. Forecasting
College Achievement. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1946.
Cross, Patricia K. New Students and New Needs in Higher
Education. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1972.
Debler, Charles H. Who Gets Into College— And Why. New
York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1965.
Doermann, Humphrey. Cross Currents in College Admissions.
New York: Teachers College Press, 1968.
Donahue, Wilma T.; Coombs, Clyde H.; and Travers, Robert
M. W. The Measurement of Student Adjustment and
Achievement. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press, 1$49.
Douglass, Carl R. "The Relation of Patterns of High
School Credits to Scholastic Success in College."
North Central Association Quarterly 6, North
Central Association Publication, Chicago (1931):
283-397.
Dressel, Paul L. Evaluation in Higher Education.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961.

Boston:

Eberly, Charles H. "Survey of Persistence Studies of
Freshman Students at Michigan State University."
Office of Evaluation Services (Internal) Report,
Michigan State University, 1971.
Educational Records Bureau. Admission to American Col­
leges: Summary of Policies and Practices'! New
YorJcl Educational Records Bureau, 1964.
Emanuel, William H. "College-Entrance Requirements Ten
Years After the Eight-Year Study." The School
Review 61 (December 1953): 521-26.
Eurich, Alvin C. "College Admissions in the 21st Century."
College Board Review 51 (Fall 1963): 18-21.
Feldman, Kenneth A., and Newcomb, Theodore M. The Impact
of College on Students. San Francisco: JosseyBass, Inc., 196$.
Fine, Benjamin. How To Be Accepted by the College of
Your Choice. New York: Appleton-Century, 1966.

87
Fine, Benjamin.

Admission to American Colleges: A Study
" ~
ind Practice. New York: Harper

Fishman, Joshua A., and Pasanella, Ann K. "College
Admission-Selection Studies." Review of Edu­
cational Research 30, American Educational
Research Association, Washington, D.C. (June
1960): 298-310.
Fryer, Douglas H., and Henry, Erwin R.
Applied Psychology. New York:
Company, 1950.

Handbook of
Rinehart and

Greene, Howard, and Minton, Robert, Scaling the Ivy Wall:
Getting into the Selective Colleges. New York:
Abelard-Schuman, 1975.
Grose, Robert F. "How Long Is a Credit? When Is a Course?"
College and University 46 (Fall 1970) : 20-32.
Harcleroad, Fred F. Issues of the Seventies.
cisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1970.

San Fran­

Heist, P., and Webster, H. "Selection, Prediction and
Persistence." Review of Educational Research 35
(1965): 250-71.
Hollinshead, Byron S. Who Should Go to College. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1952.
Jencks, Christopher, and Riesman, David. The Academic
Revolution. Garden City: Doubleday and Company,
Inc., 1968.
Kandel, I. L. History of Secondary Education.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1930.

Boston:

Katz, Joseph and Associates. No Time for Youth.
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1968.

San

Kitzhaber, Albert R.; Gorrell, Robert M.; and Roberts,
Paul. Education for College. New York: The
Ronald Press Company, 1961.
Kramer, G. A. "Admission Practices and Patterns."
Journal of Educational Sociology 35 (1962):
298-302.
Lavin, David E. The Prediction of Academic Performance.
Hartford: Connecticut Printers, Inc., id6S.

88
Levine, Joel, and May, Lawrence. Getting In; A Guide to
Acceptance at the College of Your Choice. New
York: Random House,' 1972.
Michigan State University. Admissions and Student Body
Composition: The Report to the President of
Michigan State University. East Lansing:
Michigan State University, 1971.
Academic Programs: 1974-1976. Vol. 70,
East Lansing:Michigan State University, April
1974.
_______ . Information Brochure for Prospective Freshman
Students: 197 4-1975'. East Lansing: Michigan
State University, April 1974.
_______ . Newsletter to Principals and Counselors. East
Lansing: Michigan State University, September
1974.
Paraskevopoulos, John, and Robinson, L. F. "Comparison
of Regression Equations Predicting College Per­
formance from High School Record and Admissions
Test Scores for Males and Females." College and
University 45 (Winter 1970): 211-16.
Reeves, Floyd W. "Barriers to Higher Education."
Delta Kappa 31 (January 1950): 214-24.

Phi

Rich, Catherine R., and Garrett, Thomas A. Philosophy
and Problems of College Admission. Washington,
D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press,
1963.
Rudolph, Frederick. The American College and University.
New York: Random House, Inc., 19'62'.
Schneider, Harold J. College Admissions and the Psychology
of Talent. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
Inc., 1971.
Stein, Morris E. Personality Measures in Admissions.
Princeton: College Entrance Examination Board,
1963.
Traxler, Arthur E., and Townsend, Agatha. Improving the
Transition from School to College. New York:
Harper and Brothers, Inc., 1953.

89
Whitney, Douglas R., and Boyd, Norlin W. "Limiting the
Effect of Predictive Validity on the Expected
Accuracy of Admissions Decisions.” College and
University 46 (Spring 1971): 180-90.
Wing, Cliff W., Jr., and Wallach Michael A. College
Admissions and the Psychology of Talent. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1971.