INFORM ATION TO USERS
This r e p ro d u c tio n was m ad e fro m a copy o f a d o c u m e n t sent to us fo r m icrofilming.
While th e m ost advanced tech no log y has been used to p h o to g rap h and rep rod uce
this d o c u m e n t, the quality o f the re p ro d u c tio n is heavily d e p e n d e n t u p o n the
quality o f th e material s u b m itted .
The following ex planation o f techniques is provided to help clarify m arkings or
no ta tio n s which m ay ap p e ar o n this re p ro d u c tio n .
1 .T h e sign or “ ta rg e t” fo r pages apparently lacking from the d o c u m e n t
p h o to g ra p h e d is “ Missing Page(s)” . If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) o r section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This
may have necessitated c u ttin g th ro ugh an image and duplicating adjacent pages
to assure co m plete c o n tin u ity .
2. When an image on the film is o blite rated with a ro u n d black m ark, it is an
indication o f e ith e r blurred copy because o f m ov em en t during ex p osure,
duplicate co p y, or co p y rig h te d m aterials th a t should n o t have been filmed. F o r
blurred pages, a good image o f the page can be fo u n d in the ad jacent fram e. If
co py righted materials were deleted, a target n o te will ap pear listing th e pages in
the ad jac en t frame.
3. When a m ap, drawing o r ch art, etc., is p a rt o f th e m aterial being p h o to g ra p h e d ,
a definite m e th o d o f “ sectioning” the material has been followed. It is
cu stom ary to begin film ing at th e u p p e r left h a n d co rner o f a large sheet and to
co n tin u e from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary,
sectioning is con tin u ed again—beginning below the first row and con tin u in g on
until com p lete.
4. F o r illustrations th a t c a n n o t be satisfactorily rep ro d u ce d by xerographic
m eans, p h o to g rap h ic prin ts can be purchased at additio nal cost and inserted
into y o u r xerographic co p y. These prin ts are available u p o n requ est from the
Dissertations C ustom e r Services D e p a rtm e n t.
5. Some pages in any d o c u m e n t may have indistinct print. In all cases th e best
available co p y has been filmed.

University
Micrdfilms
International
300 N. Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

8520497

Aseeri, Ali S a e e d

THE PREDICTION OF FOREIGN GRADUATE STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

Ph.D.

M ichigan State University

University
Microfilms
international

300 N. Z ee b Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

Copyright 1985
by
Aseeri, Ali Saeed
All Rights Reserved

1985

PLEASE NOTE:

In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy.
Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V .

1.

Glossy photographs or p a g e s ______

2.

Colored illustrations, paper or print______

3.

Photographs with dark background_____

4.

Illustrations are poor copy______

5.

Pages with black marks, not original copy ______

6.

Print shows through as there is text on both sides of p a g e _______

7.

Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages,

8.

Print exceeds margin requirements______

9.

Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine_______

10.

Computer printout pages with indistinct print______

11.

Page(s)____________lacking when material received, and not available from school or
author.

12.

Page(s)____________seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows.

13.

Two pages numbered_______. Text follows.

14.

Curling and wrinkled pa ge s ______

15.

Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed a s received_________

16.

Other ____________________________ ______________________________ _______

University
Microfilms
International

THE PREDICTION OF FOREIGN GRADUATE STUDENTS' ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
By
Ali Saeed Aseeri

A DISSERTATION

Subm itted to
Michigan S ta te U niversity
in p a rtia l fulfillm ent of th e requirem ents
fo r th e degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN MEASUREMENT, EVALUATION, AND RESEARCH DESIGN
D epartm ent of Counseling, *Educational Psychology,
and Special Education
1985

© 1985
ALI SAEED ASEERI

All Rights Reserved

ABSTRACT

THE PREDICTION OF FOREIGN GRADUATE STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
By
A1i Saeed Aseer i

The main p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o
which t h e f o r e i g n

s tu d e n t index of p re v io u s academ ic achievem ent

(IPAA), a v e r a g e o f t h e i r E n g l i s h s c o r e s on t h e MSU E n g l i s h T e s t (MSUAETS), GPA 1 - t e r m , and dem o gr a ph ic i n f o r m a t i o n can p r e d i c t t h e i r g r a d u ­
a t e a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s ,

a s m e a s u r e d by GPAs,

a c a d e m i c c r e d i t l o a d , a n d a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g o f t h e d o c t o r a l s t u d e n t ’s
aca dem ic com petence.

To m a i n t a i n a d e q u a t e c o n t r o l o v e r t h e s o u r c e s of

hetero g en eity of th e foreign stu d en t p opulation,

th e study sam ple

I n c l u d e d a l l f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s e n r o l l e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s
between f a l l t e r m 1978 and s p r i n g t e r m 1982 who had c o m p l e t e d a t l e a s t
12 c r e d i t s (N = 1 , 1 0 3 ) .
The p r i n c i p a l

statistical

t e c h n i q u e s used w e re z e r o - o r d e r c o r ­

r e la tio n , rank-order c o r re la tio n , stepw ise m u ltip le regression,

t-test,

and o n e - w a y ANOVA, f o l l o w e d by p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s (Tukey
p r o ce d u re ) when F was s i g n i f i c a n t .
Although t h e p r e d i c t o r s d i f f e r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e m a gn itu d e
of t h e i r v a l id it y c o e f f i c i e n t fo r th e v ario u s groups,

th e overall

AH Saeed A se er i

fin d in g s suggested t h a t t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ’
a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s 1s p o s s i b l e f r o m t h e a v a i l a b l e p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a .
B a s e d on t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h e v a r i o u s a n a l y s e s , t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u ­
s i o n s w ere drawn:

(1) MSU-AETS was a good p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u ­

d e n ts ’ academ ic su c c e s s ,
English-speaking c o u n trie s ;

particu larly

o f t h o s e s t u d e n t s from non-

(2) IPAA a p p ea r ed t o e x h i b i t an e n c o u r a g in g

s i g n a s a p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ a ca de m ic s u c c e s s a s measured
by GPA; (3) GPA 1 - t e r m was t h e b e s t s i n g l e p r e d i c t o r t h a t y i e l d e d a
c o n s is te n t v a lid ity c o e f f ic ie n t w ith a l l t h e d e fin e d c r i t e r i o n meas­
ures;

(4) GPA 1 - t e r m , MSU-AETS, and c o l l e g e t y p e w ere t h e b e s t p r e d i c ­

t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t , a s m e a s u r e d by GPA;
( 5 ) P a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n o f f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ’ aca demic s u c c e s s
s h o u ld r e s u l t from s e p a r a t e v a l i d a t i o n

on a homogeneous group r a t h e r

t h a n v a l i d a t i o n on a h e t e r o g e n e o u s group.
On t h e b a s i s o f t h e f i n d i n g s , c o n c l u s i o n s , an d d i s c u s s i o n , a
t w o - s t a g e s e l e c t i o n model was recommended f o r use in j u d g i n g t h e ad m is ­
sib ility

of fo reign

graduate students

Into

MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .

F u r t h e r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s i n c l u d e d a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f how t h e
model can be used and how i t can be e v a l u a t e d o b j e c t i v e l y .

DEDICATION

To th e mem ory of my fa th e r,

SAEED ASEERI,
fo r his love, guidance, and
th e sincere e ffo rt he devoted to th e cause of
his children's education.
May his soul re st in peace.

To th e memory of my fo rm er advisor,

ROBERT EBEL,
fo r th e rich academ ic experience I had w ith him
throughout my g rad u ate program a t
Michigan S tate U niversity.
D r. Ebel was an ex cellen t in stru c to r,
a productive scholar in his field,
and, above all, a m odest, humble human being.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

C o m p l e tio n of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n would have been I m p o s s i b l e
w ith o u t

th e

In terest

and

d irect

p articip atio n

I n d i v i d u a l s t o whom I owe e v e r l a s t i n g g r a t i t u d e .

of a number of

Sincere a p p re c ia tio n

i s e x t e n d e d t o e v e r y o n e who has worked 1n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h i s p r o j e c t .
In p a r t i c u l a r ,

I would l i k e t o acknowledge t h e e f f o r t s o f :

My a c a d e m i c
committee,
Insights,

Dr.

advisor

and t h e c h a i r m a n

W i l l i a m Mehrens,

of

my d i s s e r t a t i o n

fo r h is valuable suggestions,

u n iq u e

wisdom, and l e a d e r s h i p s k i l l in s e c u r i n g a n ' a g r e e m e n t f o r t h e

r e l e a s e o f t h e d a t a needed f o r t h i s s tu d y .
The members o f my d i s s e r t a t i o n c o m m i t t e e , Drs. Norman B e l l , Ted
Ward, and James McKee, f o r t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n and sound recom men dat ions .
The d i r e c t o r o f t h e E n g l is h Language C e n t e r a t M ich ig an S t a t e
U n i v e r s i t y , Dr. J a m e s S t a l k e r , an d h i s w i f e , Dr. J a c q u e l i n e S t a l k e r ,
f o r t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o and s u p p o r t o f t h i s p r o j e c t .

Dr. S t a l k e r ' s

a g r e e m e n t t o s u p e r v i s e t h e d a t a c o l l e c t i o n was a m a j o r s t e p t o w a r d t h e
completion of t h i s d is s e r ta t io n .
The a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ,

Dr. Lou Simon, Dr. Homer Higbee, Dr. R o b e r t

L o c k h a r t , Dr. A u g u s t B e n s o n , and R o b e r t a K e l l e y , f o r t h e i r s u p p o r t ,
cooperation,

and c o n t r i b u t i o n d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f d a t a c o l l e c t i o n .

My m o t h e r ; my b r o t h e r s Mohammed, Morazen, and Solomon; and my
s i s t e r s for t h e i r patience, to leran ce,
age me nt,

sacrifices,

which made t h e p u r s u i t o f t h e Ph.D.

and c o n s t a n t e n c o u r ­

degree p o s sib le .

A s p e c i a l n o t e o f t h a n k s i s e x t e n d e d t o my l o v e l y d a u g h t e r s ,
Samar and A ish a,
Last,
my w i f e ,

f o r t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g and p a t i e n c e .

I wish t o ack no wle dge w i t h g r a t i t u d e t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f

Badreah.

Her c o n s t a n t e n c o u r a g e m e n t and w i l l i n g

made t h i s s t u d y a f a m i l y a c c o m p l i s h m e n t .

assistance

Mere words a r e i n a d e q u a t e t o

e x p r e s s a f i t t i n g t r i b u t e t o t h e moral s u p p o r t sh e ha s g iv e n me d u ri n g
a l l of th e s e y e a rs of schooling.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................

vii

LIST OF F I G U R E S .............................................................................................................

ix

LIST OF APPENDICES........................................................................................................

x

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.............................

xi

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ..................................

1

Background ..................................................................................................
S t a t e m e n t o f t h e Problem and Need f o r t h e Study . . .
P u r p o se o f t h e S t u d y .........................................
D e f i n i t i o n o f T e r m s ...........................................................................
O r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e D i s s e r t a t i o n ...............................................

1
9
12
13
17

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE................................................

. . .

18

I n t r o d u c t i o n ..............................................................................................
Mankind and D e c i s i o n Problems ....................................................
Admission D e c i s i o n Making .............................................................
Admission D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s ........................................................
Academic P r e d i c t i o n : American S t u d e n t s .................................
Academic P r e d i c t i o n : F o r e ig n S t u d e n t s .................................
S u m m a r y .......................................................................................................

18
20
28
31
39
50
72

METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH D E S I G N .....................................................

77

Hy po the se s and Re s ea rc h Q u e s t i o n s ..........................................
N a t u r e o f t h e Study P o p u l a t i o n and Sample ........................
P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a o f G r a d u a t e Academic S u cc es s .
P r e d i c t o r s ..............................................................................................
C r i t e r i o n o f G r a d u a t e Academic S u c c e s s ............................
I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n and Data C o l l e c t i o n ......................................
Method o f Using P r e v i o u s Grades a s a P r e d i c t o r . . . .
Data A n a l y s i s .........................................................................................

77
79
83
83
84
86
87
90

v

Page

IV.

RESULTS OF THE DATA ANALYSIS..............................................................
T ot al Study S u b j e c t A n a l y s i s .........................................................
S t e p w i s e M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n f o r t h e T o t a l Sample . .
D i f f e r e n t i a l V a l i d i t y A n a l y s i s ........................................................
Means Comparison A n a l y s i s .................................................................
General D i s c u s s i o n ....................................................................................

V.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

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

S u m m a r y ...........................................................................................................
C o n c l u s i o n s ..................................................................................................
Recommendations .............................................................................
.................................
Sugg est ed Two-Stage S e l e c t i o n Model
Recommendations f o r F u r t h e r Resea rc h .................................
APPENDICES.............................................................................................................................
REFERENCES......................................................................................................................

vi

94
94
102
110
129
137
149
149
151
156
156
159
162
249

L IS T OF TABLES

T ab le

1.

2.
3.

4.

5.
6.

7.
8.

9.

10.

Page

Summary o f F i n d i n g s o f R es e a r c h Conducted on
American S t u d e n t s .....................................................................................

46

C o r r e l a t i o n Between TOFEL S c o r e s and S t u d e n t s *
F in al G P A .......................................................................................................

57

C o r r e l a t i o n o f TOFEL and C lo z e T e s t S c o r e s With S t u d e n t
O v e r a l l GPA, F a l l GPA, S p r i n g GPA, and Cu mu la ti v e
GPA in Chem istry and Co mposit ion C o u r s es ...................................

59

C o r r e l a t i o n s Between S t u d e n t s ' S c o r e s on t h e GRE-V,
GRE-Q, and TOFEL and T h e i r GPA in V a r io u s D i s c i p l i n e s

64

.

C o r r e l a t i o n a l F i n d i n g s of t h e Hendel and Doyle (1978)
S t u d y ................................................................................................................

67

C o r r e l a t i o n Between P r e d i c t o r s and T o t a l GPA f o r t h e
T o t a l Sample and f o r N a t i o n a l i t y Subgroups .............................

70

I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n Between t h e P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i o n
f o r t h e T o ta l S a m p l e ................................................................................

96

I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n Between P r e d i c t o r s (Demographic
P r e d i c t o r s ) and t h e C r i t e r i o n f o r t h e T o t a l Sample . . .

97

S t e p w is e M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n S t a t i s t i c s o f t h e P r e d i c t o r s
Th at C o n t r i b u t e d S i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e P r e d i c t i o n o f GPA
f o r T ot al Study S u b j e c t s Who Had Complete Data on All
t h e P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a (GPA) ...............................................

103

Stepwise M u ltip le Regression S t a t i s t i c s of t h e P r e d i c t o r s
Th a t C o n t r i b u t e d S i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e P r e d i c t i o n o f GPA
f o r Tot al Study S u b j e c t s Who Had Complete Data J u s t on
All t h e P r e d i c t o r s and GPA 1-Term, GPA 1- Y ea r , and
CGPA.....................................................................................................................

103

vii

Page

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

Summary T a b l e o f t h e P r e d i c t o r D i f f e r e n t i a l V a l i d i t y f o r
t h e C o l l e g e Subgroups ( C o r r e l a t i o n Range* Median*
T o t a l Number o f C o r r e l a t i o n s , Number o f S i g n i f i c a n t
C o r r e l a t i o n s , and Number o f S i g n i f i c a n t C o r r e l a t i o n s
More Than C o r r e s p o n d e n t C o r r e l a t i o n s D e t e c t e d on t h e
T o t a l Study S u b j e c t s ) ...........................................................................

113

Summary T a b l e o f t h e P r e d i c t o r D i f f e r e n t i a l V a l i d i t y
f o r t h e Country S u b g r o u p s ..................................................................

114

Rank O r de r C o r r e l a t i o n Between t h e Country Means on
P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a (GPA and C r e d i t s Completed
a t D i f f e r e n t P o i n t s 1n t h e G r a d u a te Program) .........................

127

Z e r o - O r d e r C o r r e l a t i o n Between t h e Country Means on
P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a (GPA and C r e d i t s Completed
a t D i f f e r e n t P o i n t s in t h e G r a d u a te Program) .........................

128

Means and S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s o f S e l e c t e d Groups on t h e
MSU-AETS, GPA 1-Term, Number o f C r e d i t s Completed
F i r s t Term, and CGPA...............................................................................

142

L IS T OF FIGURES

F ig u re

Page

1.

Admission Model E l em en t s

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

2.

Admission D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s ( G e n e r a l )

ix

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

30
32

L IS T OF APPENDICES

A p p e n d ix

A.

B.
C.

D.

E.
F.

G.

H.

Page

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PREDICTORS AND CRITERIA FOR
THE VARIOUS DEMOGRAPHIC SUBGROUPS....................................................
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PREDICTORS AND CRITERIA FOR
STUDENTS FROM DIFFERENT COUNTRIES . . . , ..........................

163

176

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PREDICTORS AND CRITERIA FOR
STUDENTS FROM DIFFERENT COLLEGES
..............................................

191

RESULTS OF THE PREDICTOR AND CRITERION MEAN
COMPARISON ANALYSIS ...............................................................................

201

STEPWISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION STATISTICS FOR THE
VARIOUS SUBGROUPS ....................................................................................

708

ANOVA AND POST HOC COMPARISON ANALYSIS (TUKEY) FOR
THE VARIOUS GROUPS....................................................................................

216

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY SUBJECTS ACCORDING TO THE
AVAILABILITY OF DATA, CURRICULUM,AND COUNTRY . . . .
CHART FOR THE DATA COLLECTION, RATING SCALE, AND
DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE RESEARCH....................................................

x

231

236

L IS T OF ABBREVIATIONS

AACRAO

The American A s s o c i a t i o n o f C o l l e g i a t e R e g i s t r a r s
and Admission O f f i c e r s

ACT

The American C o l l e g e T e s t i n g Program

ALIGU

The E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y t e s t o f t h e American
Language I n s t i t u t e a t Georgetown U n i v e r s i t y

CGPA

Cu m u l at i v e g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e

GGPA

G r a d u a te g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e

GMAT

G r a d u a t e Management Admission T e s t

GPA

Grade p o i n t a v e r a g e

GRE

G r a d u a te Record

GRE-A

G r a d u a t e Record

Exam inat ion (Advanced)

GRE-Q

G r a d u a t e Record

Exam inatio n ( Q u a n t i t a t i v e )

GRE-V

G r a d u a t e Record

Exam inat ion ( V e r b a l)

IPAA

Co n ve rt ed p r e v i o u s academic

MAT

M i l l e r Analogy T e s t

MSU-AETS

The a v e r a g e o f t h e MSU-English s u b t e s t s (grammar,
v o c a b u l a r y , l i s t e n i n g , r e a d i n g , and w r i t i n g )

MTELP

Michigan T e s t of E n g l is h Language P r o f i c i e n c y

pAA

Actual p r e v i o u s academic ac h i e v e m e n t r e p o r t e d on a
s c a l e from 1-100

ROAC-A

R a t i n g o f o v e r a l l academic competence compared
t o American s t u d e n t s

ROAC-F

R a t i n g o f o v e r a l l academic competence compared
to foreign students

Examination

standing

SAT

S ch o la stic A ptitude Test

SAT-Q

S c h o la s tic Aptitude Test— Q u a n tita tiv e

TOFEL

T e s t o f E n g l i s h a s a F o r e i g n Language

TRA-A

T o t a l r a t i n g compared t o American s t u d e n t s

TRC

T o t a l r a t i n g compared t o f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s

UGPA

Undergraduate grade p o in t average

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

BacKanftund
S e l e c t i o n and p l a c e m e n t o f s t u d e n t s in a p a r t i c u l a r program i s
t h e m a j o r p r o b l e m a t i c i s s u e e n c o u n t e r e d by a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n makers.
As th e y a t t e m p t t o make a r a t i o n a l

decision,

a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n makers

s u b j e c t t h e s t u d e n t ’s r e c o r d s t o an e x t e n s i v e e v a l u a t i o n .
such an e v a l u a t i o n

i s ba se d on a number o f c r i t e r i a a g a i n s t which t h e

s t u d e n t ' s ac a de m ic p o t e n t i a l
B asically,
i n t w o w ays .

N orm ally,

can be j u d g e d o r p r e d i c t e d .

t h e s t u d e n t ' s f u t u r e ac ad em ic s u c c e s s can be ju d g e d

Some d e c i s i o n m a k e r s make s u c h j u d g m e n t s a c t u a r i a l l y .

They combine p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a a c c o r d i n g t o known f o r m u l a s and t a b l e s
d ev elo p ed from t h e f i n d i n g s of sound r e s e a r c h .
d e c i s i o n makers appro ac h such j u d g m e n t s c l i n i c a l l y .
on i n t u i t i o n ,

In c o n t r a s t ,

other

They r e l y h e a v i l y

b e l i e f s , and s u b j e c t i v e j u d g m e n t s a s t h e y a t t e m p t t o

e s t i m a t e t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f a s t u d e n t ' s ac a d em ic s u c c e s s i n a p a r t i c u ­
l a r program.

Once t h e d e c i s i o n maker p r o c e s s e s t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a

th r o u g h e i t h e r o f t h e tw o a f o r e m e n t i o n e d a p p r o a c h e s and makes a j u d g ­
ment a b o u t t h e s t u d e n t ' s f u t u r e a c d e m ic p o t e n t i a l ,
a d m i t some s t u d e n t s a n d t o r e j e c t o t h e r s .

he t h e n d e c i d e s t o

The d e g r e e t o w h i c h t h e

f i n a l d e c i s i o n i s c o r r e c t d e p e n d s l a r g e l y on t h e t y p e s o f s e l e c t i o n
d e v ic e s ( c r i t e r i a ) em ployed,

t e c h n i q u e s by w h i c h t h e d a t a on t h e s e

1

2

c riteria

w ere i n t e r p r e t e d ,

and t h e d e c i s i o n r u l e u s e d t o make s u c h

decisions.
D e c i s i o n c o m m i t t e e s a t p a r t i c u l a r i n s t i t u t i o n s may us e d i f f e r ­
e n t c r i t e r i a and s t r a t e g i e s t o a r r i v e a t a p a r t i c u l a r d e c i s i o n .

Deci d­

in g which o f t h e a v a i l a b l e d e c i s i o n p o l i c i e s w i l l m ax im iz e t h e i n s t i t u ­
tio n 's d esired b e n e fits req u ires w ell-designed e v alu ativ e research.
For an i n s t i t u t i o n t o e n s u r e t h a t i t s a d m i s s i o n program i s f u n c t i o n i n g
properly,
tion.

t h e whole program must be s u b j e c t e d t o an e x t e n s i v e e v a l u a ­

Such an e v a l u a t i o n must be c o n c e r n e d w i t h ex am in in g t h e e f f e c ­

t i v e n e s s of t h e p re a d m is s io n d a ta in te r m s of t h e i r v a l i d i t y ,

rele­

v a n c e , and f a i r n e s s t o t h e d e c i s i o n s i t u a t i o n f o r w h i c h t h e y w i l l be
used.

Also,

t h e e v a l u a t i o n m u s t c o n s i d e r t h e adequacy o f t h e s t r a t e ­

g i e s employed t o p r o c e s s t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a , and f o r m u l a t e r u l e s f o r
making t h e f i n a l

decision.

E v a l u a t i n g t h e a c c u r a c y and a d e q u a c y o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g pr o­
g r a m s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n h a s b e e n a n d w i l l c o n t i n u e t o be a
s u b j e c t o f c o n t i n u i n g i n t e r e s t in t h e f i e l d s o f e d u c a t i o n and p s y c h o l ­
ogy .

As h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s g r e w ,

d e c i s i o n m akers in t h e s e

f i e l d s began t o e n c o u n t e r v a r i o u s d e c i s i o n p r o b le m s f o r which th e y
l a c k e d a d e q u a t e d a t a t o make r a t i o n a l

decisions.

Therefore,

measure­

ment s p e c i a l i s t s produced a v a s t number o f t e s t s and s c a l e s t o g a t h e r
t h e n e c e s s a r y i n f o r m a t i o n f o r making a r a t i o n a l d e c i s i o n .

For ex am p le,

a s t h e number o f s t u d e n t s s e e k i n g g r a d u a t e e d u c a t i o n I n c r e a s e d ,

a d m is ­

s io n d e c i s i o n m akers w ere p la c e d in a p o s i t i o n of n e e d in g a c c u r a t e
in d icato rs

of

graduate

academ ic

success.

C onsequently,

several

3

a s s e s s m e n t t e c h n i q u e s f o r g r a d u a t e s u c c e s s were d ev el op ed t o m e e t t h e i r
I m m e d i a t e nee ds .
As a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n m a k e r s a t t e m p t e d t o u s e t h e a f o r e m e n ­
t i o n e d d e v i c e s t o h e l p them make r a t i o n a l
e n t e r graduate school,

they

decisions

a b o u t who s ho ul d

w ere f a c e d w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s :

Which o f t h e a v a i l a b l e s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s s h o u ld be used?

How can one

e v a l u a t e t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d f r o m u s i n g a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n
device?

The p r e s s i n g need t o a n s w e r t h e s e q u e s t i o n s opened t h e d oo rs

wide f o r sound r e s e a r c h .

As a r e s u l t ,

v a r i o u s in d e p e n d e n t r e s e a r c h e r s ,

r e s e a r c h c e n t e r s , a nd d o c t o r a l s t u d e n t s h a v e e v a l u a t e d t h e v a l u e o f
p a r ti c u la r se le c tio n devices fo r s p e c if ic decision s itu a tio n s .
D uring t h e f i r s t h a l f o f t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y ,

evaluation

r e s e a r c h e r s f o c u s e d on e s t i m a t i n g t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f a s e l e c ­
tion

device as i t

re la te d to a w ell-defined c rite rio n .

The r e s u l t a n t

v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t was used a s an in de x o f b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d from
u s i n g a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e t o make a c e r t a i n d e c i s i o n .

The

p o p u l a r i t y o f p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h was e n h a n c e d by t w o f a c t o r s :

(1)

adm ission d e c is io n makers1 awareness of th e v a l i d i t y

of th e s e le c tio n

d e v i c e s t h e y used t o s c r e e n s t u d e n t s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r program and (2)
t e s t c o n s t r u c t o r s ' d e s i r e t o c o n v i n c e d e c i s i o n m a ke rs o f t h e

benefits

t o be g a i n e d from u s in g a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e .
The a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e s u g g e s t s t h a t u s i n g a v a l i d i t y

coeffi­

c i e n t a s an i n d e x o f a s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e ' s w o r t h was f o u n d t o be v e r y
e f f e c t i v e i n im p r o v in g s e l e c t i o n

programs.

As r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s in

t h i s f i e l d ad van ce d, s e v e r a l o t h e r t e c h n i q u e s emerged t o c o m p e n s a te f o r

4

t h e d e f i c i e n c i e s i n h e r e n t in t h e c l a s s i c a l

v a l i d i t y ap p roa ch as a to o l

fo r e v a lu a tin g t h e w orth of s e l e c t i o n d ev ices.

T y l e r and R u s s e l l ' s

(1939) and Br og de n' s (1946) a p p r o a c h e s s u g g e s t e d a number o f p a r a m e t e r s
o f t h e d e c i s i o n s i t u a t i o n t h a t w er e t h o u g h t t o be i m p o r t a n t f o r d e t e r ­
m in in g t h e o v e r a l l v a l u e o f s e l e c t i o n t e c h n i q u e s .
During t h e

1960s,

Cronbach and G l a s e r

(1965)

introduced

deci­

s i o n t h e o r y as a c o m p l e t e fram ew or k t h a t t a k e s i n t o a c c o u n t a l l f a c t o r s
t h a t d e t e r m i n e t h e n e t b e n e f i t t o be g a i n e d f r o m u s i n g a p a r t i c u l a r
selection

instrum ent fo r

making a r a t i o n a l

decision.

In a d d i t i o n

to

t h e p r y c h o m e t r i c p a r a m e t e r s o f t h e s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e (m ea su re m en t a cc u ­
r a c y and p r e d i c t i o n e f f i c i e n c y ) ,

d e c i s i o n t h e o r y r e c o g n i z e s t h e imp or­

ta n c e of s e l e c t i o n r a t i o , base r a te , s ta n d a rd d e v ia tio n of c r i t e r i o n
d i s t r i b u t i o n , and c o s t o f o b t a i n i n g s e l e c t i o n - d e v i c e i n f o r m a t i o n a s
n e c e s s a r y f a c t o r s t h a t s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d when e v a l u a t i n g t h e c o n t r i ­
b u t i o n o f s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s t o making c o r r e c t d e c i s i o n s .
Bec au se o f t h e l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by t h e n a t u r e o f t h e e d uc a­
tional/psychological

o ut co me ( c r i t e r i o n ) and t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f o b t a i n ­

i n g t h e n e c e s s a r y d a t a , d e c i s i o n t h e o r y was n o t w i d e l y d i f f u s e d a s a
technique
field s.

evaluating

th e

w orth

of s e le c tio n

devices

in th e s e

T h e re fo re , c l a s s i c a l v a l i d i t y ap p ro ac h es rem ained t h e b e s t

practical
rational

for

t e c h n i q u e s f o r e v a l u a t i n g t h e s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s used t o make
d e c is io n s in t h e s e f i e l d s .

S i n c e W or ld War I I ,

t h e number of f o r e ig n s t u d e n t s e n t e r i n g

American i n s t i t u t i o n s h a s i n c r e a s e d d r a m a t i c a l l y ,

and t h e i r

has become a p a r t of a c a d e m i c l i v e o f v a r i o u s s c h o o l s .

presence

These s t u d e n t s

5

h a v e com e t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n a q u e s t f o r k n o w l e d g e .
t h e i r o b l i g a t i o n s toward t h o s e s t u d e n t s ,

To f u l f i l l

American i n s t i t u t i o n s m ust

m a i n t a i n t h e a p p r o p r i a t e c o n d i t i o n s f o r aca dem ic s u c c e s s .

The f i r s t

s t e p t o w a r d a c h i e v i n g t h i s goal i s t o impr ov e t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s so
a s t o s e l e c t t h o s e s t u d e n t s who a r e m o s t l i k e l y t o s u c c e e d a c a d e m ­
ically.
S e l e c t i n g s t u d e n t s - t o s t u d y in a p a r t i c u l a r program i s a d i f f i ­
c u l t ta s k f o r admission

d e c i s i o n makers.

The t a s k becomes even more

d i f f i c u l t when d e c i s i o n m a k e r s l a c k t h e n e c e s s a r y i n f o r m a t i o n f o r
making t h e i r f i n a l d e c i s i o n .

Most a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n m a k er s have found

i t e x t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t t o make a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t s a b o u t t h e p r o b a b i l i t y
of a f o r e i g n s t u d e n t ' s s u c c e s s in a p a r t i c u l a r program b ec a u se such
s t u d e n t s d i f f e r w i d e l y in t e r m s o f e d u c a t i o n a l b a c k g r o u n d , c u l t u r a l
heritage,

la n g u a g e ,

been r e p o r t e d .

and t h e manner in which t h e i r p r e v i o u s g r a d e s have

These d i f f e r e n c e s ,

along w ith th e la ck of adequate

s t a n d a r d i z e d a p t i t u d e t e s t s o r any t y p e o f u n if o r m i n f o r m a t i o n a g a i n s t
which d e c i s i o n m a k e rs can j u d g e t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s a c a d e m ic p o t e n t i a l ,
have i n c r e a s e d t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f t h e d e c i s i o n ma ke r' s t a s k .
As t h e i n f l u x o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s i n c r e a s e d ,

i t became e v i d e n t

t h a t many o f t h o s e s t u d e n t s w e r e f a i l i n g t o cope w i t h s c h o o l

ac ad em ic

s t a n d a r d s o r were u n a b l e t o r eac h t h e ac a de m ic l e v e l t h e y had a c h i e v e d
a t t h e i r home s c h o o l s .

Therefore,

1 t became i m p o r t a n t f o r a d m i s s i o n

d e c i s i o n makers t o d e f i n e a number o f c r i t e r i a a g a i n s t which t h e y c o u l d
ju d g e th e academ ic p o te n tia l of th e s e s tu d e n ts .

D ecisio n m akers a t

v a rio u s u n i v e r s i t i e s developed c e r t a i n p o lic ie s to s e le c t foreigners

6

seeking adm ission t o t h e i r graduate schools.

Although such s e l e c t i o n

p o l i c i e s d i f f e r w i d e l y a c r o s s s c h o o l s and a c r o s s d e p a r t m e n t s w i t h i n
each s c h o o l , t h e y s h a r e a number of common e l e m e n t s .

Most w el l- kn ow n

schools r e q u i r e fo re ig n s tu d e n ts to subm it a com plete record of p re­
v i o u s a ca d em i c a c h i e v e m e n t E n g l is h t e s t s c o r e s , l e t t e r s of recommenda­
tion,

and b i o g r a p h i c a l

inform ation.

Further,

some s c h o o l s and d e p a r t ­

men ts r e q u i r e s t u d e n t s ' s c o r e s on s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s such as t h e Gradu­
a t e R e c o r d E x a m i n a t i o n (GRE), t h e M i l l e r A n a l o g y T e s t (MAT), and t h e
G r a d u a te Management Ad mi ss ion T e s t (GMAT).
G e n e r a l l y , t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d p r e d i c t o r s a r e used by a d m i s s i o n
d e c i s i o n m a k ers a t v a r i o u s s c h o o l s as a b a s i s f o r a d m i t t i n g f o r e i g n
students to

g raduate school

these c r i t e r i a

on a r a t h e r

i n d i r e c t b a s i s — namely,

have been found t o be e f f e c t i v e

s t u d e n t s ' academic success.

th at

in p r e d i c t i n g American

Although t h e f a c t o r s t h a t d e t e r m i n e Ameri­

can s t u d e n t s ' g r a d u a t e - s c h o o l s u c c e s s may r e s e m b l e t h o s e o f t h e f o r e i g n
g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t , t h e r e i s no s c i e n t i f i c e v i d e n c e on which t o b a s e such
a generalization.
makers have l i t t l e

The a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e s u g g e s t s t h a t most d e c i s i o n
o b j e c t iv e d i r e c t evidence to su p p o rt using th e

a fo re m e n tio n e d c r i t e r i a as p r e d i c t o r s of fo r e ig n g ra d u a te s t u d e n t s '
a ca de m ic s u c c e s s .

Furtherm ore,

the d is tin c t v ariation

in t h e c h a r a c ­

t e r i s t i c s o f f o r e i g n a nd A m e r i c a n s t u d e n t s p r o v i d e s a v e r y l i m i t e d
basis fo r valid g e n era liza tio n s.
widely with
ability

The t w o s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n s d i f f e r

resp ect to educational

t o us e t h e E n g l i s h lan g ua g e.

background,

cultural

A c c o r d in g l y ,

heritage,

and

one can a r g u e t h a t

t h e p r e d i c t o r s em ployed t o s e l e c t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r

7

program may n o t r e p r e s e n t v a l i d I n d i c a t o r s o f t h e i r a ca de m ic s u c c e s s .
I t c a n a l s o be a r g u e d t h a t f o r e l g n - s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n s may p o s s e s s
d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t have a s tr o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e i r
f u t u r e academ ic su c c e ss.
until

These a r g u m e n ts a r e p o s s i b l e and l o g i c a l

f u r t h e r e v i d e n c e em e r g e s t o pr ov e o t h e r w i s e .
Th ere fo re*

f o r a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n m ak ers t o d e f i n e a c c u r a t e l y

th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of fo re ig n s tu d e n ts t h a t r e l a t e to t h e i r f u tu r e
ac a de m ic s u cc es s * 1 t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e y m u s t
1.

e v a l u a t e t h e c u r r e n t a d m i s s i o n p o l i c y o r e n s u r e t h a t such

an e v a l u a t i o n i s c o n d u c t e d e l s e w h e r e i n t h e

in stitu tio n .

Such an

e v a l u a t i o n must be c o n c e r n e d w i t h e s t i m a t i n g t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d
from u s i n g t h e c u r r e n t c r i t e r i a a s a b a s i s f o r j u d g i n g f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n ts' academ ic p o t e n t i a l .
validity*

In a d d i t i o n to e s ti m a t in g t h e p r e d i c t o r s '

t h e e v a l u a t i o n mu st a l s o be c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e r e l e v a n c e and

f a i r n e s s of t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s t o t h e d e c i s i o n s i t u a t i o n f o r which t h e y
w ill

be used.
2.

conduct ex p lo ra to ry research to id e n tify o th e r fo re ig n -

s t u d e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t have a s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e i r f u t u r e
ac a de m ic s u c c e s s .
When a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n
p r e c e d i n g two p r o c e d u r e s ,
indicators
cess.

makers a t v a r i o u s

schools follow

the

t h e y w i l l be a b l e t o i d e n t i f y a c c u r a t e l y t h e

th a t best predict

foreign

g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' a ca d em ic s u c ­

The a c c u m u l a t e d f i n d i n g s w i l l p r o v i d e a s c i e n t i f i c b a s i s f o r

im p r o v in g t h e i r d e c i s i o n s and t h e r e f o r e w i l l h e l p p r e v e n t t h e g r e a t

8

economic* s o c i a l ,

and p s y c h o l o g i c a l

l o s s e s t h a t may r e s u l t from making

a wrong d e c i s i o n .
D e s p i t e t h e e a r l y p r e s e n c e of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s in American
s c h o o l s and t h e i n c r e a s e d i n t e r e s t

in p r e d i c t i o n

research,

little

e f f o r t h a s b e e n made t o i d e n t i f y t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n ts t h a t have a s t r o n g

r e l a t i o n s h i p t o f u t u r e academic success.

However, t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e v e a l e d t h a t a number o f s t u d i e s have been
c o n c e r n e d w i t h e x a m i n i n g t h e v a l i d i t y of p r e d i c t o r s used t o s c r e e n
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r g r a d u a t e program.
s t u d i e s have f o c u s e d on e x a m i n i n g t h e p r e d i c t a b i l i t y

Mo s t o f t h e s e
of p r e a d m i s s i o n

v a r i a b l e s such as E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s ( T e s t of E n g l i s h as a F o r e i g n
Language
[MTELP],

[TOFEL],
local

Michigan

En g l i s h t e s t s ) ,

Test

of

English

Language P r o f i c i e n c y

s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s (GRE, MAT, and GMAT),

and b i o g r a p h i c a l d a t a a s t h e y r e l a t e t o v a r i o u s m e a s u r e s of g r a d u a t e
s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s (GGPA o r r a t i n g ) .
examined th e

credibility

a c h ie v e m e n t as

of

a predictor

foreign
of t h e i r

Ver y few s t u d i e s h a v e

students'

previous

academic

f u t u r e academic performance.

Because of s ma l l s a mp l e s i z e s and h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f s a m p l e s ,

researchers

have been u n a b l e t o d e v i s e c o n s i s t e n t e s t i m a t e s of t h e p r e d i c t i v e
v a l i d i t y of t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d v a r i a b l e s .
The p r e s e . . *=tudy i s a c o n t i n u a t i o n o f p r e v i o u s e f f o r t s t o
evaluate foreign-s

t-selection

devices.

I n an a t t e m p t t o a s s e s s

more s e n s i t i v e p r e d i

o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c p o t e n t i a l ,

the

r e s e a r c h was d e s i g n e d t o e xami ne t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of some o f t h e

9

s e l e c t i o n v a r i a b l e s used by Mi chi gan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y a d m i s s i o n d e c i ­
s i o n ma ke r s 1n v a r i o u s d e p a r t m e n t s t o s c r e e n f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f o r t h e i r
g r a d u a t e pr ogr ams .

The s t u d y

was u n d e r t a k e n w i t h t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t

e x a m i n i n g t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d f rom u s i n g t h e c u r r e n t p r e a d m i s s i o n
data

will

p r o v i d e a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n maker s w i t h some g u i d e l i n e s f o r

i mp r o v i n g t h e a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s and t h e r e f o r e w i l l
social

prevent the

and economi c l o s s e s t h a t may r e s u l t from making a wrong d e c i ­

sion.

S t a t e m e n t o f t h e Pr obl em and

iie.e.d.-fo.r. ,the-JLtudy
M i c h i g a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y i s one Amer ic an i n s t i t u t i o n t h a t
h o s t s a l a r g e number of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s .
i n d i c a t e s t h a t most f o r e ig n

The u n i v e r s i t y l i t e r a t u r e

a p p l i c a n t s ar e c ol le ge graduates seeking

a d m i s s i o n t o a l m o s t a l l m a j o r g r a d u a t e programs#

w i t h mos t demand in

such f i e l d s a s a g r i c u l t u r e and n a t u r a l

engineering,

science,

education,

and b u s i n e s s .

resources,

natural

The a d m i s s i o n p o l i c y f o r t h e s e

s t u d e n t s s t a t e s t h a t E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s a s m e a s u r e d by t h e TOFEL,
MTELP, o r MSU E n g l i s h t e s t ; t h e r e c o r d o f p r e v i o u s a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e ­
ment;

letters

required
final

o f r e c o m m e n d a t i o n ; and b i o g r a p h i c a l

before th e s t u d e n t 's a p p l i c a t i o n

is

information are

p r o c e s s e d f o r maki ng t h e

admission decision.
In a d d i t i o n t o t h e p r e v i o u s l y me n t i one d c r i t e r i a ,

some d e p a r t ­

m e n t s r e q u i r e t h e s t u d e n t ' s s c o r e s on s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s s u c h a s t h e
GRE, MAT,and GMAT.

Generally, a ll foreign students are required to

me e t t h e u n i v e r s i t y - d e f i n e d s t a n d a r d s r e g a r d i n g t h e q u a l i t y o f p r e v i o u s

10

a c a d e m i c r e c o r d s a nd p r o f i c i e n c y 1n u s i n g t h e E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e ( s e e
Appendix H) b e f o r e t h e y

are granted provisional

o r r e g u l a r admission.

Some d e p a r t m e n t s a l s o r e q u i r e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s t o me e t s p e c i f i c s t a n d ­
ards regarding standardized t e s t scores.

Admi s s i on d e c i s i o n ma k e r s i n

v a r i o u s d e p a r t m e n t s have been u s i n g t h e f o r e g o i n g v a r i a b l e s as t h e
b a s i s f o r maki ng a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n s ,

y e t no s t u d y has been de v o t e d t o

e xa m in in g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h e s e v a r i a b l e s in pre d ic tin g foreign
s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c p e r f o r m a n c e i n a p a r t i c u l a r program.
A l t h o u g h s u c h v a r i a b l e s a s p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t and
s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s c o r e s have been fo un d t o
American

graduate

s t u d e n t s ’ academic

be good i n d i c a t o r s

performance,

f o r e i g n - s t u d e n t a d m i s s i o n may n o t be a p p r o p r i a t e .
teristics

their

use

of
for

The d i s t i n c t c h a r a c ­

o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s and t h e l a c k o f o b j e c t i v e d a t a by which

to interpret their

p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t p r o v i d e no b a s i s f o r

definite generalizations.

Further,

u n iv e rs i ty standards regarding th e

s c o r e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s mu s t a c h i e v e on t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t ( s e e Appen­
d i x H) b e f o r e b e i n g g r a n t e d r e g u l a r o r p r o v i s i o n a l
on a r a t h e r s u b j e c t i v e j u d g m e n t .

a d m i s s i o n a r e bas ed

Uni i k e TOFEL, t h e MSU Engl i sh t e s t

h a s n o t b e e n v a l i d a t e d a s an I n d i c a t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ E n g l i s h
r e a d i n e s s f o r s t a r t i n g t h e i r a c a d e mi c program.
Overall,

the a v a ila b le inform ation suggests th a t admission

d e c i s i o n ma k e r s a t MSU b a s e t h e i r d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '
adm issibility

on r a t h e r s u b j e c t i v e j u d g m e n t s .

No o b j e c t i v e e v i d e n c e

j u s t i f i e s t h e i r c h o i c e o f t h e c u r r e n t c r i t e r i a , t h e p r o c e s s by w h i c h

11

t h e y j u d g e t h e q u a l i t y of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e ­
ment# and t h e i r s t a n d a r d s f o r d e f i n i n g s t u d e n t s ' E n g l i s h r e a d i n e s s f o r
s t a r t i n g t h e i r a c a demi c pr ogram.
Ge n e r a l l y #

a d e q u a t e us e o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s a c a de mi c

r e c o r d s a n d s c o r e s on E n g l i s h t e s t s and s t a n d a r d i z e d m e a s u r e s a s a
b a s i s f o r j u d g i n g t h e i r a c a d e mi c p o t e n t i a l

requires accurate in terpre­

t a t i o n o f w h a t t h e d a t a on t h e s e a d m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a mean i n t e r m s o f
s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c p e r f o r ma n c e a t a p a r t i c u l a r u n i v e r s i t y .

Such i n t e r ­

p r e t a t i o n s h o u l d be bas ed on an e x a m i n a t i o n of a l a r g e number o f f o r ­
e i g n s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s g r a d e s and E n g l i s h and s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s c o r e s
a s t h e y c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e s t u d e n t s ' GPA d i s t r i b u t i o n .
Based on t h e f o r e g o i n g argument# t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y was d e s i g n e d
t o e s t i m a t e t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of a number of c r i t e r i a

u s e d by

a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n m a k e r s a t MSU a s a b a s i s f o r s c r e e n i n g f o r e i g n
stud ents for graduate school.

Because of t h e d i f f i c u l t y in v o l v e d in

o b t a i ni ng com pi e t e d a t a a b o u t a l l t h e m a j o r a dm i s s i on c r i t e r i a# t h e
w r i t e r was c o n c e r n e d o n l y w i t h t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f p r e v i o u s
a c a demi c a chi evement #
MSU t e s t s #

and de mogr a phi c v a r i a b l e s such a s sex# m a r i t a l

major field #
validities

E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s as me as ur e d by t h e TOFEL and

and d e g r e e l e v e l .

status#

age#

The s i m p l e a n d m u l t i p l e p r e d i c t i o n

o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s we r e e s t i m a t e d a s t h e y we r e r e l a t e d t o

s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s as me as ur e d by t h e i r GGPA# c r e d i t load#

and

t h e m a j o r a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g .
The f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y s h o u l d be v a l u a b l e t o a d m i s s i o n
d e c isio n makers.

K n o w l e d g e o f how t h e a d m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a c o r r e l a t e

12

with s t u d e n t s ’ academic performance w i l l

provide admission decision

ma ke r s w i t h o b j e c t i v e I n f o r m a t i o n by which t h e y can de ve l op a c c u r a t e
interpretations

of

at the

d a t a on t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s

mean.

Such

a c c u r a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s can h e l p t h e m ma ke a c c u r a t e d e c i s i o n s a b o u t
whom t o a d m i t t o g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .

Making a c c u r a t e a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n s

i s an i m p o r t a n t m a t t e r f o r bot h f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s and u n i v e r s i t y o f f i ­
c i a l s b e c a u s e i t can h e l p t o d e c r e a s e t h e r a t e o f a c a d e mi c f a i l u r e and
thereby prevent great f in a n c ia l,

psychological,

and s o c i a l

losses.

P u r p o s e o f t h e Study
The p r e s e n t s t u d y was b a s e d on t h e p r e m i s e t h a t i d e n t i f y i n g
f o r e ig n - g r a d u a te - s tu d e n t a t t r i b u t e s t h a t are c o r r e la te d with t h e i r
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s ,

a s me a s ur e d by GGPA and m a j o r - a d v i s o r r a t i n g ,

would

p r o v i d e a b a s e l i n e f o r a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n m a k e r s t o make a c c u r a t e
judgments of fo re ig n a p p l i c a n t s ’ a c a d e m i c p o t e n t i a l .

Such j u d g m e n t s

would h e l p t hem make c o r r e c t d e c i s i o n s a b o u t whom t o a d m i t t o g r a d u a t e
school.

Accordingly,

t h e p u r p o s e of t h i s s t u d y was t o d i s c o v e r which

o f t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a u s e d by MSU d e c i s i o n m a k e r s i n ma k i n g
a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n s a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c p e r ­
f or manc e.
B e c a u s e o f t h e d i f f i c u l t y i n v o l v e d i n g a i n i n g a c c e s s t o com­
p l e t e in for m atio n about al l

of t h e

preadmission c r i t e r i a ,

f o c u s e d o n l y on t h e f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s :
of p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t ,

status,

writer

(1) t h e f o r e i g n - s t u d e n t i ndex

(2) E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s a s measur ed

by t h e TOFEL and MSU E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e t e s t s ,
a b l e s s uch a s s e x , m a r i t a l

the

and (3) d e mo gr a ph i c v a r i ­

age, m a j o r f i e l d ,

and d e g r e e l e v e l .

13

The s i m p l e and m u l t i p l e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s wer e
e s t i m a t e d a s t h e y we r e r e l a t e d t o a number o f g r a d u a t e - a c a d e m i c - s u c c e s s
c r i t e r i o n measures.

T h e s e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s w e r e GGPA, n u m b e r o f

c o m p l e t e d c r e d i t s comput ed a t v a r i o u s p e r i o d s ,

and t h e m a j o r a c a d e mi c

a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g o f t h e s t u d e n t 1n t h e d o c t o r a l progr am.
B ecause of t h e d i v e r s i t y of t h e s tu d y s u b j e c t s ,

the w riter

a t t e m p t e d t o exa mi ne t h e e x t e n t t o which such v a r i a b l e s a s s e x , m a r i t a l
status,
tify

age,

major f i e l d ,

s u b g r o u p s of

and c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n c o u l d be used t o i d e n ­

individuals

for

whom t h e m a j o r p r e d i c t o r ( p r e v i o u s

a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t and E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s ) co u l d have i n c r e a s e d
validity.

Finally,

t h e w r i t e r was c o n c e r n e d w i t h a number o f g e n e r a l

q u e s ti o n s r e l a t e d t o p r e d i c t i n g f o r e ig n g r ad u ate s t u d e n t s ' academic
success.

D e f i n i t i o n . . o f Terms
The f o l l o w i n g t e r m s a r e d e f i n e d i n t h e c o n t e x t 1n w h i c h t h e y
a r e used i n t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n .
Prediction:

The t e r m " p r e d i c t i o n " r e f e r s t o " t h e p r o c e s s of

d e t e r m i n i n g t h e ma g n i t u d e o f s t a t i s t i c a l v a r i a t e s a t some f u t u r e p o i n t
of tim e" (Kendall & Buckland,

1 9 7 1 , p. 11 7 ) .

(1973) s t a t e d t h a t p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h

is

K e r l i n g e r a nd P e d h a z u r

a "special

c as e of ex pl ana­

t i o n and can be subsumed u n d e r t h e o r y and e x p l a n a t i o n " (p. 4).
P r e d i c t i o n and e x p l a n a t i o n
emphases.
tion,

Wh e r e a s p r e d i c t i o n

explanatory

research

reflect

different

c o n c e r n s and

r e s e a r c h emphasizes p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a ­

em phasizes

the

explanation

of

the

14

variability

o f a d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e by u s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n from one o r

mor e I n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s .

Further,

p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h i s concerned

p r i m a r i l y w i t h u s i n g a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n t o b u i l d a r e g r e s s i o n equa^
t i o n t o p r e d i c t t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e , w h i c h i s u s u a l l y m e a s u r e d by
s o me i n d e x o f p e r f o r m a n c e o r a c c o m p l i s h m e n t .
explanatory

research

i s concerned with

dependent-variable variation
variables.

On t h e o t h e r h a n d ,

d e t e r m i n i n g t h e amount of

accounted f o r

by each o f t h e i n d e p e n d e n t

Fin al ly , th e choice of I n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s

in p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h 1s d e t e r m i n e d by t h e i r c r e d i b i l i t y
t h e p r e d i c t i o n of t h e c r i t e r i o n .

In c o n t r a s t ,

(predictors)
in e n h a n c i n g

t h e cho ice of t h e i n d e ­

p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s i n e x p l a n a t o r y r e s e a r c h 1s d e t e r m i n e d on a t h e o r e t i ­
ca l b a s i s .
P r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n :

The t e r m " p r e d i c t o r " r e f e r s t o t h e

d a t a c o l l e c t e d on p a r t i c u l a r a t t r i b u t e s ,

which can be used t o

predict

t h e v a r i a t i o n of some f u t u r e p e r f o r ma n c e o r a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s ( c r i t e r i o n
measures).

In t h e c o n t e x t of t h i s s t u d y , v a r i a b l e s such a s f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t i n d e x o f p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t ,

E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s as

me as ur e d by t h e TOFEL and MSU E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e t e s t ,

age,

sex,

nation

o f o r i g i n , m a r i t a l s t a t u s , d e g r e e l e v e l , a nd m a j o r c u r r i c u l u m f i e l d
w e r e t h e main p r e d i c t o r s t h a t w er e us e d t o p r e d i c t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s 1
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s ,

as me as ur e d by GGPA, number o f c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d , and

t h e m a j o r a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g .
S u p p r e s s o r v a r i a b l e s and m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s :

A suppressor

v a r i a b l e i s any v a r i a b l e t h a t ha s a low o r z e r o r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e
c r i t e r i o n and a hi gh r e l a t i o n s h i p wi t h a p a r t o f a p a r t i c u l a r p r e d i c t o r

15

th a t is unrelated to the c rite rio n .

When a s u p p r e s s o r v a r i a b l e i s

added t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n , i t l e a d s t o an i n c r e a s e i n t h e magni ­
tude of t h e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n .

Th i s o c c u r s b e c a u s e s u p p r e s s o r v a r i ­

a b l e s u s u a l l y a c t t o p a r t i a l o u t t h e i n v a l i d component of t h e o t h e r
predictor th a t

is

unrelated

to the c rite rio n

i n c r e a s e in p r e d i c t i o n accuracy.

In g e n e r a l ,

r a r e l y found in p s y c h o l o g i c a l

or e d u ca tio n a l

1979; G h i s e l l i ,

Campbel l , & Zedeck,

In c o n t r a s t ,

a nd t h u s l e a d s t o an

a suppressor v a r ia b le is

1981; H o r s t ,

r e s e a r c h ( A l l e n & Yen,
1966).

m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s a r e more common i n ps ychol ogy

and e d u c a t i o n and a r e u s u a l l y e n c o u n t e r e d by r e s e a r c h e r s c o n c e r n e d w i t h
predictor
teristics

research.

Mo d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s r e f e r t o t h e d i s t i n c t c h a r a c ­

of a subgroup t h a t in f l u e n c e t h e magnitude of th e major

p r e d i c t o r ' s v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t and t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e t o t a l - s a m p l e
regression equation.
Both m o d e r a t o r and s u p p r e s s o r v a r i a b l e s a r e i m p o r t a n t c o n s i d ­
e r a t i o n s i n p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h b e c a u s e t h e y h e l p i mpr ove t h e a c c u r a c y
and e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e p r e d i c t i o n e s t i m a t e s .

Whereas s u p p r e s s o r v a r i ­

a b l e s im p ro ve p r e d i c t i o n s on ly t h r o u g h t h e i r power t o s u p p r e s s t h e
other predictor's
terion,

i n v a l i d component which i s u n r e l a t e d t o t h e c r i ­

m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s have been f ound t o

three d istin c t

ways:

i mpr ove p r e d i c t i o n

in

(1) M o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s can I mpr ove p r e d i c t i o n

when t h e y a r e used t o l o c a t e a d i s t i n c t gr oup w i t h i n t h e t o t a l

s ampl e

f o r which t h e m a j o r p r e d i c t o r has a d i f f e r e n t v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t
(differential validity).

(2) M o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s c a n i m p r o v e p r e d i c ­

t i o n when t h e y a r e added t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n o f t h e t o t a l s a mpl e

16

(moderator re g re s s io n equation).

(3) Mo d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s can Improve

p r e d i c t i o n when t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s o f some gr oup a r e t h o u g h t t o be
more p r e d i c t a b l e t h a n t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s o f t h e o t h e r gr oups .

Such

us e i s m a i n l y c on c e r n e d w i t h e x a mi n i n g a p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p ' s p r e d i c t a ­
bility

(differential predictability).
Mo s t m e a s u r e m e n t s p e c i a l i s t s

a g r e e t h a t t h e t h r e e u s e s of

m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s a r e d i f f i c u l t t o c r o s s - v a l 1d a t e b e c a u s e c r o s s v a l i d a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s r e q u i r e a l a r g e s a mp l e f o r which t h e r e s e a r c h e r
mus t have c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n ( Sa unde r s ,

1956;

Ghis elli e t al.,

1981;

A l l e n & Yen,

1966).

In t h e c o n t e x t of t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , such v a r i ­

a b l e s a s s e x,

age,

country of o r i g i n ,

and

degree level

w e r e t h o u g h t t o be p o s s i b l e m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s .

In

attempting to

i mpr ove t h e

marital

status,

curriculum,

predictive validity

o f t h e mai n p r e d i c t o r ,

t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d v a r i a b l e s were i n c l u d e d in t h e e q u a t i o n used t o
estimate the to tal

multiple correlation

for the to tal

sampl e.

These

v a r i a b l e s were a l s o used t o group a l l s tu d y s u b j e c t s I n t o subgroups;
t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e main p r e d i c t o r was t h e n e s t i m a t e d s e p ­
arately.
Validity c o e f f i c ie n t:

Validity co efficien t

o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n be t we e n an i n d i v i d u a l

refers to the size

p r e d i c t o r o r a group o f p r e ­

d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i o n meas ur e .
Foreign s t u d e n t :

In t h i s sxudy, t h e t e r m " f o r e i g n s t u d e n t "

r e f e r s t o a l l s t u d e n t s e n r o l l e d i n MSU's g r a d u a t e pr o g r a ms who wer e n o t
A m e r i c a n c i t i z e n s and who h ad c o m p l e t e d t h e i r B.A. o r M.A. d e g r e e s i n
t h e i r home c o u n t r i e s b e f o r e a t t e n d i n g Mi chi gan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .

17

I n d e x o f P r e v i o u s Academic Achi eve ment (IPAA);

The IPAA 1s t h e

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t ' s p r e v i o u s a c a de mi c s t a n d i n g a f t e r t h e g r a d e s o r s c o r e s
a c h i e v e d a t h i s home s chool have been c o n v e r t e d on t h e b a s i s o f a f o u r p o i n t s e a l e.
P r e v i o u s Academic Achi evement (PAA):
s t u d e n t ' s p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c achi evement *

PAA r e f e r s t o t h e f o r e i g n

r e p o r t e d on a s c a l e f r om 1 t o

100 .
Organization of th e D i s s e r t a t i o n
The c h a p t e r s of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n a r e o r g a n i z e d a s f o l l o w s .
ter

I c o n t a i n e d a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s t u d y background*

t h e p r o b l e m, and need f o r t h e s t udy.

Chap­

a s t a t e m e n t of

Ch a p t e r I I i n c l u d e s a h i s t o r i c a l

o v e r v i e w o f t h e d e c i s i o n m e c h a n i s m , w i t h e m p h a s i s on t h e s c i e n t i f i c
method ( p r e d i c t i o n t h e o r y and d e c i s i o n t h e o r y )
admission decision
presentation

of t h e

problem.

particular.

to the

The c h a p t e r a l s o i n c l u d e s a d e t a i l e d

literature

a c h i e v e m e n t 1n g e n e r a l

in r e l a t i o n

about the

prediction

of

academic

a nd f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a demi c a c h i e v e m e n t i n

The h y p o t h e s e s a n d r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s ,

n a t u r e o f t h e s a m p l e a nd p o p u l a t i o n ,

study v a r i a b l e s ,

p r o c e d u r e s of u s ing p r e v i o u s

g r a d e s a s a p r e d i c t o r , and t h e s t a t i s t i c a l m e t h o d s us e d i n a n a l y z i n g
t h e d a t a a r e p r e s e n t e d 1n Ch a p t e r I I I .

C h a p t e r IV c o n t a i n s t h e r e s u l t s

of t h e d a t a a n a l y s i s and t h e s t u d y f i n d i n g s .
t h e study,

Finally,

t h e summary of

c o n c l u s i o n s , and r e c o mme n d a t i o n s a r e i n c l u d e d i n C h a p t e r V.

CHAPTER I I

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction
The e v a l u a t i o n o f b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d f r o m u s i n g s e l e c t i o n
d e v i c e s h a s b e e n an i s s u e

of c o n tin u in g

e d u c a t i o n a nd p s y c h o l o g y .

D e c is io n makers in t h e s e f i e l d s a r e con­

tinually

i n t e r e s t in t h e f i e l d s of

f a c e d w i t h t h e pr obl em o f making d e c i s i o n s f o r which t h e

information i s incomplete or t o t a l l y lacking.
for jobs

and advanced t r a i n i n g

these fields.

a r e e x a mp l e s o f

Selection of a p p l i c a n t s
d e c i s i o n p r o b l e ms

As d e c i s i o n ma k e r s t r y t o make r a t i o n a l

in

decision s, they

r e l y h e a v i l y on a n u m b e r o f a v a i l a b l e s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s .

Decision

ma k e r s ' a w a r e n e s s o f t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d fr om u s i n g t h e s e d e v i c e s
opens t h e door f o r sound r e s e a r c h .

Accordingly,

a v a s t number of

s t u d i e s have been d e s i g n e d t o e v a l u a t e t h e b e n e f i t s g a i n e d f r om u s i n g
particular selection

devices t o screen s tu d e n t s a t p a r t i c u l a r schools.

Most s t u d i e s have f o c u s e d on e s t i m a t i n g t h e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t a s t h e
b e s t i nde x o f t h e v a l u e o f a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n devi ce.
The main p u r p o s e o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y i s t o e v a l u a t e t h e bene­
f i t s t o be g a i n e d f r o m u s i n g a n u m b e r o f s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s t o s c r e e n
fo r e ig n a p p l i c a n t s t o g ra d u a te school a t Michigan S t a t e U n iv e rs ity .
The e v a l u a t i o n 1s c o n c e r n e d w i t h e s t i m a t i n g t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of
t h e s e s e l e c t i o n devices.

The r e s u l t a n t v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t w i l l

18

be

19

used as

an i n d e x o f

benefits

to

be a c h i e v e d

by u s i n g t h e d e f i n e d

s e l e c t i o n me a s ur e s .
V a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s have been used a s an I ndex f o r e v a l u a t i n g
t h e v a l u e o f s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s f o r a number o f y e a r s .

Recent l y*

deci­

s i o n t h e o r y has emerged a s a c o m p l e t e f r a me wo r k t h a t t a k e s i n t o c o n s i d ­
e r a t i o n a l l t h e f a c t o r s t h a t d et er mine t h e worth of a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c ­
t i o n device.

To show how t h e s e t wo a p p r o a c h e s wer e d e v e l o pe d and how

t h e y have c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e i mp r o v e me n t o f a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n making*
t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e vi e w was de v e l o p e d as f o l l o w s .
D i s c u s s e d f i r s t i s t h e n a t u r e of d e c i s i o n pr o b l e ms and how man
has managed t o l i v e w i t h t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s o f d a i l y d e c i s i o n s .
cifically*

a brief historical

Spe­

r e v i e w o f man' s h i s t o r y w i t h t h e pr obl em

o f d e c i s i o n making i s p r e s e n t e d .

T h i s h i s t o r i c a l appr oach d i s c u s s e s

t h e v a r i o u s t e c h n i q u e s t h a t have been de v e l o p e d t o s o l v e t h e pr obl em of
making d a i l y d e c i s i o n s .

Emphas i s i s g i v e n t o t h e s c i e n t i f i c method and

how i t h a s b e e n u s e d t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e p r o b l e m o f a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n
making.

The s e c o n d t o p i c o f t h e c h a p t e r i s t h e n a t u r e o f p r e d i c t i o n

t h e o r y a n d how 1 t h a s b e e n u s e d i n t h e c o n t e x t o f s c h o o l
decisions.

Further*

a number of s t u d i e s

admission

are reviewed t h a t

have

employed p r e d i c t i o n t h e o r y t o f o r e c a s t t h e a c a d e m i c p e r f o r m a n c e of
American s t u d e n t s .

Such a r e v i e w f u r n i s h e s a backgr ound f o r t h e f i n a l

s e c t i o n of t h i s c h a p te r * which c o n t a i n s a d e t a i l e d revie w of s t u d i e s
t h a t have f o c u s e d on t h e e v a l u a t i o n of s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s used by many
schools t o screen foreign students.

20

Mankind and De c i s i o n Probl ems
A d e c i s i o n p r o b l e m I s a s i t u a t i o n 1n w h i c h o n e 1s f o r c e d t o
ch o os e a p a r t i c u l a r a c t i o n from a s e t of a l t e r n a t i v e a c t i o n s ( Br o ss,
19 53) .

During t h e i r d a i ly l i v e s ,

people encounter several

decision

p r o b l e m s in which t h e y have t o d e c i d e b e t w e e n a number o f a v a i l a b l e
a lte rn a tiv e actions.

They u s u a l l y ma ke a d e c i s i o n

while they

are

p a r t i a l l y or c o m p l e t e l y u n c e r t a i n ab o u t t h e n a t u r e of t h e outcome.
Although d e c i s i o n p r o b l e ms s h a r e s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,

they d i f f e r

w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e d e g r e e o f c o m p l e x i t y , s t r u c t u r e , and t h e p r o c e s s
one must f o l l o w b e f o r e making t h e d e c i s i o n .
theorists,

According t o d e c isio n

a l l t y p e s of d e c i s i o n p r obl e ms can be c l a s s i f i e d i n t o t h r e e

categories:
1.

D e c i s i o n p r o b l e ms t h a t can be made w i t h c o m p l e t e c e r t a i n t y .

In s uch p r o b l e m s ,

t h e d e c i s i o n maker has c o m p l e t e knowl edge a b o u t t h e

n a tu re of t h e outcome

and t h e r e s u l t s

action.

r o l e does n o t go beyond m a n i p u l a t i n g t h e d a t a

Therefore,

to select

his

of t h e p o s s i b l e c o u r s e s of

t h e b e s t c o u r s e of a c t i o n from t h e a v a i l a b l e c o u r s e s of

action.
2.

The s econd c a t e g o r y c o n s i s t s o f d e c i s i o n p r o b l e ms t h a t a r e

ma de u n d e r p a r t i a l u n c e r t a i n t y .

This type of d e c isio n problem has a

known l a w o f r a n d o m n e s s t h a t c o n t r o l s t h e s t a t e o f n a t u r e ( o u t c o m e ) .
In s uch p r o b l e ms ,

d e c i s i o n maker s u s u a l l y have p r i o r

the r e la tiv e probability
c a n be t a k e n .

knowl edge a b o u t

o f t h e out come f o r each d e c i s i o n a c t i o n t h a t

21

3.

The t h i r d c a t e g o r y o f d e c i s i o n p r o b l e m s c o m p r i s e s t h o s e

pr o b l e ms t h a t a r e d e c i d e d u n d e r c o m p l e t e u n c e r t a i n t y .

Thes e t y p e s of

d e c i s i o n p r o b l e m s o c c u r when t h e d e c i s i o n m a k e r d o e s n o t know wh i c h
s t a t e of n a t u r e w ill

o c c u r a n d t h e r e f o r e d o e s n o t know t h e l a w o f

randomness t h a t c o n t r o l s i t .

In such p r o b l e m s ,

th e u n c e rta in ty is

c a u s e d by t h e f a c t t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n maker does n o t know t h e r e l a t i v e
p r o b a b i l i t y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each p o s s i b l e c o u r s e o f a c t i o n (Dinkel,
Kochenber ger ,

& Plane,

Most a c t i o n s
tial

1978; C h e r n o f f ,
in t h e real

or complete u nc er ta in ty .

1959).

wor l d a r e c o m p l i c a t e d by e i t h e r p a r ­

People a r e c o n t i n u a l l y

faced with th e

pr obl em of making c h o i c e s f rom among a number o f a c t i o n s under one of
t h e s e t y p e s o f u n c e r t a i n t y ( B r o s s , 1 953) .
h a s b e e n and w i l l
o r g a n i s ms .

The p u z z l e o f u n c e r t a i n t y

c o n t i n u e t o be a g r e a t c h a l l e n g e f o r a l l

S i mpl e o r g a n i s m s a r e e q ui pp e d w i t h

biological

t h a t h e l p t hem make t h e d e c i s i o n s n e c e s s a r y f o r s u r v i v a l .

living

mechani sms
The pr ob1ems

o f more compl ex o r g a n i s m s a r e a l s o more compl ex, and b i o l o g i c a l mechan­
i s m s a r e l e s s e f f e c t i v e i n h e l p i n g t h e o r g a n i s m make t h e n e c e s s a r y
decisions.
Man as a l i v i n g o r g a n i s m has been c h a l l e n g e d by t h e u n c e r t a i n t y
of h i s action s.

Th r oughout e x i s t e n c e ,

and has a t t e m p t e d t o c r e a t e
t h e r e a l i t y o f h i s wor l d.

he has r e s i s t e d t h i s c h a l l e n g e

various s o p h i s t i c a t e d

The h i s t o r i c a l

met hods t o c l a r i f y

r e c o r d o f manki nd r e p r e s e n t s

a c l e a r p i c t u r e o f how he has managed t o l i v e w i t h t h e u n c e r t a i n t y of
his actio ns.

22

During t h e

early

stage

of

ma n ' s h i s t o r y #

several

cultural

p a t t e r n s e m e r g e d a s a r e s u l t o f h i s n e e d t o s u r v i v e a n d s e t t l e 1n a
permanent s o c ia l

group.

The e m e r g e n c e o f t h e s e c u l t u r a l

patterns

produced a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e s o l u t i o n o f man's d a l l y
decision

pr obl ems .

Each s o c i a l

gr oup a t t e m p t e d t o combi ne t h e i n d i ­

v i d u a l s ' e x p e r i e n c e s i n t o a s e t o f r u l e s a n d a d v i c e t h a t was u s e d t o
guide t h e i r d a i l y d e c i si o ns .
With t h e a d v e n t o f c i v i l i z a t i o n #
compl ex and d i v e r s e f o r t h e c u l t u r a l
c u l t t o speci fy in d e t a i l
situation.

Therefore,

d e c i s i o n pr o b l e ms became t o o

d e c i s i o n maker.

I t became d i f f i ­

t h e a p p r o p r i a t e c o u r s e s of a c t i o n f o r ever y

a c l a s s of p r o f e s s i o n a l

t o systemize t h e dec isi on process.

d e c i s i o n ma ke r s emerged

Every known c i v i l i z a t i o n , has pr o­

d u c e d a n u m b e r o f i n t e l l e c t u a l s w h o s e j o b was m a k i n g d e c i s i o n s and
devising i n t e l l e c t u a l

me chani s ms f o r t h e d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s .

They have

t r i e d t o de v e l o p c e r t a i n br oad p r i n c i p l e s t h a t can be used t o de a l wi t h
a l a r g e number of d e c i s i o n p r o b l e m s .

Al t hough p r o f e s s i o n a l d e c i s i o n

maker s i n each c i v i l i z a t i o n we r e t r y i n g t o a l l e v i a t e t h e u n c e r t a i n t y of
man's a c t i o n s ,

they d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with r e s p e c t t o t h e p r i n c i ­

p l e s t h e y evol ve d.
themselves

Such d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d b e c a u s e t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l s

differed

with

r e g a r d t o t h e i r c o n c e p t i o n o f wor l d r e a l i t y

and t h e c a u s e s behi nd t h e u n c e r t a i n t y of d a i l y a c t i o n s .
Br o s s (1953) i d e n t i f i e d t h r e e d i f f e r e n t c l a s s e s o f p r o f e s s i o n a l
d e c i s i o n makers#

who have d e v i s e d t h r e e d i s t i n c t i n t e l l e c t u a l

isms f o r d e c i s i o n making.

mechan­

The f i r s t c l a s s o f p r o f e s s i o n a l d e c i s i o n

maker s wer e t h o s e who a d v o c a t e d t h e " d e v i l t h e o r y " a s t h e mechani s m f o r

23

d e c i s i o n making.

They s t a t e d t h a t t h e w o r l d r e a l i t y

product of I n t a n g i b l e causes c a l l e d th e d ev il.

( e v e n t s ) 1s a

Accordingly*

they

d e v e l o p e d c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s by w h i c h p e o p l e c a n a c t a n d make d e c i ­
sions.

Although t h e d e v i l

theory

brought s i g n i f i c a n t advancement

t o w a r d c l a r i f y i n g t h e u n c e r t a i n t y o f man' s a c t i o n s ,

1t was n o t s t r o n g

enough t o cope w i t h t h e demands o f more compl ex pr obl ems .

Further, the

out come o f t h i s t h e o r y a s a s cheme f o r making d e c i s i o n s d i d n o t s a t i s f y
p e o p l e ' s common s e n s e .
t h e o r y by t h e r e s u l t s ,

P e o p l e began t o j u d g e t h e p r i n c i p l e o f t h i s
and t h e r e s u l t s d i d n o t p l e a s e them.

many i n t e l l e c t u a l s began t o q u e s t i o n t h e d e v i l

Therefore,

theory's effectiveness

as a mechanism f o r d e c i s i o n making and i n i t i a t e d an e f f o r t t o d e v i s e a
b e t t e r I n t e l l e c t u a l mechanism.
D u r i n g t h e G o l d e n Age o f G r e e c e , t h e s e c o n d c l a s s o f p r o f e s ­
sional

d e c i s i o n ma ke rs emerged as a r e f l e c t i o n of man's need f o r a

l o g i c a l c o n c e p t o f how h e c a n 1 i v e w i t h t h e u n c e r t a i n t y o f h i s d a i l y
d e c i s i o n pr ob l ems .

This c l a s s

o f i n d i v i d u a l s managed t o

d e p a r t fr om

t h e myt h o f t h e d e v i l t h e o r y and d e v e l o p e d m o r e l o g i c a l
e x p l a i n i n g t h e wor l d r e a l i t y .

rules for

They used d e d u c t i v e l o g i c and r e a s o n i n g

a s t h e mechanism f o r a r r i v i n g a t a p a r t i c u l a r d e c i s i o n .

T h i s mechanism

r e p r e s e n t e d a s u b s t a n t i a l adva nc e me nt beyond d e v i l t h e o r y .

Both p o i n t s

of view a g r e e d t h a t w o r l d e v e n t s a r e a p r o d u c t o f c a u s e s ,
d i f f e r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e s o u r c e s of t h e s e c a u s e s .

but they

Whereas a dvo­

c a t e s of t h e d e v i l t h e o r y a t t r i b u t e d t h e e v e n t s of t h e real w orld t o
invisible

causes

named " d e v i l s , " t h e s u p p o r t e r s

of

reason

theory

24

a t tr ib u t e d these causes to natural
manipulated

( Br o s s ,

f a c t o r s t h a t can be c o n t r o l l e d and

1953).

Generally speaking,

t h e r e a s o n t h e o r y a s a mechanism f o r making

d e c i s i o n s has c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e d e v e l o p me n t o f r a t i o n a l and c o n s i s t e n t
p r i n c i p l e s t h a t have h e l p e d man cope w i t h t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n h e r e n t i n
his daily actions.

T h e s e r a t i o n a l a nd c o n s i s t e n t p r i n c i p l e s e s t a b ­

l i s h e d t h e b a s i s f o r t h e e mer gence o f t h e t h i r d c l a s s o f p r o f e s s i o n a l
d e c i s i o n m a k e r s — p r o p o n e n t s of t h e s c i e n t i f i c method a s a mechani sm f o r
d e c i s i o n making.

However, t h e I n t e l l e c t u a l s f a i l e d t o r e a l i z e t h e

c o n n e c t i o n bet wee n r e a s o n and t h e wor l d r e a l i t y .

They di d n o t r e a l i z e

t h a t r e a s o n c a n be i n f e r r e d f r o m t h e w o r l d r e a l i t y .

Therefore, the

r e a s o n t h e o r y f a i l e d t o be d i f f u s e d on a l a r g e s c a l e u n t i l
discovered i t s connection with t h e real
duced i n d u c t i v e l o g i c ( s c i e n t i f i c
me a s ur e me nt ,

wor l d.

scientists

Scientists later intro­

procedure t h a t

us e s e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n ,

observation,

and s y m b o l i c l a n g u a g e t o de v e l o p s t a t e m e n t s

a b o u t t h e worl d re a l i t y ) .

The g a p b e t w e e n r e a s o n and t h e r e a l w o r l d

became ver y c l e a r ( Br os s ,

1953).

The e m e r g e n c e o f t h e s c i e n t i f i c

method as a mechanism f o r

a r r i v i n g a t d e c i s i o n s c l a r i f i e d m o s t o f t h e c a u s e s u n d e r l y i n g ma n’ s
d a i l y d e c i s i o n pr o b l e ms .

Advocat e s o f t h e s c i e n t i f i c method a t t r i b u t e d

t h e c a u s e s o f u n c e r t a i n t y t o f a c t o r s t h a t c a n be m e a s u r e d q u a n t i t a t ­
ively.

They ar gue d t h a t w o r l d e v e n t s a r e r e p e a t a b l e and o c c u r a c c o r d ­

i ng t o a p a r t i c u l a r p a t t e r n of r e g u l a r i t y .

This noti on of t h e r e p e a t a ­

b i l i t y o f e v e n t s m o t i v a t e d s e v e r a l m a t h e m a t i c i a n s t o exami ne t h e t h e o r y
very c a r e f u l l y .

C o n s e q u e n t l y , s e v e r a l t e c h n i q u e s and f o r m u l a s w er e

25

devel oped t o d e t e r m i n e t h e l i k e l i h o o d of t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f p a r t i c u l a r
e v e n t s (Levi n,
a dva nc e me nt s ,

1978).

Thes e new d e v e l o p me n t s we r e f o l l o w e d by f u r t h e r

which enhanced t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f p r o b a b i l i t y t h e o r y in

ex a mi n i n g t h e n a t u r e o f s o c i a l

phenomena.

The de v e l o p me n t o f n o r ma l -

cu rv e d i s t r i b u t i o n , t h e o r y of e r r o r , t h e o r y of s t a t i s t i c a l
tests,

and t h e o r y of r e g r e s s i o n and c o r r e l a t i o n

emergence of t h e i n d u c t i v e s c i e n t i f i c
decisions (S tilson ,

decision

contributed to the

method as a t o o l

f o r making

1966) .

Use o f t h e i n d u c t i v e s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d a s a d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g
to o l gained wide p o p u l a r i t y d u r in g t h e f i r s t h a l f of t h e t w e n t i e t h
century.

D e c i s i o n m a k e r s i n v a r i o u s f i e l d s had e n c o u n t e r e d s e v e r a l

d e c i s i o n pr o b l e ms f o r whi ch i n f o r m a t i o n was i n c o m p l e t e ,

uncertain,

completely lacking.

s t a t i s t i c s to

Therefore,

a i d t hem i n making r a t i o n a l

they turned t o c l a s s i c a l

or

d e c i s i o n s in t h e f a ce of u n c e r t a i n t y .

The t e r m " c l a s s i c a l s t a t i s t i c s " r e f e r s t o t h e t e c h n i q u e s and
t h e o r y t h a t can be used t o p r o mo t e r a t i o n a l
of u n c e r t a i n t y .

Specifically,

d e c i s i o n maki ng 1n t h e f a c e

i t refers to the various hypothesis-

t e s t i n g t e c h n i q u e s and e s t i m a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s t h a t e m p l o y p r o b a b i l i t y
t h e o r y a s a b a s i s f o r maki ng r a t i o n a l

d e c i s i o n s from i n c o m p l e t e d a t a .

When t h e d e c i s i o n m a k e r e n c o u n t e r s a d e c i s i o n p r o b l e m f o r w h i c h t h e
information is

incomplete,

he t e n d s t o us e c l a s s i c a l

inferential

sta­

t i s t i c s a s a means o f m i n i m i z i n g t h e r i s k of ma ki ng wrong d e c i s i o n s .
The d e c i s i o n m a k e r b e g i n s by g a t h e r i n g
sampl e.
tegic

i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t a random

Then he u s e s h y p o t h e s i s - t e s t i n g p r o c e d u r e s t o f o r m u l a t e s t r a ­
policies

that

can

be

used.

Usually

the

choice

among t h e

26

alternative

hypotheses

is

based

on

the

probability

error

alpha

(Hamburg* 1970) .
Although c l a s s i c a l

h y p o t h e s i s t e s t i n g h a s been s u c c e s s f u l in

a s s e s si n g di ve rs e decision-making pr o b le m s in v a r i o u s f i e l d s ,
been t h e s u b j e c t of c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n t r o v e r s y .

As a r e s u l t of i t s wi de

a p p l i c a t i o n , s t a t i s t i c i a n s began t o n o t i c e t h a t c l a s s i c a l
testing

fails

i t has

hypothesis

t o c o n s i d e r some of t h e mos t i m p o r t a n t i n g r e d i e n t s f o r

s u c c e s s f u l d e c i s i o n making.

They f o u n d t h a t h y p o t h e s i s t e s t i n g wa s

c o n c e r n e d w i t h Type I and Type I I e r r o r s and n e g l e c t e d t o c o n s i d e r t h e
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f wrong d e c i s i o n s .

Also, th e y n o t i c e d t h a t h y p o t h e s i s

t e s t i n g n e g l e c t e d t o use p r i o r knowledge about t h e h y p o th e s i s under
consideration.

Therefore,

s t a t i s t i c i a n s extended hypothesis t e s t i n g t o

a mor e c o h e r e n t f r a me wo r k t h a t c o n s i d e r s a l l
for successful

d e c i s i o n making.

of t h e f a c t o r s n e c e s s a r y

Th i s new met hod ( s t a t i s t i c a l

t h e o r y ) was b a s e d on b a y s i a n s t a t i s t i c a l t h e o r y .

decision

The a p p l i c a t i o n o f

t h i s met hod h a s h e l p e d t h e d e c i s i o n maker form d e c i s i o n s i n a way t h a t
takes

i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e p r o f i t and l o s s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each

a l t e r n a t i v e co ur se of a c t i o n .
statistical

As s t a t i s t i c i a n s a p p l y t h e p r i n c i p l e s of

decision theory,

t h e y a t t e m p t t o combi ne t h e p r i o r knowl ­

edge c o n c e r n i n g t h e d e c i s i o n

pr obl em w i t h t h e r e l a t i v e p r o b a b i l i t y o f

the current

Information.

Then t h e y e s t i m a t e t h e r e l a t i v e p r o b a b i l i t y

a s s o c i a t e d w ith each a l t e r n a t i v e c o u r s e of a c t i o n .
compa r e t h e v a r i o u s o u t c ome s

in te rms of t h e i r

Finally,

they

l i k e l i h o o d and ch o o s e

t h e a c t i o n t h a t w i l l ma x i mi z e t h e out come p a y o f f and m i n i m i z e t h e l o s s
f u n c t i o n (Habur g, 1970).

27

By c o m p a r i n g c l a s s i c a l
decision theory,

hypothesis t e s t in g with s t a t i s t i c a l

1t can be s e e n t h a t t h e me t ho ds r e s e m b l e each o t h e r i n

t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e pr obl em t o which t h e y a d d r e s s t h e m s e l v e s and t h e
purpose they want t o achieve.
optimum d e c i s i o n .
the conditional

However,

Bo t h m e t h o d s s t r i v e t o a c h i e v e t h e

while th e c l a s s i c a l

method f o c u s e s o n l y on

p r o b a b i l i t i e s of sample outcomes as t h e b a s i s f o r

developing a d e c i s i o n r u l e ,

statistical

d e c i s i o n t h e o r y goes f u r t h e r t o
i
i n c l u d e more f a c t o r s n e c e s s a r y f o r a c h i e v i n g o p t i m a l d e c i s i o n s .
In

addition to the conditional

p r o b a b i l i t y of s a mp l e out come,

statistical

d e c i s i o n t h e o r y p r o v i d e s a m e t h o d by w h i c h o n e c a n c o m b i n e t h e p r i o r
probability

distribution

and i n c o r p o r a t e s l o s s e s
pr obl em (Haburg,

with c u r r e n t

s a mp l e p r o b a b i l i t y

i n t o th e formal

structure

distribution

of t h e d e c i s i o n

1970).

The a d v e n t o f s t a t i s t i c a l d e c i s i o n t h e o r y a s a m e c h a n i s m f o r
maki ng d e c i s i o n s h a s l e d t o c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n t r o v e r s y bet ween t h o s e who
advocate i t s
method.

u s e a n d t h o s e who a d h e r e t o t h e c l a s s i c a l

statistical

P r a c t i t i o n e r s i n each f i e l d have begun t o e v a l u a t e t h e e f f e c ­

t i v e n e s s o f bot h me t hods and t o t a k e a s t a n d on how d e c i s i o n pr obl ems
s h o u l d be s o l v e d ( C r o n b a c h & G l a s e r ,

1 9 65) .

For exam ple ,

decision

maker s i n t h e f i e l d o f e d u c a t i o n and p s yc hol ogy have a p p l i e d t h e p r i n ­
c i p l e s o f b o t h a p p r o a c h e s t o s o l v e many o f t h e i r d e c i s i o n p r o b l e m s .
Specifically,

t h e s e l e c t i o n of a p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a n t f o r a p a r t i c u l a r

j o b o r a d v a n c e d t r a i n i n g w a s , a n d c o n t i n u e s t o be, t h e m o s t c o m p l e x
d e c i s i o n pr obl em e n c o u n t e r e d by d e c i s i o n ma ker s i n t h e i r f i e l d s .
r e s u l t of th e u n c e r t a in t y

involved in t h e s e l e c t i o n

process,

As a

decision

28

m a k e r s h a v e r e l i e d h e a v i l y on c l a s s i c a l
making r a t i o n a l d e c i s i o n s .

s t a t i s t i c s t o a i d t h e m 1n

More r e c e n t l y , many c on c e r n e d s c h o l a r s have

begun t o a d o p t t h e s t a t i s t i c a l

d e c i s i o n t h e o r y as t h e b e s t t e c h n i q u e t o

use i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s (Cronbach & G l a s e r ,

1965).

Beca us e t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y i s c on c e r n e d w i t h s e l e c t i o n p r o b l e ms
as they r e l a t e t o f o r e ig n s tu d e n t s ,
f u r t h e r d e t a i l s on t h i s t o p i c .

the following section

In p a r t i c u l a r ,

includes

th e di sc us sio n concerns

t h e a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s and how c l a s s i c a l s t a t i s t i c s and s t a t i s ­
tical

decision theory

accuracy of t h e i r

a r e u s e d by d e c i s i o n m a k e r s t o i n c r e a s e t h e

decisions.

Admi ssi on D e c i s i o n Making
P r a c t i t i o n e r s i n t h e f i e l d s o f e d u c a t i o n a nd p s y c h o l o g y a r e
constantly

faced with

decision

pr obl ems f o r which t h e i n f o r m a t i o n

un cer ta in , incomplete, or e n t i r e l y

lacking.

is

S ele ctio n of a p p lic a n ts

f o r a j o b o r advanced t r a i n i n g i s an e xampl e o f such d e c i s i o n pr obl ems .
In s e l e c t i o n , t h e d e c i s i o n ma ker ha s t h e o p t i o n o f r e j e c t i n g o r a c c e p t ­
i ng t h e p r o s p e c t i v e a p p l i c a n t .

U s u a l l y , t h e d e c i s i o n i s ba s e d on known

i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e a p p l i c a n t (Cronbach,
B e f o r e World War I I ,

1971).

a d m i s s i o n s p o l i c i e s wer e ve r y s i m p l e and

we r e among t h e l e a s t i m p o r t a n t i s s u e s o c c up yi ng t h e t h i n k i n g o f t h o s e
responsible for the in stitu tio n .

A f t e r t h e war,

s i o n d e c i s i o n s became more complex.
of s t u d e n t s e n t e r i n g c o l l e g e s
challenge.

t h e pr obl em o f a d mi s ­

The m a s s i v e i n c r e a s e i n t h e number

presented decision

maker s w i t h

a great

I t p l a c e d t hem 1n a p o s i t i o n of ne e d i n g a b e t t e r met hod f o r

s e l e c t i n g s t u d e n t s who had a hi gh p r o b a b i l i t y o f s u c c e s s .

This ur gent

29

need l e d many s e l e c t i v e
gram.

s chools t o design a complete admi ssi ons pro­

In d e v e l o p i n g t h e s e p r ogr a ms ,

s c h o o l s d i f f e r e d i n t h e ways t h e y

c o n c e p t u a l i z e d t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a sound a d m i s s i o n p o l i c y .
s p i t e of t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s ,

however,

In

t h e r e a r e a number of c r i t e r i a by

which one can j u d g e t h e q u a l i t y o f a p a r t i c u l a r s c h o o l ’s a d m i s s i o n
program.
H i l l (1971) a r g u e d t h a t ,
institution,

w h a t e v e r t h e a c a d e m i c s t a t u s o f an

a number o f c r i t e r i a can be used t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e bet ween

sound and unsound a d m i s s i o n pr ogr ams .

He s t a t e d t h a t ,

f o r t h e admis­

s i o n p r o g r a m t o be s o u n d , i t m u s t be " r a t i o n a l , l o g i c a l , c l e a r , t h o r ­
oughl y p l a n n e d ,

and m o d i f i a b l e on t h e b a s i s o f o b j e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n of

i t s o p e r a t i o n and i t s s u c c e s s i n m e e t i n g t h e s p e c i f i e d o b j e c t i v e e f f i ­
c i e n t l y " (p. 7 0 0 ) .

He w e n t on t o s a y ,

As t h e i n s t i t u t i o n d e c i d e s t o d e v e l o p a sound s e l e c t i o n pr ogr am, 1 t
m u s t t a k e a s t a n c e on a n u m b e r o f i s s u e s , i n c l u d i n g t h e k i n d o f
b e n e f i t or u t i l i t y 1t d e s i r e s t o ach iev e with i t s o p e r a tio n ,
w h e t h e r 1 t w i l l be a d a p t i v e 1n i t s t r e a t m e n t o f s t u d e n t s , t o what
e x t e n t i t w i l l r e c r u i t a p p l i c a n t s f o r i t s c l a s s e s , what m e a s u r e s i t
w i l l u s e i n ma ki ng i t s a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n s , how t h o s e me a s u r e s w i l l
be combi ned, and whe r e t h e c u t t i n g s c o r e s w i l l be p l a c e d , (p. 682)
F i g u r e 1 shows a s c h e m a t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f how H i l l
the c h a ra c te ris tic s
a d m is s i o n s program.

and l o g i c a l

defined

s t e p s i n v o l v e d i n d e v e l o p i n g a sound

At t h e b e g i n n i n g , an i n s t i t u t i o n ’ s p h i l o s o p h y ,

goals,

and o b j e c t i v e s a r e t h e main f a c t o r s t h a t d e t e r m i n e i t s a c a d e mi c

status

(s elec tiv e or nonselective).

selective,

As t h e

institution

decides t o

be

i t mus t d e v e l o p a sound a d m i s s i o n s program and s t a t e c l e a r l y

i t s s t a n d s on t h e s i x i s s u e s l i s t e d i n t h e d i a g r a m .

The f i r s t f o u r

i s s u e s compose t h e ma j o r e l e m e n t o f t h e a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n model.

School p h i l o s o p h y ,
g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s

Not s e l e c t i v e

Selective

Tend t o have no
c l e a r r e q u i r e me n t s
f o r a d mi s s i on

Must de v e l o p a
sound admi s s i on
program

Must t a k e a s t a n d
on t h e f o l l o w i n g
issues:

1. Det er mi ne t h e ki nd o f b e n e f i t
it de s ir e s to achieve ( c r it e r io n )
2. Def i ne t h e measur es o f p r e d i c t o r s
t h a t w i l l be used in making t h e
a d mi s s i o n d e c i s i o n
3. S p e c i f y how p r e d i c t o r s w i l l be
processed ( c l i n i c a l l y , s t a t i s ­
tically)
it. Det ermi ne t h e c u t t i n g s c o r e s f o r
al 1 t h e p r e d i c t o r s
5. Det ermi ne t h e t y p e o f t r e a t m e n t
( adapt ive or fixed)
6. Def i ne t h e a p p l i c a n t s o u r c e s

F i g u r e I . —Admission model e l e m e n t s .

V jJ

O

31

Admi ssi on D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s
Cronbach and G l a s e r (1965) a r g u e d t h a t a l l

personnel

decisions

can be c h a r a c t e r i z e d i n t h e same manner be c a u s e t h e y i n v o l v e t h e same
e l e m e n t s and t h e s a m e s t e p s t h a t o n e m u s t t a k e b e f o r e m a k i n g a d e c i ­
sion.

Admission d e c i s i o n making i s a t y p i c a l example of a p e r s o n n e l

d e c i s i o n in which t h e I n d i v i d u a l
number o f a p p l i c a n t s .
ful,

ma k e s d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g a l a r g e

For an a d m i s s i o n s d e c i s i o n maker t o be s u c c e s s ­

he mus t s e e k a s t r a t e g y t h a t w i l l work b e s t on t h e a v e r a g e ove r a

series

of d e c i s i o n

actions.

He m u s t e m p l o y t h e m e a s u r e s

and t h e

s t r a t e g i e s t h a t w i l l ma x i mi z e t h e s c h o o l - d e f i n e d u t i l i t i e s and m i n i m i z e
t h e l o s s e s t h a t may r e s u l t fr om a wrong d e c i s i o n .
School a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s e s d i f f e r a c c o r d i n g t o t h e
s c h o ol ' s philosophy.
tain

However,

ty p e of c e n t r a l

mos t s e l e c t i v e s c h o o l s p r a c t i c e a c e r ­

control

over undergraduate admissions.

employ t h e same s t r a t e g y t o make d e c i s i o n s a b o u t a l l
At t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l ,
me nt a l

They

new a p p l i c a n t s .

t h e a c t u a l d e c i s i o n making i s made on a d e p a r t ­

b a s i s (Quann & A s s o c i a t e s ,

s i o n i s made on a c e n t r a l

1980).

However,

or a departmental

basis,

whether th e admis­
t h e d e c i s i o n maker

mus t u s e t h e same s t r a t e g y i n s i m i l a r c a s e s (Cronbach & G l a s e r ,

1965).

Whet her t h e a d m i s s i o n 1s made by t h e c e n t r a l g r a d u a t e o f f i c e or
by an i n d i v i d u a l

department,

t h e d e c i s i o n model mu s t i n v o l v e t h e e l e ­

me nt s and t h e p r o c e s s r e p r e s e n t e d i n F i g u r e 2.
c o l l e c t t h e needed i n f o r m a t i o n ,
strategy,

a nd t h e n

The d e c i s i o n maker mus t

process i t according to a defined

ma ke t h e d e c i s i o n

that,

on t h e a v e r a g e ,

will

P r e a d mi s s i o n d a t a
(past)

Data p r o c e s s i n g , s e t t i n g d e c i s i o n s t r a t e g i e s ,
and d e c i s i o n a c t i o n ( p r e s e n t )

r~

1

De c i s i o n S t r a t e g y
o r Rules
Accept

-

j

Reject

Statistical
Data a bout a p p l i c a n t s

(future)

Outcome

GRE s c o r e s
UGPA
En g l i s h s c o r e s
Recommendation
Demographic i n f o r m a t i o n
Ot her
Evaluation of the
whole p r o g r a m' s
p r e d i c t i o n s yst em

F i g u r e 2 . - - A d mi s s i o n d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s ( g e n e r a l ) .

oo
N>

33

ma xi mi z e t h e s c h o o l - d e f i n e d b e n e f i t s and m i n i m i z e t h e l o s s e s t h a t may
r e s u l t from maki ng a wrong d e c i s i o n .
By e x a m i n i n g t h e a d m i s s i o n model ( F i g u r e 2 ) ,

i t c a n be s e e n

t h a t a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n s a r e p a r t o f an i n t e r r e l a t e d p r o c e s s t h a t t a k e s
pla ce over a period of time.
l e a d s t o an a c t i o n ,

In t h i s p r o c e s s t h e d e c i s i o n s t r a t e g y

whi ch t h e n l e a d s t o a p a r t i c u l a r out come.

F o r t h e d e c i s i o n m a k e r t o make o p t i m u m d e c i s i o n s ,
consider past,
prediction

present,

s ys t e m

and f u t u r e outc ome s.

he mu s t

T h i s means t h a t t h e

i s an i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t o f t h e a d m i s s i o n s d e c i s i o n

p r o c e s s be c a u s e i t p r o v i d e s a p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n ,
be t we e n t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a

which shows t h e

joint

distribution

and t h e f u t u r e o u t ­

come.

Thi s p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n p r o v i d e s a q u a n t i t a t i v e me a s u r e of

t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n h e r e n t i n a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n out comes .
quantification;
will

Based on t h i s

t h e d e c i s i o n maker c h o o s e s t h e d e c i s i o n s t r a t e g y t h a t

ma xi mi z e (on t h e a v e r a g e ) t h e s c h o o l ' s d e s i r e d outcome.
A f t e r t h e d e c i s i o n maker ch ooses t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n m e a s u r e s ,

p r o c e s s e s t h e m , a nd m a k e s h i s d e c i s i o n ,
program t o an e x t e n s i v e e v a l u a t i o n .

he m u s t s u b j e c t t h e e n t i r e

D e c i s i o n ma ker s c h o o s e d i f f e r e n t

a d m i s s i o n s t r a t e g i e s , and " wha t c o n s t i t u t e s t h e b e s t s t r a t e g i e s depends
on s o me s u b t l e q u e s t . o n o f e v a l u a t i o n " ( C r o n b a c h & G l a s e r ,
21).

Th i s means t h a t ,

program 1s f u n c t i o n i n g ,
evaluation.

1965,

p.

f o r t h e i n s t i t u t i o n t o make s u r e t h e a d m i s s i o n
i t mus t s u b j e c t t h e whol e pr ogr am t o e x t e n s i v e

Quann and A s s o c i a t e s ( 1980) s t a t e d t h a t " e v a l u a t i o n o f

a d m i s s i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s mus t be ongo i ng;

th e admissions o f f i c e

should

c o n d u c t v a l i d i t y s t u d i e s — or be s u r e t h a t t h e y a r e c o n d u c t e d e l s e w h e r e

34

i n t h e I n s t i t u t i o n " (p. 4 6 ) .
predictive validity*

In a d d i t i o n t o t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e i r

a d m i s s i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s mus t a l s o be e v a l u a t e d i n

t e r m s of t h e i r v i s i b i l i t y and f a i r n e s s .
The e v a l u a t i o n

of s e l e c t i o n

d e v i c e s has been a problem of

c o n t i n u i n g i n t e r e s t i n t h e f i e l d s o f p s yc h ol o gy and e d u c a t i o n .

A vast

number o f e v a l u a t i v e s t u d i e s i n t h e s e f i e l d s have been d e s i g n e d t o
e s t i m a t e t h e u t i l i t y o f a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n de v i c e .
stages,

evaluation

research

was c o n c e r n e d s o l e l y

p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n

In t h e e a r l i e s t

with e s ti m a t in g th e

device.

The r e s u l t a n t

v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t was u s e d a s an i n d e x o f t h e t e s t ’s b e n e f i t .

For

s e l e c t i o n d e c i s i o n s , t h e h i g h e r t h e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t , t h e more
b e n e f i c i a l t h e s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e was i n making a r a t i o n a l
Actually,

decision.

t h e w i d e s p r e a d us e o f p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y was m o t i ­

v a t e d by t h e d e s i r e o f t e s t c o n s t r u c t o r s t o c o n v i n c e d e c i s i o n m a k e r s
t h a t t h e b e n e f i t o f u s i n g s uch t e s t s i n d e c i s i o n maki ng j u s t i f i e s t h e i r
cost.

As t e s t c o n s t r u c t o r s a t t e m p t e d t o g i v e t e s t u s e r s an i d e a o f t h e

p o te n tial payoffs to a n t i c i p a t e from u s i n g p a r t i c u l a r t e s t s ,

several

app ro ac h es t o i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t were advanced.
Dur i ng t h e e a r l y s t a g e s o f t h e p r e d i c t i o n movement,
casting efficiency, E = 1 - / l value.

t h e index of f o r e ­

r ^ was u s e d a s a m e a s u r e o f a t e s t ' s

Then, d u r i n g t h e 1930s and 1940s, t h e c o e f f i c i e n t o f d e t e r m i n a ­

t i o n r 2 became a more p o p u l a r m e a s u r e o f a t e s t ' s w o r t h ( Cronbach &

>•

G l a s e r » 1965).

35

r^ r e f e r s t o t h e amount of out co me v a r i a t i o n t h a t can

be p r e d i c t e d o r e x p l a i n e d by a p a r t i c u l a r t e s t s c o r e .
value,

The h i g h e r t h i s

t h e g r e a t e r t h e wor t h o f t h e t e s t a s a s e l e c t i o n de v i c e .
Al t hough t h e s e t w o me a s u r e s have been and w i l l

c o n t i n u e t o be

used f o r i n t e r p r e t i n g a t e s t ' s v a l i d i t y , t h e y have been s u b j e c t e d t o
constructive criticism .

Cronbach and G l a s e r (1965) a r g u e d t h a t t h e

w i d e s p r e a d u s e o f E a nd

r^ as a m e a s u r e of a t e s t ' s w o rth has l e d t o

c o n s i d e r a b l e p e s s i mi s m w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e v a l u e o f t e s t s
procedures.

in s e l e c t i o n

Th i s 1s b e c a u s e bot h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f t e s t wor t h empha­

s i z e d hi gh v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s a s a n e c e s s a r y c o n d i t i o n f o r t h e t e s t
t o have p r a c t i c a l

value.

Both a p p r o a c h e s e mp h a s i z e d me a s u r e me n t a c c u ­

r a c y and p r e d i c t i v e e f f i c i e n c y and i g n o r e d v a r i o u s p a r a m e t e r s t h a t
a c tu a lly determined th e overall

worth of a s e l e c t i o n device.

e xa mpl e , t h e y i g n o r e d t h e e f f e c t of t e s t c o s t ,

For

s e l e c t i o n r a t i o , and t h e

s y s t e m a t i c n a t u r e o f t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s (Cronbach & G l a s e r ,

1965).

The t h i r d a p pr oa c h t o j u d g i n g a s e l e c t i o n m e a s u r e ' s v a l u e was
de v e l ope d by T a y l o r and R u s s e l l

(1939).

Thi s a p pr oa c h r e c o g n i z e s t h e

f a c t t h a t t h e v a l u e o f a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n me a s u r e depends h e a v i l y
on t h e n a t u r e o f t h e d e c i s i o n f o r w h i c h i t i s t o be u s e d .
R u s s e l l ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n went beyond t h e v a l i d i t y
sider the selection

T a y l o r and

c o e f f i c i e n t t o c on­

r a t i o and b a s e r a t e a s n e c e s s a r y p a r a m e t e r s i n

e v a l u a t i n g t h e v a l u e o f a ny s e l e c t i o n

device.

According t o t h e i r

a r g u m e n t , t h e u t i l i t y o f any s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e d e p e n d s on w h e t h e r t h e
s e l e c t i o n r a t i o i s h i g h o r l ow.

A t e s t w i t h m o d e r a t e v a l i d i t y (.30—

. 50) i s c o n s i d e r e d t o h a v e a p r a c t i c a l

v a l u e , p a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e

36

selection ratio

1s low.

ures of t h e t e s t ' s
A fourth

utility

Such an I n t e r p r e t a t i o n p r o d u c e s b e t t e r meas­
( Ta yl or & R u s s e l # 1939#

1950).

approach t o e v a l u a t i n g th e b e n e f i t of a s e l e c t i o n

m e a s u r e was d e v e l o p e d by B r o d g e n ( 1946#

1949) .

He a r g u e d t h a t t h e

b e n e f i t of using a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n device i s l i n e a r l y
the v alid ity

c o e f f i c i e n t of t h a t s e l e c t i o n

Accor di ng t o h i s argument #

related to

device with t h e c r i t e r i o n .

t h e gain of using a s e l e c t i o n devi ce with a

v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t o f .60 i s equal t o 60% o f t h e g a i n t h a t may r e s u l t
from a d e v i c e w i t h a p e r f e c t v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t .

He d e r i v e d t h e

f o l l o w i n g for mul a t o e s t i m a t e t h e average gain of a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c ­
t i o n device:

Au = r xy ° y E ( *2)
B a s e d on B r o d g e n ' s w o r k a n d t h e l o g i c o f s t a t i s t i c a l

decision theory

a d a p t e d f o r e c o n o m i c d e c i s i o n p r o b l e m s # C r o n b a c h a nd G l a s e r ( 19 65)
d e v e l o p e d a c o m p r e h e n s i v e a p p r o a c h t h a t o u t l i n e d t h e ways i n which
statistical

t h e o r y can be used t o a p p r a i s e t h e u s e f u l n e s s o f a p a r t i c u ­

l a r sel e c tio n -d e c i sion device.

They s t a t e d

t h a t t h e v a l u e of any

s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e " c a n be s t a t e d o n l y i n t e r m s o f a s p e c i f i c t y p e o f
d e c i s i o n problem# t h e s t r a t e g y employed# t h e e v a l u a t i o n a t t a c h e d t o t h e
outcome#

and t h e c o s t o f t e s t i n g " (p. 32).

estim ating

the

utility

of

a

selection

In d e r i v i n g t h e f o r m u l a f o r
device#

they

went

Br odgen' s (1949) f o r m u l a t o i n c o r p o r a t e t h e c o s t component .
Brodgen' s formula:
Cronbach & G l a s e r ' s f o r m u l a :

Au = r ^
= r

ay

E(x')

ay

E(x')

-

beyond

37

where:
Au

= Net g a i n

of s e l e c t i o n device u t i l i t y

r xy

= VaH d 1 t y c o e f f i c i e n t of t h e s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e o b t a i n e d
c u r r e n t l y on p r e s e n t p o p u l a t i o n I n s t i t u t i o n

cy

= Standard

d e v i a t i o n of t h e c r i t e r i o n d i s t r i b u t i o n

E ( x ' ) = The o r d i n a l o f t h e normal c u r v e a t t h e c u t t i n g s c o r e
t h e us ed s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e
Cx

of

= Co s t of o b t a i n i n g s e l e c t i o n - d e v i c e i n f o r m a t i o n

Cronbach

and

Glaser's

formula

went

beyond

the

classical

appr oac h t o c o n s i d e r t h e f a c t o r s t h a t d e t e r m i n e t h e optimum u t i l i t y of
a p a r t i c u l a r s e le c tio n device.
coefficient

In a d d i t i o n t o I n c l u d i n g a v a l i d i t y

C r o n b a c h and G l a s e r ' s a p p r o a c h i n c o r p o r a t e d s e l e c t i o n

r a t i o s and t h e c o s t o f g a t h e r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a s i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s t h a t
determine th e actual

u t i l i t y o f a s e l e c t i o n de vi c e .

Al t hough Cronbach and G l a s e r ' s appr oac h t o e s t i m a t i n g t h e u t i l ­
ity

of a s e l e c t i o n

classical

approach,

d e v i c e b r o u g h t s i g n i f i c a n t a d v a n c e s beyond t h e
the

decision theory's ap p lic a b ility to the selec­

t i o n o f s t u d e n t s and e mp l o y e e s pr oved t o be ve r y l i m i t e d ( H i l l ,
A n a s t a s i ( 1982),

Lord and Novick (1968),

and S c h mi d t and Hunt er (1980)

exami ned t h i s a p p r oa c h and e x p l a i n e d I t s l i m i t e d p o p u l a r i t y .
tional

1972).

In e d u c a ­

s e l e c t i o n , t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f t h i s appr oa c h i s c o m p l i c a t e d by

various factors.

Anastasi

( 1982) a r g u e d t h a t " t h e l a c k o f a d e q u a t e

system f o r a s s ig n in g value t o outcome in te rm s of a uniform u t i l i t y
s c a l e has been one o f t h e c h i e f o b s t a c l e s t o t h e appl i c a t l o n o f d e c i ­
s i o n t h e o r y " (p.

168) .

In e d u c a t i o n a l

selection,

outcome c r i t e r i a

38

c a n n o t be p r e c i s e l y d e t e r m i n e d .

Lack o f a s i m p l e m e a s u r a b l e c r i t e r i o n

t h a t p e r m i t s t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n of a c o s t component c o m p l i c a t e s t h e use
of t h i s ap proach in e d u c a t i o n a l s e l e c t i o n .
p r o b l e ms ,

t h e Cronbach and G l a s e r model

In a d d i t i o n t o c r i t e r i o n

was bas ed on c e r t a i n as s ump­

t i o n s and r e q u i r e s e s t i m a t i o n o f some v a l u e s (Oy) t h a t a r e d i f f i c u l t t o
me e t i n p r a c t i c a l

s e t t i n g s (Lord & Novick,

1968; H i l l ,

In s p i t e of t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d d i f f i c u l t i e s ,

1971).
the decision-

t h e o r y a p p r o a c h h a s a d d r e s s e d a number o f q u e s t i o n s f o r sound r e s e a r c h ,
and when t h e s e q u e s t i o n s a r e a n s we r e d ,

d e c i s i o n t h e o r y may p r o v i d e a

s o l u t i o n t o t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n h e r e n t 1n t h e a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s .
In summary,

t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d by u s i n g a

p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e ha s been an a t t r a c t i v e t o p i c f o r me a s u r e ­
me nt r e s e a r c h .
dictive validity

The e v a l u a t i o n movement began w i t h a c o n c e r n f o r p r e ­
i n t h e for m of c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s .

The i n a d e ­

quacy o f v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s l e d t o a c o n c e r n w i t h p r e d i c t i v e a c c u ­
r a c y i n t h e f orm o f t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f c o r r e c t p r e d i c t i o n 1n e x c e s s o f
t h e ba s e r a t e .

Finally,

t h e e v a l u a t i o n e f f o r t moved i n a l i m i t e d way

t o a concern w ith th e p r e d i c t i v e u s e f u ln e s s ( u t i l i t y ) of a s e l e c t i o n
device (G h i s e l l i ,

Campbel l , & Zedeck,

1981). U t i l i t y a n a l y s i s i s sel dom

used in e d u c a t i o n a l s e l e c t i o n b e c a u s e of t h e n a t u r e of e d u c a t i o n a l
o u t c o m e ( c r i t e r i o n ) and t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f o b t a i n i n g t h e i n f o r m a t i o n
r e q u i r e d by t h e f o r mu l a .

Therefore,

d i c t l v e - a c c u r a c y approaches w i l l
t a t i o n s are resolved.

t h e p r e d 1 c t i v e - v a l i d i t y and p r e -

c o n t i n u e t o be used u n t i l t h e s e l i m i ­

39

The n e x t t w o s e c t i o n s o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e
detail

the contribution

admission

decision

of p r e d i c t i o n

making.

review

research t o th e

discuss

I mpr ovement of

The n a t u r e o f p r e d i c t i o n

research

described* i n c l u d i n g d e f i n i t i o n and h i s t o r y o f t h e p r o c e s s *
Involved in p r e d i c t i o n
pr obl ems .

research,

in

1s

problems

and how e x p e r t s r e s p o n d t o t h e s e

P r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h t h a t has been c o n du c t e d on bot h American

and f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s i s a l s o r evi e we d .

Asiadfimic. Pm d lc.tlon.;

American S t u d e n t s

The t e r m " p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y " r e f e r s t o t h e a c c u r a c y w i t h
which e x i s t i n g d a t a on a p e r s o n ’s a t t r i b u t e s o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
c a t e h i s f u t u r e p e r f o r ma n c e .

Specifically*

predictive validity

indi­
refers

t o t h e d e g r e e t o which such d a t a as p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t , t e s t
s c o r e s * p e r s o n a l i t y p a t t e r n s , s t u d y h a b i t s , s e x , m a r i t a l s t a t u s , and
ethnocultural

b a c k g r o u n d c a n be u s e d t o

p e r f o r ma n c e ( Mehrens & Lehmann,

1984).

p re d ic t a person's future

The p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i ­

c i e n t i s u s u a l l y d e t e r m i n e d by c o r r e l a t i n g t h e p r e d i c t o r d a t a w i t h
i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d on a p a r t i c u l a r c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e o f f u t u r e p e r ­
f or mance.
direct

The r e s u l t a n t p r e d i c t i v e c o e f f i c i e n t i s

n o r m a l l y used as a

i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e p r e d i c t o r ' s v a l i d i t y ( Nunnal l y,
The v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s of i n d i v i d u a l

determined

1978).

p r e d i c t o r s ar e normally

by u s i n g t h e P e a r s o n p r o d u c t - mo me n t c o r r e l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e .

When a c o m b i n a t i o n of p r e d i c t o r s i s exami ned,

however ,

their validity

c o e f f i c i e n t i s d e t e r m i n e d by u s i n g m u l t i p l e - c o r r e l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s .
Because o f t h e u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i a ,
range sc o re s ,

a nd t h e p r o b l e m o f p o o l e d s a m p l e s ,

restrlcted-

the c o e ffic ie n t

40

v a l i d i t y o f p r e d i c t o r s used f o r f o r e c a s t i n g s t u d e n t s ’ a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s
have ne v e r been p e r f e c t .

Accor di ng t o Nun n a l l y (1978),

In mos t p r e d i c t i o n p r o b l e ms 1 t 1s r e a s o n a b l e t o e x p e c t o nl y modest
c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n a c r i t e r i o n and e i t h e r I n d i v i d u a l p r e d i c t o r
t e s t or a combination of p r e d ic to r t e s t s .
People a re f a r too
compl ex t o p e r m i t a h i g h l y a c c u r a t e e s t i m a t e of t h e i r p e r f o r ma n c e
from any p r e d i c t a b l e c o l l e c t i o n o f t e s t m a t e r i a l , (p. 79)
Nunnal l y went on t o d e s c r i b e t h e pr o b l e ms I n h e r e n t 1n u s i n g c u m u l a t i v e
GPA as a c r i t e r i o n o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s 1n p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h :
E q u a l ly com plex a r e t h e s i t u a t i o n s in which c r i t e r i o n d a t a a r e
o b t a i n e d , e. g. , t h e immense c o m p l e x i t y o f a l l v a r i a b l e s I n v o l v e d i n
d e t e r m i n i n g t h e a v e r a g e s of s t u d e n t s over f o u r y e a r s of c o l l e g e .
C o n s i d e r i n g t h e 1 mmense. compl e x i t y o f a l l t h e p r o b l e m s , 1 t i s
r e m a r k a b l e t h a t some p r e d i c t o r t e s t s c o r r e l a t e a s h i g h l y a s t h e y do
w i t h c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s , (p. 79)
The

foregoing

statem ents

describe

the

r e s e a r c h e r s c o n c e r n e d w i t h a c a d e mi c p r e d i c t i o n .

challenges
However,

facing

me a s u r e me n t

t h e o r i s t s and c o n c e r n e d s p e c i a l i s t s have d e v o t e d much t i m e and e f f o r t
t o s o l v i n g t h e p r o b l e ms i n h e r e n t i n p r e d i c t i v e r e s e a r c h .
such t e c h n i q u e s a s t h e c o e f f i c i e n t of a t t e n u a t i o n ,

For exampl e,

d iffe re n tia l predic­

t i o n , and e q u a t i n g g r a d e s f r om d i f f e r e n t s c hool s y s t e m s have been found
t o be u s e f u l

in e n h a n c i n g t h e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s o f commonly used

predictors.

However, c u r r e n t p r e d i c t i o n s t i l l s u f f e r s from v a r i o u s

pr obl ems .

These p r o b l e m s c a n n o t be s o l v e d w i t h o u t t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f

sound r e s e a r c h .

S c h m i d t and H u n t e r (1980) d i s c u s s e d t h e f u t u r e o f

p r e d i c t i v e r e s e a r c h a nd c o n c l u d e d t h a t " t h e f u t u r e . . . w i l l s e e a
widespread u t i l i z a t i o n

of v a l i d i t y

of e s t i m a t i n g v a l i d i t y " (p.

57).

g e n e r a l i z a t i o n and r a t i o n a l

method

41

The d e v e l o p me n t of a c a d e mi c p r e d i c t i o n s t u d i e s can be t r a c e d t o
t h e b eginning of t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y .

As e a r l y a s 1 9 1 7 ,

examined t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between high school
g r a d e s o f 253 s t u d e n t s a t Har var d U n i v e r s i t y .

Lincoln

g r a d e s and f r e s h m a n

The f i n d i n g s

indicated

t h a t h i g h s c h o o l g r a d e s had a m o d e r a t e l y h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n ( . 6 9) w i t h
f r e s h ma n g r a d e s .

Thr e e y e a r s l a t e r ,

t i o n o f .50 f o r t h e s ame v a r i a b l e s .
f i n d i n g s o f 23 s t j d i e s .

J o r d a n (1922) d e t e c t e d a c o r r e l a ­
In 1934, Segel s u m m a r i z e d t h e

His re vie w i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e c o r r e l a t i o n

b e t we e n hi gh school g r a d e s and s t u d e n t a c a de mi c a c h i e v e m e n t a t c o l l e g e s
r a n g e d b e t w e e n . 29 a n d . 6 9 , w i t h a m e d i a n o f . 55.
Dur i ng t h e f i r s t o n e - t h i r d o f t h i s c e n t u r y ,
p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h was l i m i t e d t o a s mal l s c a l e .
t h e 1950s,

many r e s e a r c h e r s became i n t e r e s t e d

the popularity

At t h e b e g i n n i n g of

1n a c a d e mi c p r e d i c t i o n .

Lavi n (1965) gave t h r e e r e a s o n s f o r t h e sudden p o p u l a r i t y
prediction

of

oi

a c a d e mi c

research:

1.

The i m m e n s e i n c r e a s e i n s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n e n t e r i n g c o l l e g e s
c r e a t e d an u r g e n t need f o r a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma k e r s t o d e f i n e
t h e mos t a c c u r a t e c r i t e r i a which can be used f o r s c r e e n i n g t h e
prospective applicant.
T h i s u r g e n t n e e d m o t i v a t e d many
r e s e a r c h e r s t o conduct several p r e d i c t i o n s t u d i e s a t t e m p t i n g t o
discover th e stu den t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which have t h e g r e a t e s t
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e i r f u t u r e ac a de mi c p e r f o r ma n c e .

2.

The s econd r e a s o n f o r r e s e a r c h e r s ’ g r e a t I n t e r e s t i n p r e d i c t i o n
s t u d i e s was t h e g r owt h of pr ogr ams t h a t we r e d e s i g n e d t o i d e n ­
t i f y and t r a i r . t a l e n t e d s t u d e n t s .

3.

The t h i r d r e a s o n was t h e d e s i r e o f r e s e a r c h e r s t o s t u d y t h e
c u r r e n t is su e s in education.
These r e a s o n s , a l o n g w i t h t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t

from v a r i o u s a g e n c i e s ,
studies.

c o n t r i b u t e d t o th e development of numerous

Whereas e a r l y p r e d i c t i o n s t u d i e s f o c u s e d on p r e v i o u s g r a d e s

42

and t e s t

scores

as

the

ma i n

predictors

of academic

achievement

r e s e a r c h s i n c e t h e 1950s has been c o n c e r n e d w i t h e x a m i n i n g t h e nonI n t e l l e c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f s t u d e n t s as p o s s i b l e p r e d i c t o r s of
future

academic

performance.

This

new

development#

r e s e a r c h e r s ’ r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t s t u d e n t s ’ a c a de mi c a b i l i t y
of several i n t e r r e l a t e d v ar ia b le s #
prediction

research

(Smith#

along

with

is a function

changed t h e d i r e c t i o n of academic

1981).

In a d d i t i o n t o

intellective

vari­

abl e s # many r e s e a r c h e r s began t o e x a mi n e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of u s i n g some
n o n i n t e l 1e c t i v e v a r i a b l e s #
pattern#

s e x,

marital

Mayhew#

1972).

such as s t u d e n t m o t i v a t i o n ,

status,

and age,

Other res e a rc h

as p r e d i c t o r s

personality

(Eyesenck,

1965;

f o c u s e d on c o m b i n i n g s o me o f t h e s e

v a r i a b l e s w i t h p r e v i o u s g r a d e s and t e s t s c o r e s t o e n h a n c e t h e i r p r e d i c ­
tive validity coefficient.

A t h i r d g r o u p o f r e s e a r c h e r s f o c u s e d on

d e s i g n i n g m e t h o d o l o g i c a l t e c h n i q u e s and mode l s f o r I mpr ovi ng p r e d i c t i o n
f r o m p r e v i o u s a c a d e m i c g r a d e s a n d t e s t s c o r e s ( Bl oom & P e t e r # 1965;
Tucker#

1963; L i n d q u i s t #

1963; Linn#

1966).

In g e n e r a l # t h e movement t o w a r d a c a d e mi c p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h a t
the college level

d u r i n g t h e 1950s and 1960s l e d t o t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of

a l a r g e number o f s t u d i e s .

The f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s ca n be drawn from

t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e s e s t u d i e s :
1.

High s c h o o l

g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e (HSGPA) o r r a n k wa s t h e

p r e d o m i n a n t v a r i a b l e f o r p r e d i c t i n g f u t u r e s u c c e s s (Lavin# 1965; Rose &
Tr ent # 1973).

The c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t b e t w e e n HSGPA a nd g r a d e s

o b t a i n e d i n t h e f i r s t y e a r o f c o l l e g e a v e r a g e d . 50 f o r m a l e s a n d . 52
f o r f e ma l e s .

When t h e HSGPA was combi ned w i t h s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s c o r e s

43

(SAT), t h e me an I n c r e a s e d f r o m . 50 t o . 5 2 f o r m a l e s a n d f r o m . 52 t o . 55
f o r f e m a l e s (Fishman & P a s a n l l a ,
2.

1960).

N o n i n t e l 1e c t i v e v a r i a b l e s ( b i o g r a p h i c a l and d e m o g r a p h i c

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s t u d e n t s ) w e r e f o u n d t o be e f f e c t i v e i n i m p r o v i n g
t h e p r e d i c t i o n of academic a c h ie v e m e n t (Lavin,

19 6 5 ; S m i t h ,

P r e d i c t i o n o f a c h i e v e m e n t i mpr oved when v a r i a b l e s

such a s s e x ,

1 981 ) .
race,

and s o c i o e c o n o m i c l e v e l wer e t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n .
3.
can

be

F i r s t term or s e m e s te r grades are th e b e s t c r i t e r i a t h a t

used

to

assess

undergraduate

A f t e r World War I I ,

students'

academic

success.

mos t p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h f o c u s e d on exam­

i n i n g t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of t h e v a r i o u s s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s used t o
s c r e e n u n d e r g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s . Two d e c a d e s l a t e r ,
uate education

became v e r y h i g h .

t h e demand f o r g r a d ­

Mo s t s c h o o l s b e g a n t o h a v e m o r e

q u a l i f i e d a p p l i c a n t s t h a n t h e y c o u l d a d mi t .

Therefore, admission deci­

s i o n maker s and f a c u l t y members began t o f a c e t h e same t y p e s of p r o b ­
l e ms a s t h o s e p r e s e n t e d by u n d e r g r a d u a t e a d m i s s i o n s .

They wer e p l a c e d

in a p o s i t i o n of ne ed in g p r e c i s e m e a s u r e s f o r p r e d i c t i n g g r a d u a t e
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

Co n s e q u e n t l y , many g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s began t o r e q u i r e

a p p l i c a n t s t o s u b m i t a c o m p l e t e r e c o r d o f p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e ­
ment ,

t e s t scores,

and r e c o mme n d a t i o n s .

The w i d e s p r e a d us e o f t h e s e

me a s u r e s as a b a s i s f o r g r a d u a t e a d m i s s i o n s

has a r o u s e d c o n s i d e r a b l e

controversy.
As a r e s u l t o f g r a d e i n f l a t i o n a n d v a r i a t i o n s i n g r a d i n g s y s ­
t e ms a t t h e c o l l e g e l e v e l , many e d u c a t o r s began t o d o u b t t h e u s e f u l n e s s
of UGPA as a p r e d i c t o r o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s i n g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .

Ot her

44

e d u c a t o r s di r e c t e d t h e l r c r i t i c i s m t o w a r d s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s .
ar gue d t h a t s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s

They

me a s u r e u n i m p o r t a n t knowl edge and r o t e

r e c a l l * f o c u s on l i m i t e d t y p e s o f c o m p e t e n c i e s , p e n a l i z e deep t h i n k i n g ,
and t h e r e f o r e a r e i n v a l i d p r e d i c t o r s of g r a d u a t e a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .
The c o n t r o v e r s y r e g a r d i n g p r e v i o u s g r a d e s and s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t
s c o r e s , a l o n g w i t h a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma k e r s ’ a w a r e n e s s of t h e v a l i d i t y
o f t h e s e s e l e c t i o n me a s u r e s ,

led t o various p r e d i c t i v e stud ie s.

Most

o f t h e s e s t u d i e s f o c u s e d on e x a m i n i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f p r e v i o u s
g r a d e s and s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s

(GRE,

MAT,

and GMAT) in p r e d i c t i n g a c a ­

d e m i c s u c c e s s a t t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l , a s m e a s u r e d by v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a
(graduate grade p o in t average,

r a t i n g of fac ul ty

o r a c a demi c a d v i s o r ,

g r a d u a t e d , n o n g r a d u a t e d , and c o m p r e h e n s i v e s c o r e s ) .
p r o b l e ms I n v o l v e d i n g r a d u a t e - l e v e l
rion

problems

and

adequate

sample

In s p i t e o f t h e

p r e d i c t i v e r e s e a r c h ( ma i n l y c r i t e ­
size),

the

current

literature

I n c l u d e s a number of d i s s e r t a t i o n s and a r t i c l e s c o n c e r n e d w i t h p r e d i c t ­
i n g a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s a t t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l .
P r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h a t t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l has f o l l o w e d t h e same
p r o c e d u r e s empl oyed i n p r e d i c t i n g a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s a t t h e u n d e r g r a d u a t e
level.

Mo s t s t u d i e s h a v e empl o y e d z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n , m u l t i p l e

correlation,

and s t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n t o e x a mi n e t h e v a l i d i t y

of v a rio u s s e l e c t i o n
graduate applic an ts.
we r e p r a c t i c a l

devices

u s e d by p a r t i c u l a r s c h o o l s t o s c r e e n

Al t hough f i r s t - s e m e s t e r GPA a n d c u m u l a t i v e GPA

me a s u r e s o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s a t t h e u n d e r g r a d u a t e l e v e l ,

t h e y wer e proven i n a d e q u a t e f o r a s s e s s i n g a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s in g r a d u a t e
school.

4$

Many e d u c a t o r s h a v e a r g u e d t h a t g r a d u a t e a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s
i n v o l v e s v a r i o u s a s p e c t s t h a t c a n n o t be r e p r e s e n t e d
s e m e s t e r GPA or c u m u l a t i v e GPA.

by t h e f i r s t -

In a d d i t i o n t o a c h i e v i n g a good GPA, a

s u c c e s s f u l g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t m u s t p a s s t h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e exams* show
p e r s i s t e n c e i n m e e t i n g a c a d e mi c c h a l l e n g e s ,

be c r e a t i v e ,

a b i l i t y t o be a p r o d u c t i v e s c h o l a r i n t h e f u t u r e .
difficulty

involved

in a c c u r a t e l y

and p r o v e h i s

As a r e s u l t o f t h e

assessing these c r ite r ia ,

most

r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e c o n t i n u e d t o u s e GGPA a s a c r i t e r i o n f o r m e a s u r i n g
ac a demi c s u c c e s s a t t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l .
other c r i t e r i a ,

i n a d d i t i o n t o GGPA.

Ot he r s have a t t e m p t e d t o use

R e s e a r c h e r s ’ t e n d e n c y t o u s e GGPA

1n s p i t e o f s k e p t i c i s m a b o u t I t s adequacy was e x p l a i n e d by H i l l (1971).
He w r o t e :
G r a d e s a r e a l l u r i n g a s c r i t e r i a b e c a u s e t h e y a r e u s u a l l y o b t a i na b l e , r e a d i l y q u a n t i f i a b l e , and of g r e a t e r i m p o r t a n c e i n making
o t h e r d e c i s i o n s such as w h e t h e r t h e s t u d e n t s g r a d u a t e o r not,
w h e t h e r t h e y a r e a l l o w e d t o r e m a i n i n s chool o r not . . . . C l e a r l y ,
r e g a r d l e s s of what i n s t i t u t i o n s say about what they d e s i r e t o
a c c o m p l i s h w i t h s t u d e n t s , t h e y behave a s t hough t h e y v a l u e mos t t h e
s t u d e n t s who o b t a i n e d g r a d e s , (p. 689)
By l o o k i n g a t T a b l e 1, o n e c a n n o t i c e t h a t m o s t r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e
used GGPA a l o n e o r w i t h c o mp l e me n t a r y c r i t e r i a as a me a s u r e o f a c a de mi c
success.

K a i s e r (1982),

Borg (1963),

S l e e p e r (1961),

S t u i t and P e t e r ­

s o n ( 1 9 5 1 ) , Neman ( 1 9 6 8 ) , Maddus a n d Wa l s h ( 1 9 6 5 ) , S t r i k e r a nd Hu b e r
(1967), and Camp and Clawson (1979) exami ned t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of
GRE and UGPA.
success.
.42,

They u s e d t h e GGPA a s a c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e o f g r a d u a t e

The GRE-V had a z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n r a n g e bet wee n .08 and

w it h a median r of .23.

r a n g e was bet ween .11 and .49,

Wi t h r e g a r d t o GRE-Q, t h e c o r r e l a t i o n
w i t h a medi an o f .18.

When r e s e a r c h e r s

of

K a i s e r , 1982
N - A07
C: GP A o f s t u d e n t i n
e d u c . £ com, s c i .
H ac km an , 1970
N - 1*6 £ ii8
C : l s t - y e a r GPA, r a t i n g
of success a f te r six
years

Ph.D.
Ed u c a t i o n

1963

N * 175
Ct GP A

.37

(.02)

(.05)

.21
.28

.32
.21

(.0!)
(.01)

(.01)
(.01)

.**9

N » 2k
C : GPA

(.01)
(.01)

Ph.D.
Educat i o n

Sleeper,

ED
.28
.26

M. A.

• O
cn
sr m
i
—. —t
• O
o
— a>

CO
CP>

M. A.
Educat i o n

O X“
— CD

Stuit
cn
o

N « 1U
C:Master

xco

(.01)

Powell

.27

9tr

to

N => 41 1
C : GPA

(.01)

o
oo

£ Peterson,

X-

PSY
.32

M. A.
Psychology

co
X-

o
o

1971

N - 2M
C: G0. PA ( GPA)
UGPA+
GRE- AD
. 61

General

cn

1981

R o s c o e £ H o u s t o n , 19&9
N = 252
C: GPA £ g r a d u a t e d /
nongraduated

Ayers,
O Co
— X*

£ Gab,
1970

N * 8^4
C: GP A £ g r a d u a t e d / n o n ­
graduated
Borg,

CO CO
•*»J --O

Harlow

o
o

1951

£ Geisinge*,
co mp ,

exam

1981

students.

W illiams,

A me r i c a n

1
o o
CO —

F u r s t £ R o e l f s , 1979
N - 3A8
C : A n a l y t i c exam, g r a d e in
s ta t i st ic s , research ;
GPA

on

CO
X“ t
^ O
O

1983

conducted

CO
x.—. o
. OS
o

£ Elmore,

research

.15
(.05)

CO to

— to

Broadus

N - 257
C: GP A 6 c o m p r e h e n s i v e
scores

of

(.05)

.23
-.11

• Xo
cn

o —
to CO

.32

PSY

1

CO X*
P CO Xo
x- xX* to
.21
.05

"O —

Al t v a r .
.50
(.01)

to

X“
0c
•
CO

O
o

findings

O
—.

.65

. 01
•H

Ph.D.
Educat i o n

to cn

to

m

CO

I
to to
to CO

i
o —

1 . — Summary

•

Z x- o

GRE- V+Q

.19
.12

to —
"O to

Tabl e

X* X*
P OO -O
o
cn cn
- o to

— CO
—o
O to

.27
.37
.31
.35
a . 01

Ph.D.
Educat i o n

to —
P — O'
o
cn . .
to —
X- co

0

. o
CO 30
co m
• <
o *
0,0

-35(.001)
.31(.001)

M S.
Library
Science

O O
o o

.
N)
cn
•
o

Variables
Examined

admission

level

— to
CO CO

GRE-V

of

>

GRE-Q,

S)
-Q

GRE-AD

Compos i t e
Measures

Sex

Age

MAT

Educational

c:
i

I . - -Cont i n u e d .

Ne w ma n ,
fs>

o
vc

o
oo

1967

Ph.D.
Educat i o n

~
•
O
vn
;)•

•

—

O'

oj

x*
:!- .
O
OO

£ Walsh,

N - 569
C t GP A a t e n d o f
semester
Striker

hJ
O

ro

m
o
c
o

1968

N - 66
C : GPA

Maddus

2

o —

PSY

.35
a . 05

GRE- V+Q+
ADV
.28

I
<ywn <
on O tu

Tabl e

GRE- V+Q

“0
i/i
-<

>
—o
O oj

Var i a b l e s
Exami n e d

GRE-Total

.22
a . 01
—

GRE- V

.18

General
Ph.D.
j
Psychology

I

O X-

S t o r d h a 1,
N - 53**
C: GPA

.18
a . 01

Ph.D.
Psychology
2

GRE- Q

UGPA+MAT

Oo
ho
*

GRE-AD

admission
x*
:>

.65*

of

level
M. A.
j
Educat i o n

s

Compos i t e
Measures

X

U- GPA

Age

MAT

GMAT

Educational

</i

n

oj

o

o o
00 —

first

6 Huber,

1967

N = 37
C : GPA

Wi 1 1 i a m s ,

1

2

o

(/!£ ■ -

1 965

1970

N = 86
Ct GP A £ g r a d u a t e d /
nongraduated

i
OJ

1
— o
OO Vn

oj

o

VI

£-

(.05)
.32

x*

.30

O
O

i

o
vn

o

vo •
o
vn

1

o o
o —

(.05)

N)
CTv

VO

o

.2 2

on

PSY

.37

....

H. A.
M.A.
Psychology Business

OO
M M

o

Bean,

1?75

N - 91
Ct GP A 6 m a s t e r ' s c o m ­
p r e h e n s i v e exam
Frederics

Schuerger,
197**
N * f r o m 15 t o 5**
Ct GPA £ f a c u l t y r a t i n g

Oj

Paolilo,

o
o

N « 220
Ct GPA

vn

.35

X- OJ

o x-

o "o

o o

M. A.
! Counseling

...I

•
ro
x
O

—

M. A.
Counseling

oo —

co -u

© ^
o o
— vn

cn
ya
m
i
H
O
rr
aj

(.05)

— hO

vn x-

.2 2

| Ph.D.
Education

i

x- V
"*J V/l

•

hj

nj

o
30
m

—. ----- i
• x- o
a
r*
vn

Z .fr

a>

D ol e £ B a g g a l e y , 1979
N * 61
C: F a c u l t y r a n k o f
scholarship £ profess i o n a l i sm
Ca mp £ C l a w s o n ,

O
O

N - 135
Ct GPA

1979

ro ho

Omizo £ M i c h a e l ,

o o

N * 107
Ct GP A £ m a s t e r ' s c o m p ­
rehensive scores

X* x -

—o
OJ V

1982

ho

ON
X*

£

1979

48

c o m b i n e d GRE-V a nd Q» t h e m u l t i p l e - r r a n g e d f r o m . 1 9 t o . 4 5 , w i t h a
m e d i a n o f . 23.
Broadus

a nd

Elmor

(1983),

Bean

(1975),

and

Oml z o

( 1979)

a t t e m p t e d t o u s e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e exam s c o r e 1n a d d i t i o n t o GGPA a s a
c r i t e r i o n of graduate success.

The f i n d i n g s o f t h e s e s t u d i e s I n d i c a t e d

t h a t t h e GRE-V h a d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 3 7 , . 3 1 , a n d . 24 w i t h GGPA a n d o f
. 3 1 , . 1 9 , and . 24 w i t h t h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e exam s c o r e .

A l s o , t h e GRE-Q

s h o we d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 1 1 , . 1 0 , a n d .05 w i t h GGPA a n d o f . 1 7 , - . 1 3 ,
and .13 w i t h t h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e exam s c o r e s .

Ot h e r s t u d i e s by W i l l i a n ,

H a r l o w , a n d Gab ( 1 9 7 0 ) , F e d e r i c s a n d S c h u e r g e n ( 1 9 7 4 ) , a n d R e s c o e a nd
Houston

(1969)

employed,

1n

addition

to

GPA,

faculty

rating

or

g r a d u a t e d / n o n g r a d u a t e d as c r i t e r i a o f a c a de mi c s u c c e s s .
A l t h o u g h m o s t o f t h e s t u d i e s i n c l u d e d i n T a b l e 1 f o c u s e d on a
d i r e c t e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p bet ween t r a d i t i o n a l me a s u r e s and
t h e i n d e x o f g r a d u a t e s u c c e s s a s m e a s u r e d by v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a , o t h e r
s t u d i e s have used v a r io u s m ethodological approaches t o improve th e
predictability

o f commonly used s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s .

Some s t u d i e s have

gone beyond e x a m i n i n g t h e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s o f c u r r e n t
t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f a new p r e d i c t o r .
on

developing

research
analysis.

better

criteria

of

graduate

Ot h e r s have f o c u s e d

success.

ha s c o n c e n t r a t e d on i mp r o v i n g p r e d i c t i o n

predictors

S till

research

other

d e s i g n and

A c o m p l e t e r e v i e w o f t h e s e s t u d i e s was c o n d u c t e d by Lannholm

( 1 9 6 8 , 1972) a n d T h u n c k e r , W i l l i a m s , and W i l l i a m s ( 1 9 7 4 ) .

B a s e d on

t h e s e r e v i e w s a n d t h e f i n d i n g s d e t e c t e d by v a r i o u s r e s e a r c h e r s , t h e
f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s we r e drawn:

49

1.

P r ed ictio n research a t th e graduate level

ful than a t th e u n d e rg ra d u a te le v e l.

1s l e s s s u c c e s s ­

The r e s t r i c t e d

range of th e

p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a d a t a p r e v e n t t h e r e s e a r c h e r from d e t e c t i n g
me a n i n g f u l and a c c u r a t e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s .

Fur t h e r * t h e d i f f i c u l t y

o f l o c a t i n g an a d e q u a t e homogeneous s a mp l e has l e d r e s e a r c h e r s t o pool
s a mpl e s u b j e c t s f rom d i f f e r e n t a c a d e mi c d e p a r t m e n t s o r f rom t h e same
department over several

years.

S i n c e g r a d i n g s t a n d a r d s and r a t i n g

p r o c e d u r e s d i f f e r a c r o s s d e p a r t m e n t s and a c r o s s f a c u l t y members i n t h e
same d e p a r t me n t *
2.

t h e p r e d i c t o r ' s v a l i d i t y has been u n d e r e s t i m a t e d .

GRE-V s c o r e s h a v e a h i g h e r c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t w i t h .

v ar iou s c r i t e r i o n measures of g r ad u a t e success,
criterion

1s s t u d e n t s '

performance in f i e l d s

particularly

when t h e

of a d e s c r i p t i v e nature.

On t h e o t h e r hand* GRE-Q s c o r e s t e n d t o have a h i g h e r c o r r e l a t i o n when
they a r e r e l a t e d t o t h e s t u d e n t s ' performance in s u b j e c t s of a q u a n t i ­
t a tiv e nature,
3.
validity*

such as s t a t i s t i c s and r e s e a r c h met hodol ogy.

GRE- Adva nc e d s c o r e s s e e m t o h a v e p r o m i s i n g
especially

predictive

when combi ned w i t h o t h e r p r e d i c t o r s such a s UGPA

and GRE a p t i t u d e t e s t s c o r e s .
4.

C o m b i n a t i o n o f GRE s c o r e s w i t h UGPA h a s s hown a h i g h e r

v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t t h a n when t h e t wo me a s u r e s were us ed al one.
5.

Rat ings of t h e s t u d e n t ' s undergraduat e schcol

anc e t h e r e t e n d t o be p r o m i s i n g
cess.

predictors

and p e r f o r m ­

of g r a d u a t e a c a d e mi c s u c ­

50

6.

P r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h a t t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l has shown c o n s i s ­

t e n t f i n d i n g s when 1 t was c o n d u c t e d on a d e p a r t m e n t a l b a s i s r a t h e r t h a n
w i t h a poo l e d s ampl e.
B a s e d on t h e p r e c e d i n g r e v i e w o f s t u d i e s c o n c e r n e d w i t h a c a ­
demi c p r e d i c t i o n o f Ameri can s t u d e n t s ,

t h e r evi e w o f r e s e a r c h on p r e ­

d i c t i o n o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a de mi c s u c c e s s w i l l

be d e v e l o p e d i n such

a way a s t o p r o v i d e a n s w e r s t o t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s :
1.
prediction

To w h ' t e x t e n t h a s r e s e a r c h on f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c
been s u c c e s s f u l

in i d e n t i f y i n g th e

p re d ic to rs t h a t are

r e l e v a n t t o t h e i r a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t ?
2.

Ar e t h e

p r e d i c t o r s t h a t have been employed t o p r e d i c t

American s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t a l s o e f f e c t i v e i n p r e d i c t i n g
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a de mi c a c h i e v e m e n t ?
3.

I f t h e answ er t o Q u estio n 2 i s yes, what m ajor p r e d i c t o r s

can be used e f f e c t i v e l y i n maki ng s uch a p r e d i c t i o n ?
4.

I f t h e a n s w e r t o Q u e s t i o n 2 1s no,

what c r e d e n t i a l s of

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a r e r e l e v a n t t o t h e i r a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s ?
5.

Finally,

what m a j o r proble m s have been e n c o u n t e r e d

r e s e a r c h e r s who have a d d r e s s e d t h e q u e s t i o n o f f o r e i g n

students'

by

aca­

demi c p r e d i c t i o n ?
Academic P r e d i c t i o n :

Foreign St udent s

As f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s became an I m p o r t a n t s e g me n t o f t h e s t u d e n t
population

i n many Amer i can u n i v e r s i t i e s ,

th e qu estion of t h e i r aca­

demi c a c h i e v e m e n t became an i m p o r t a n t conc e r n.
f a i l e d o r we r e u n a b l e t o r e a c h t h e o p t i ma l

Many o f t h o s e s t u d e n t s

level

t h e y had a c h i e v e d a t

51

t h e i r home s c h o o l s .

The eme r ge nc e of t h i s pr obl em c r e a t e d t h e need f o r

a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma ke r s t o i d e n t i f y t h e v a r i a b l e s t h a t can be used t o
p r e d i c t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ p r o b a b i l i t y o f s u c c e s s 1n p a r t i c u l a r p r o ­
grams.
Des pite t h e l o n g - s t a n d i n g presence of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s in t h e
American c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s ,

and t h e g r e a t i n t e r e s t o f Amer i can

research er s in p r e d ic ti o n research,

l i t t l e has been done t o a n s we r t h e

q u e s t i o n r e l a t e d t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n of such s t u d e n t s ’ a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e ­
ment.

An e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e c u r r e n t l i t e r a t u r e r e v e a l e d t h a t t h e

p r e d i c t i o n of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t h a s n o t r e c e i v e d
enough a t t e n t i o n from c o n c e r n e d r e s e a r c h e r s .
A c t u a l l y , t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t i s a
p r o b l e m a t i c i s s u e t h a t i s I n t e n s i f i e d when t h e s u b j e c t s a r e f r o m a
foreig n country.

Some r e s e a r c h e r s have s t a t e d t h a t p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s ’ a c a demi c a c h i e v e m e n t i s a d i s c o u r a g i n g p r o c e s s (Moore,

1953).

More s t a t e d t h a t p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t i s
c o m p l i c a t e d b e c a u s e of t h e d i f f i c u l t y of u s i n g p r e v i o u s g r a d e s as a
p r e d i c t o r of t h e s t u d e n t s ’ f u t u r e p e r f o r m a n c e .

F u r t h e r , t h e l a c k of

s ta n d a r d iz e d t e s t s t h a t measure fo reig n students' potential aptitude
ha s p r e v e n t e d r e s e a r c h e r s fr om a t t e m p t i n g t h i s t y p e o f r e s e a r c h .
A n o t h e r p r o b l e m i n v o l v e d 1n p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ a c a ­
demi c p e r f o r ma n c e 1s t h e c r i t e r i o n pr obl em.

The us e o f f i r s t t e r m o r

c u m u l a t i v e GPA 1s s u b j e c t t o t h e s a m e d e f i c i e n c i e s f o u n d 1n m a k i n g
predictions

c o n c e r n i n g Amer i can s t u d e n t s ' a c h i e v e m e n t .

GPA i s s u b j e c t t o o t h e r d e f i c i e n c i e s ,

Al so,

u s e of

such a s f a c u l t y d o u b l e s t a n d a r d s

52

1n g r a d i n g p r a c t i c e s a n d f o r e i g n

students' tent

y t o c a r r y a few

c r e d i t s ea c h t e r m and t o a v o i d deman ding c o u r s e s t o keep t h e i r g r a d e
a v e r a g e hi gh

(Put man,

1961;

P a r a s k o v o p o u l o s & Dremuk,

1969).

Further

r e s e a r c h by

t h e A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f C o l l e g i a t e R e g i s t r a r s a nd

A d m i s s i o n O f f i c e r s (AACRAO, 1971) and P a r a s k o v o p o l o u s a n d K i r s t e i n
(1968)

I n d i c a t e d t h a t f i r s t - t e r m GPA does n o t r e f l e c t a r e l i a b l e c r i ­

t e r i o n o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a de mi c a c h i e v e m e n t b e c a u s e t h e f i r s t t e r m
i s a p e r i o d o f a d j u s t m e n t t o t h e new a c a d e mi c e n v i r o n m e n t .
These p r o b l e m s ,
homogeneous

a l o n g w i t h t h e d i f f i c u l t y of l o c a t i n g a l a r g e ,

sam ple of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s , have p r e v e n t e d r e s e a r c h e r s

from a c h i e v i n g c o n s i s t e r

f i n d i n g s and t h e r e f o r e have d i s c o u r a g e d t hem

fr om a t t e m p t i n g f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h .

In s p i t e of t h e s e p r o b l e ms , a number

o f r e s e a r c h e r s h a ve been c o u r a g e o u s enough t o i n i t i a t e t h i s t y p e of
research.
Be ca us e of t h e d i f f i c u l t y

involved

in

using foreign

students'

p r e v i o u s a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t and t h e l a c k o f a d e q u a t e s t a n d a r d i z e d
a p t i t u d e t e s t s f o r t h e s e s t u d e n t s , mos t p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h has f o c u s e d
on e x a mi n i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y ,
various t e s t s ,

a s me as ur e d by

1n p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s .

A

n u m b e r o f r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e o p p o s e d u s i n g an E n g l i s h t e s t t o p r e d i c t
a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s ( R i g g s , 19 8 1 ; P e r r e n , 1 9 6 7 ) .
English t e s t sc o re s ,

They h a v e a r g u e d t h a t

a s m e a s u r e d by TOFEL, MTELP, a n d t h e E n g l i s h

p r o f i c i e n c y t e s t of t h e American Language I n s t i t u t e a t Georgetown
U n i v e r s i t y (ALIGU), a r e a n I n d e x o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' E n g l i s h p r o f i ­
c i e n c y and do n o t h a v e a ny b e a r i n g on s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s .

On

t h e o t h e r hand,

several

other

r e s e a r c h e r s have a d v o c a t e d u s i n g s c o r e s

on E n g l i s h t e s t s a s p r e d i c t o r s o f s u c c e s s .
ach iev e academic su ccess,

They h a v e a r g u e d t h a t , t o

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s mu s t a c q u i r e t h e E n g l i s h -

l a n g u a g e s k i l l s t h a t w i l l h e l p t hem keep up w i t h t h e pace of i n s t r u c ­
tion.

For ex am p le ,

in h i s a r g u m e n t a b o u t t h e i m p o r t a n c e of u s i n g

English t e s t s c o r e s in s c r e e n i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ,

Sharon (1972) s t a t e d

that
Co mpe tence i n t h e E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e i s one f a c t o r which h a s been
assumed t o be c r u c i a l f o r t h e s u c c e s s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s s t u d y i n g
a t an Amer i can u n i v e r s i t y .
I t 1s d i f f i c u l t t o i m a g i n e how a s t u ­
d e n t can l e a r n i n an Amer i can g r a d u a t e s c h o o l w i t h o u t be i ng a b l e t o
r e a d , w r i t e , and c o m p r e h e n d t h e E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e .
Thus E n g l i s h
p r o f i c i e n c y m i g h t be t h o u g h t o f a s a n e c e s s a r y , a l t h o u g h no t s u f f i ­
c i e n t , p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r g r a d u a t e s u c c e s s , (p. 425)
S h a r o n ' s s t a t e m e n t s u g g e s t e d t h a t l ow E n g l i s h s c o r e s c o n ­
t r i b u t e t o v a r i o u s a c a d e mi c d i f f i c u l t i e s

b u t t h a t hi gh En g l i s h s c o r e s

do n o t i n s u r e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s .
proficiency

However, E n g l i s h

i s one of t h e f a c t o r s t h a t d e t e r m i n e s t h e e x t e n t t o which

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s can cope w i t h t h e a c a d e m i c c h a l l e n g e a t American
schools.

When E n g l i s h s c o r e s a r e used i n c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h o t h e r p r e ­

screening devices,

a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma k e r s can d e t e r m i n e w i t h s u f f i ­

c i e n t a c c u ra c y t h e e x t e n t t o which a p r o s p e c t i v e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t can
cope w ith t h e academic s t a n d a r d s a t a p a r t i c u l a r s c ho o l.

For t h i s

r e a s o n , many g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s r e q u i r e f o r e i g n a p p l i c a n t s t o p r o v i d e
r e c o r d s o f t h e i r En g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y .
G a r r e t t ( 1979) c o n d u c t e d a s u r v e y t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e s t a t e d
p o l i c i e s and a c t u a l p r a c t i c e s of s e l e c t e d American g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s
regarding foreign

student affairs.

His f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e d t h a t 91% o f

54

t h e s u r v e y e d s c h o o l s r e q u i r e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s t o a c h i e v e a mi ni mum
English s co re before being gran ted u n co n d itio n al adm ission.
G a r r e t t found t h a t t h e TOFEL,

ALIGU,

Also,

and t h e Mi chi gan T e s t o f E n g l i s h

Language P r o f i c i e n c y (MTELP) wer e t h e mos t w i d e l y used t e s t s .

Further,

16% o f t h e s u r v e y e d s c h o o l s u s e d t h e s c o r e s on t e s t s d e s i g n e d by t h e
local English-language center.

G a r r e t t ' s s u r v e y showed t h a t a d m i s s i o n

d e c i s i o n maker s i n v a r i o u s s c h o o l s vi e wed En g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s a s i mp o r ­
t a n t p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a de mi c s u c c e s s .
A number o f p r e d i c t i o n s t u d i e s have exami ned t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s
of English t e s t s c o r e s alone or in combination with o t h e r preadmissi on
d a t a i n p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a demi c s u c c e s s ,
GPA o r a r a t i n g s c a l e ,

as me a s ur e d by

Haml in (1972) exami ned t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p bet ween

MTELP s c o p e s and t h e a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t (GPA of f i r s t t wo t e r m s ) o f
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a t Oregon S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
that

His f i n d i n g s

MTELP s c o r e s wer e s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d

of c r e d i t s e a r n e d .
(.12) e x i s t e d

(37)

indicated

w i t h t h e number

On t h e o t h e r h a n d , a n o n s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n

be t we e n MTELP s c o r e s and GPA.

However,

the correlation

o f t h e t e s t s c o r e s w i t h b o t h c r i t e r i a i n c r e a s e d when t h e s a m p l e was
s ubgr ouped by c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n and ma j o r f i e l d o f s t u d y .

Further, the

s t u d y c o n f i r m e d t h a t s t u d e n t s w i t h s c o r e s below 80 p o i n t s on t h e MTELP
t e s t had a g r e a t e r t e n d e n c y t o dr op t h e i r c l a s s e s and t o r e c e i v e i ncom­
p l e t e g r a d e s t h a n di d t h o s e s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d s c o r e s h i g h e r t h a n 80
poi n t s .
U p s h u r ( 1967) a n d A l l e n ( 1965) e x a m i n e d t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f
MTELP t o t a l

scores,

a u r a l c o mpr e he ns i on s c o r e s ,

and w r i t i n g s c o r e s i n

55

p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a chi evement * as me a s ur e d by t h e i r
GPA.

The f i n d i n g s o f b o t h s t u d i e s s h o we d t h a t MTELP s c o r e s h a d a

c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' GPA.
I n t h e i r r e s e a r c h , Thomas a n d M a r g u e r i t e ( 1 9 6 8 ) e x a m i n e d t h e
p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e Lado t e s t o f a u r a l comp r e h e n s i o n .

They used

GPA and g r a d e s i n an E n g l i s h c o u r s e f o r f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a s t h e c r i ­
t e r i o n me a s u r e s .

The f i n d i n g s

i n d i c a t e d t h a t Lado a u r a l

s c o r e s had a

c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 16 w i t h GPA a n d o f . 26 ( a l p h a = . 05) w i t h t h e g r a d e i n
th e English course.

Accordingly, th e re se a rc h e rs concluded t h a t the

detected co rrelation

p r o v i d e d some j u s t i f i c a t i o n

f o r u s i n g Lado a u r a l

s c o r e s as p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' ac a de mi c s u c c e s s .
J o n e s and Mi chael (1961) exami ned t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f a
n u mb e r o f a p t i t u d e a n d a c h i e v e m e n t t e s t s a s r e l a t e d t o f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n t s ' a c h i e v e m e n t i n an E n g l i s h c o u r s e d e s i g n e d f o r f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s .
The c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s o f t h e v a r i o u s t e s t s r a n g e d f r o m . 45 t o
. 6 4 , w i t h a m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 766 ( a l p h a = . 0 1 ) .

Three years

1 a t e r , J o n e s , K a p l a n , a n d M i c h a e l ( 1 9 6 4 ) r e p l i c a t e d t h e s t u d y u s i ng a
m o d i f i e d f o r m o f t h e b a t t e r y e x a m i n e d by J o n e s a n d M i c h a e l i n 1961.
The s t u d e n t s ' s c o r e s on t h e s i x t e s t s w e r e r e l a t e d t o t h e i r a c a d e m i c
p e r f o r ma n c e ,

a s me as ur e d by GPA i n c o u r s e s t a k e n ove r a p e r i o d o f f o u r

s e m e s t e r s a n d by a c o m p o s i t e

ra tin g of th e s tu d e n ts' t r a n s c r i p t s .

C o r r e l a t i o n s o f t h e s i x t e s t s w i t h GPA r a nge d f r om - . 0 2 t o .20, w i t h a
m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 32 ( a l p h a = .01).

On t h e o t h e r hand,

correla­

t i o n s of t h e t e s t w i t h t h e r a t i n g of s t u d e n t a c h i e v e m e n t r a n g e d f r om
.11 t o . 3 0 ,

w i t h a m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 377 ( a l p h a = . 0 5 ) .

Ba s e d

56

on t h e s e f i n d i n g s , t h e a u t h o r s c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s
o f t h e v a r i o u s t e s t s we r e below t h e ma g n i t u d e of t h o s e f ound f o r Ameri­
can s t u d e n t s .

They h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n ma g n i t u d e of

v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s may be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' us e o f
a p a t t e r n of a b i l i t y
students,

d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t e m p l o y e d by t h e A m e r i c a n

o r t o i n s t r u c t o r s ' do ubl e s t a n d a r d i n g r a d i n g p r a c t i c e s .

Acco r di ng t o G a r r e t t ' s
t i c e s o f Ameri can u n i v e r s i t i e s ,

(1979) s u r v e y of t h e p o l i c i e s and p r a c ­
t h e TOFEL was f ound t o be t h e E n g l i s h

t e s t t h a t m o s t a d m i s s i o n s d e c i s i o n m a k e r s c o n s i d e r e d when d e c i d i n g
whether t o ad m it a f o r e ig n s tu d e n t.

A number o f p r e d i c t i v e s t u d i e s

have been c o n d u c t e d i n an a t t e m p t t o e v a l u a t e t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d
from u s i n g t h e TOFEL.

For ex a mpl e , Howang and Di zey (1970) c on d u c t e d a

s t u d y of 32 ma l e and 31 f e m a l e g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s f rom China.
students,

Of t h e 63

20 t o o k a c o u r s e i n E n g l i s h a s a Second Language (ESL) d u r i n g

t h e i r f i r s t term of g r ad u a t e study.

The a u t h o r s c o r r e l a t e d t h e TOFEL

scores with th e stu d en ts' f i r s t - t e r m
s c o r e s in ESL c l a s s e s .

GPA a n d w i t h t h e 20 s t u d e n t s '

The a u t h o r s found t h a t TOFEL s c o r e s had g r e a t e r

p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y f o r ESL s c o r e s ( . 6 6 ,

a l p h a = . 05) t h a n f o r s t u ­

d e n t s ' a c a de mi c s u c c e s s a s me a s ur e d by t h e f i r s t - t e r m GPA.
A c o m p l e t e e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e TOFEL's p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y
c o n d u c t e d by Gue a n d H o l d a w a y ( 1 9 7 3 ) .

was

Data w ere c o l l e c t e d o ve r f o u r

y e a r s on 123 g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s f r o m T h a i l a n d .

The p r e d i c t o r

data

c o n s i s t e d o f (1) t h e s t u d e n t s ' TOFEL s c o r e s c o l l e c t e d a t t wo d i f f e r e n t
p e r i o d s and (2) t h e s t u d e n t s '
d uc t e d s e v e r a l

correlational

interview

scores.

The r e s e a r c h e r s con­

a n a l y s e s bet ween t h e TOFEL s c o r e s and t h e

57

students1 final

GPA.

The f i n d i n g s #

as p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 2# I n d i c a t e d

t h a t TOFEL t o t a l s c o r e s and s u b t e s t s c o r e s t e n d e d t o hav e a s i g n i f i c a n t
p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n with th e s tu de nt s' fi n al

GPA.

Ta b l e 2 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween TOFEL s c o r e s and s t u d e n t s ' f i n a l GPA.

TOFEL S u b t e s t

TOFEL Summer ( 1)

L i s t e n i n g compr e hens i on
En g l i s h s t r u c t u r e
Vocabul ar y
Readi ng compr e hens i on
Wr i t i n g
Tot al TOFEL s c o r e
S ou r ce:

. 38*
. 51*
. 34*
. 38*
. 51*
. 49*

TOFEL F a l l

(2)

. 52*
. 55*
.48*
. 51*
. 53*
. 59*

Gue and Holdaway# 1973# p. 98.

" S i g n i f i c a n t a t alpha = .01.
Not e:

Numbers 1n T a b l e 2 i n d i c a t e P e a r s o n p r o d u c t - mo me n t c o r r e l a t i o n
c o e f f i c i e n t be t we e n f i n a l GPA and TOFEL s c o r e s a d m i n i s t e r e d in
(1) s u m m e r and (2) f a l l f o r t h e t o t a l g r o u p (N = 123) .

Al t hough some o f t h e s u b t e s t c o r r e l a t i o n s
t h e t re nd of t h e t o t a l

correlation

wer e s omewhat low#

r e s u l t i n d i c a t e d t h a t TOFEL s c o r e s

a d e q u a t e l y p r e d i c t e d s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t a s m e a s u r e d by
their

final

GPA.

Further,

s c o r e s on t h e TOFEL a d m i n i s t e r e d a f t e r

s t u d e n t s had c o m p l e t e d t h e summer E n g l i s h

program showed a s omewhat

h i g h e r c o n s i s t e n t c o r r e l a t i o n t h a n di d s c o r e s on t h e TOFEL a d m i n i s t e r e d
immediately a f t e r t h e s t u d e n t s ' a r r i v a l .
t h e summer En g l i s h

This find in g suggests th a t

pr ogr am ' h e l p e d t h e s t u d e n t s I mpr ove t h e i r En g l i s h

a nd t e s t - t a k i n g s k i l l s a n d e n h a n c e d t h e i r a b i l i t y t o a c h i e v e s c o r e s

58

t h a t r e f l e c t e d t h e i r a c t u a l E n g l i s h compet ency.
s c o r e s and t o t a l

s c o r e s wer e used a s

regression analyses,
consistent findings.
tent superiority

When t h e TOFEL s u b t e s t

predictors

1n s t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e

t h e t o t a l - g r o u p and s ubgr ou p a n a l y s e s showed no
All

of t h e TOFEL s c o r e s f a i l e d t o show a c o n s i s ­

1n p r e d i c t i n g s t u d e n t s ’ f i n a l GPA.

However,

according

t o Gue and Holdaway, t h e v a r i o u s c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s e s
p r o v i d e d some s u p p o r t f o r t h e c o n t i n u e d u s e o f o b j e c t i v e t e s t
l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y i n p r e d i c t i n g a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .
I t also
i n d i c a t e d t h a t f u r t h e r e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n s h o u l d be c o n d u c t e d w i t h t h e
us e o f i n t e r v i e w p a n e l s a s a s e l e c t i o n p r o c e d u r e f o r f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n t s a p p l y i n g f o r a d m i s s i o n t o u n i v e r s i t i e s wehr e E n g l i s h i s t h e
l a n g u a g e o f i n s t r u c t i o n , (p. 103)
Al +h o u g h m o s t o f t h e s t u d i e s r e v i e w e d t h u s f a r e x a m i n e d t h e
p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s , o t h e r s t u d i e s h av e been
co n cern ed w ith t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of o t h e r p r e a d m i s s i o n data.
Many r e s e a r c h e r s have a r g u e d a g a i n s t c o m p l e t e r e l i a n c e on E n g l i s h t e s t
s c o r e s as a p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a de mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .

Based

on t h e l i t e r a t u r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e TOFEL's p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y ,

Riggs

(1981) a r g u e d t h a t
The TOFEL d o e s n o t , n o r d o e s i t p u r p o r t t o , y i e l d a m e a s u r e o f
p r e d i c t i o n o f a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s . . . . B a s e d on t h e p r e m i s e t h a t
TOFEL s c o r e s f o r f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a p p l y i n g f o r r e g u l a r a d m i s s i o n t o
A m e r i c a n c o l l e g e s a n d u n i v e r s i t y a r e an i n a d e q u a t e m e a s u r e o f
p r e d i c t i o n o f s u c c e s s a s me as ur e d by GPA, i t 1s now s u g g e s t e d t h a t
a n o t h e r m e a s u r e , a c l o z e t e s t s c o r e , s h o u l d be e m p l o y e d b e c a u s e
c l o z e t e s t s on a c t u a l c o u r s e m a t e r i a l w i l l p r e d i c t a f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n t ' s s u c c e s s b e t t e r t h a n TOFEL s c o r e s , (pp. 12, 14)
A c c o r d i n g l y , Riggs c o n d u c t e d a s t u d y t o compar e t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y
o f TOFEL s c o r e s a n d c l o z e t e s t s c o r e s a s t h e y r e l a t e t o s t u d e n t GPA.
Bo t h t e s t s w e r e a d m i n i s t e r e d w i t h i n a o n e - w e e k p e r i o d t o 23 f o r e i g n
undergraduate students.

A f t e r t h e s t u d e n t s c o m p l e t e d t wo s e m e s t e r s o f

59

ac a de mi c work,

official

r e p o r t s o f t h e i r GPA's we r e o b t a i n e d .

Finally,

t h e Spearman r a n k - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e was used t o c o m p l e t e t h e
correlation

coefficient.

The f i n d i n g s p r e s e n t e d 1n Ta b l e 3 l e n d s up­

p o r t t o t h e us e of c l o z e t e s t s c o r e s a s p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '
a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .

Al t hough t h e s a mp l e i n R i g g s ' s s t u d y

was ve r y

s m a l l , t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e f i n d i n g s c o n f i r m e d t h e s u p e r i o r i t y of c l o z e
test

s c o r e s i n p r e d i c t i n g s t u d e n t s ' GPA.

T a b l e 3 . — C o r r e l a t i o n of TOFEL and c l o z e t e s t s c o r e s wi t h s t u d e n t
o v e r a l l GPA, f a l l GPA, s p r i n g GPA, and c u m u l a t i v e GPA i n
c h e m i s t r y and c o m p o s i t i o n c o u r s e s .

Overal1
GPA

GPA F a l l
S e me s t e r

GPA S p r i n g
Seme s t er

GPA i n
Che mi s t r y and
Compos i t i on

TOFEL

.29

.33

.10

. 50

Cl oze t e s t

. 57*

.67

.27

. 70

Vari a b l e

" S i g n i f i c a n t a t a l p h a = . 05.

A d d i t i o n a l s t u d i e s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s have been c o n c e r n e d w i t h
e v a l u a t i n g t h e p o s s i b l e b e n e f i t s t o be ga i n e d from u s i n g s t a n d a r d i z e d
a p t i t u d e t e s t s c o r e s (SAT, ACT, GRE, MAT, and GMAT) a s a b a s i s f o r
judging foreign students' academic p o t e n t i a l .

Some o f t h e s e s t u d i e s

f o c u s e d on c o mp a r i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' s c o r e s on t h e s e t e s t s w i t h t h o s e
o b t a i n e d by Ameri can s t u d e n t s .

The f i n d i n g s o f t h e s e s t u d i e s c o n f i r m e d

t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a r e a t a d i s a d v a n t a g e when t h e i r a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s

60

is

judged

according

to

their

performance

on s t a n d a r d i z e d

tests.

T h e r e f o r e , i t was s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e s e t e s t s s h o u l d n o t be u s e d when
c o n s i d e r i n g t h e admissi on of f o r e i g n s t ud en t s.
O t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s have a r g ue d t h a t f o r e i g n

students' aptitude

s c o r e s do h a v e a m e a n i n g and t h a t t h e y c a n be u s e d a s p r e d i c t o r s o f
t h e i r f u t u r e a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

Howell

(1968) s t a t e d t h i s

a r g u me n t as

follows:
The m a i n p o i n t we a r e m a k i n g . . . i s t h a t SAT s c o r e s o f f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s o f n o n - E n g l i s h backgr ound do have one meani ng o f t h e same
k i n d — i f n o t o f t h e s a m e s t r e n g t h — a s t h e y h a v e f o r s t u d e n t s who
a r e n a t i v e s of t h e United S i t e s .
T h i s meani ng i s d e r i v e d f r om t h e
f a c t t h a t t h e y e n a b l e us t o p r e d i c t c o l l e g e g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e
w i t h a t l e a s t a s l i g h t me a s u r e of c o n f i d e n c e , (p. 230)
He went on t o s a y ,
I f SAT s c o r e s a r e t o be u s e d 1n t h e s e l e c t i o n o r p l a c e m e n t o f
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s o f n o n - E n g l i s h backgr ound, t h e s c o r e s s h o u l d n o t
be i n t e r p r e t e d a s h a v i n g i d e n t i c a l m e a n i n g w i t h t h a t o f U.S. s t u ­
d e n t s , u n l e s s t h e r e 1s s p e c i f i c e v i d e n c e t h a t t h i s i s t r u e f o r t h e
p a r t i c u l a r i n s t i t u t i o n and group i n q u e s t i o n , (p. 232)
H o we l l ' s a r g u m e n t was ba s e d on t h e l o g i c o f p r e d i c t i o n t h e o r y ,
which s t a t e s t h a t t h e v a l u e of any s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e can be d e r i v e d from
t h e d e g r e e o f I t s a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e s t u d e n t ' s p r o b a b l e p e r f o r ma n c e .
I n an a t t e m p t t o t e s t t h e m e r i t o f h i s a r g u m e n t , H o w e l l i n v e s t i g a t e d
t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' SAT s c o r e s .

The f i n d i n g s

of t h e s t u d y wer e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s ar g u me n t .

Whereas t h e c o r r e l a ­

t i o n o f S AT - Ve r b a l w i t h GPA wa s i n c o n s i s t e n t ,

th e SAT-Mathematics

c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h GPA was a l m o s t c o m p a r a b l e t o t h a t a c h i e v e d w i t h t h e
American sa mple.
median o f .28.
correlations

The c o r r e l a t i o n s

r a n g e d f r o m . 19 t o . 3 1 ,

with a

F u r t h e r f i n d i n g s showed t h a t SAT-V + SAT-M had m u l t i p l e
that

ranged

from

. 19 t o

.43,

with

a median

of

. 31.

61

Mor eover ,

t h e f i n d i n g s showed t h a t t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' mean GPA was

more f a v o r a b l e t h a n t h e i r t e s t s c o r e s .

Th i s f i n d i n g I m p l i e s t h a t when

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a p t i t u d e t e s t s c o r e s a r e j u d g e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e same
c r i t e r i a a s t h o s e used w i t h t h e Ameri can s t u d e n t s ,
u n d e r p r e d ic t t h e i r academic achievement.

such s c o r e s t e n d t o

A c c o r d i n g l y , Howell s t a t e d

t h a t a v a l i d us e of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' t e s t s c o r e s as p r e d i c t o r s of
t i h e i r a c a de mi c a c h i e v e m e n t r e q u i r e s a c c u r a t e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n ,

bas ed on

t h e f i n d i n g s o f a s c i e n t i f i c e x a m i n a t i o n o f a l a r g e number o f f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s ' t e s t s c o r e s a s compar ed t o t h e i r GPA i n v a r i o u s f i e l d s .
Additional

e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t i n g Ho we l l ' s a r g u me n t was f ound i n

studies

conducted

(1971),

Sokari

by C a r l s o n

(1980),

studies indicated that,
on v e r b a l

a.n*d E l l t i n g

in

El i t i n g ,

1975),

The f i n d i n g s

AACRAO

of t h e s e

Whi l e SAT-V t e n d e d t o have l o w e r v a l i d ­

SAT-M showed v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s s i m i l a r t o t h o s e

prediction
1970;

(1970).

(1973,

t h e i r s c o r e s t e n d e d t o show c o n s i s t e n t p r e ­

d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e i r GPA.

found

Wilcox

d e s p i t e t h e low p e r f o r ma n c e o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s

aptitude te sts,

ity coefficients,

(1967),

Sokari,

research

on A m e r i c a n s t u d e n t s

(AACRAO,

1970;

1980).

A i n s w o r t h ( 1 9 5 7 ) c o n d u c t e d a s t u d y o f 5 0 Ar ab s t u d e n t s a t t h e
U n i v e r s i t y o f Texas.

He exami ned t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s ' a c a demi c a c h i e v e m e n t by u s i n g t h e i r s c o r e s on t h e f o l l o w i n g
tests:

( 1) t h e D i a g n o s t i c R e a d i n g T e s t (DRT),

(2) t h e C u l t u r e - F r e e

T e s t o f I n t e l l i g e n c e ( CF TI ) , (3) t h e S u r v e y o f S t u d y H a b i t s a n d A t t i ­
t u d e s (SSHA), a nd (4) t h e T e s t o f A u r a l C o m p r e h e n s i o n o f E n g l i s h f o r
n a t i v e s p e a k e r s (TAC).

The f i r s t t wo t e s t s we r e a d m i n i s t e r e d i n t h e i r

62

s t a n d a r d form.

T e s t s 3 and 4 w e r e t r a n s l a t e d

P e a r s on p r o d u c t - mo me n t c o r r e l a t i o n s #

i n t o Arabic.

Using

Ai n s wo r t h comput ed t h e r e l a t i o n ­

s h i p b e t w e e n s t u d e n t s ’ t e s t s c o r e s o n ' t h e f o u r s c a l e s a n d t h e i r GPA.
R e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t GPA h a d a c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 46
( a l p h a = . 05) w i t h s t u d e n t s ’ s c o r e s on t h e SSHA, . 35 ( a l p h a = . 05) w i t h
s c o r e s on t h e DRT-Vocabulary#

34

( a l p h a = .05) w i t h s c o r e s on t h e DRT-

Comprehension# and . 32 ( a l p h a = .05) wi t h t o t a l

s c o r e s on t h e DRT.

The

m u l t i p l e - c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s i s showed t h a t SSHA and DRT-Vocabulary had a
c o r r e l a t i o n of .52 ( a l p h a = .01).

The r e m a i n i n g v a r i a b l e s s h o w e d no

ap p are n t evidence of a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p
Based on t h e s e f i n d i n g s #

w i t h s t u d e n t . GPA.

t h e r e s e a r c h e r concluded t h a t t h e measures of

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' s t u d y h a b i t s and a t t i t u d e s and E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e can
be used t o p r e d i c t t h e i r a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t a s me a s u r e d by GPA.
At t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l #

a number o f r e s e a r c h e r s have a t t e m p t e d

t o e v a l u a t e t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d fr om u s i n g a p t i t u d e t e s t s c o r e s
t o p re d ic t foreign stu d e n ts' fu tu re performance.
(1977)

investigated the effectiveness

Ayers and P e t e r s

o f TOFEL and GRE s c o r e s 1n p r e ­

d i c t i n g t h e GPA o f 50 f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s .

The c o r r e l a t i o n a l

analysis

i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' o v e r a l l GPA had a c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 40
( a l p h a = . 01) w i t h t h e TOFEL s c o r e s # . 27 w i t h t h e GRE-V# . 55 ( a l p h a =
. 0 5 ) w i t h t h e GRE-Q# and a m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n o f .71 ( a l p h a = . 01)
w i t h t h e TOFEL and GRE-V.

Ba s e d on t h e s e f i n d i n g s # t h e a u t h o r s c o n ­

c l u d e d t h a t TOFEL s c o r e s may be used as p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '
o v e r a l l GPA.

Fur t h e r # t h e y c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e c o m b i n a t i o n of TOFEL and

63

GRE-V s c o r e s a p p e a r e d t o be a r e a s o n a b l e p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .
Another study,
P eters's study,

slightly

d i f f e r e n t i n n a t u r e f r o m A y e r s and

was c a r r i e d o u t by S h a r o n i n 1972.

He d e s i g n e d t h e

s t u d y t o d e t e r m i n e (1) t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f TOFEL s c o r e s and GRE
s c o r e s a n d (2) t o e x a m i n e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f u s i n g TOFEL s c o r e s a s a
mediator

of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p

b e t w e e n t h e GRE-V and s t u d e n t s ' GPA.

S u b j e c t s o f t h e s t u d y w e r e 975 g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s f r o m 24 A m e r i c a n
institutions.

Because o f school

variations

in grading standa rd s,

the

r e s e a r c h e r s i n t r o d u c e d an a d d i t i v e a n d m u l t i p l i c a t i v e c o n s t a n t f o r
a d j u s t i n g t h e p r t :i c t e d g r a d e s i n each s c h o o l .
d e t e r m i n e d by t h e v a r i a b i l i t y

and a v e r a g e l e v e l

p a r t i c u l a r s c h o o l s ' GPA d i s t r i b u t i o n s .
T a b l e 4,

The c o n s t a n t f a c t o r was

s u g g e s t t h a t t h e TOFEL,

of p e rfo r m a n c e of

The s t u d y f i n d i n g s ,

GRE-V,

a n d GRE-Q c a n

p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' f u t u r e a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

as shown in
be u s e d a s

Al t hough some

of t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s were low, t h e o v e r a l l r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e
v a r i o u s t e s t s c o r e s b o re a somewhat c o n s is te n t p o s itiv e re la tionship
w i t h s t u d e n t s ' GPAs.

Al so,

t h e f i n d i n g s c o n f i r m e d t h a t GRE-Q was t h e

b e s t p r e d i c t o r o f a l l o f t h e s u b j e c t s ' GPA.

Further,

when s u b j e c t s

w e r e s u b g r o u p e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e TOFEL ( l o w ,
m i d d l e , o r h i g h s c o r e s ) , t h e c o r r e l a t i o n o f GRE-V a n d GRE-Q w i t h GPA
i n c r e a s e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y f o r s u b j e c t s w i t h TOFEL s c o r e s i n t h e low and
m i d d l e r a nge s .

On t h e o t h e r hand,

f o r s u b j e c t s w i t h hi gh TOFEL s c o r e s ,

t h e c o r r e l a t i o n o f GRE s c o r e s w i t h GPA d i d n o t I n c r e a s e .

Th i s s u g g e s t s

that

the

English

test

scores

can

be

used

to

moderate

validity

64

c o e f f i c i e n t of a p t i t u d e t e s t scores.
studies*

In c o n t r a s t t o t h e t wo p r e c e d i n g

M a b e r l y ( 1 9 6 3 ) e x a m i n e d t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e GRE

s c o r e s and f ou n d l i t t l e e v i d e n c e of t h e i r a b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t f o r e i g n
students'

a c a d e mi c GPA.

Ta b l e 4 . — C o r r e l a t i o n s bet ween s t u d e n t s ' s c o r e s on t h e GRE-V* GRE-Q,
and TOFEL and t h e i r GPA i n v a r i o u s d i s c i p l i n e s .
Subject

Engineering,
t e c h . and math
Natural s c i e n c e
Ot her
All s u b j e c t s

GRE-V

GRE-Q

TOFEL

TOFEL+GRE-V

TOFEL+GRE-Q

. 22
.41
. 35
. 24

. 39
. 59
. 28
.32

.21
. 39
. 28
.32

. 23
. 42
. 39
.27

, 39
.61
. 39
.34

Moghrabi (1966) exami ned t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e d e g r e e
of s u c c e s s o r f a i l u r e of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a t Texas A & M U n i v e r s i t y .
The s t u d y r e s u l t s r e v e a l e d t h a t GRE-V, GRE-Q, a n d GRE- Advanced w e r e
good p r e d i c t o r s o f s t u d e n t s ' GPA.

The s t u d e n t GPA had a c o r r e l a t i o n o f

. 54 ( a l p h a = . 05) w i t h GRE-V, . 57 ( a l p h a = . 05) w i t h GRE-Q, a n d . 59
( a l p h a = . 05) w i t h GRE- Advanced.
bot h age and m a r i t a l
(.33,

Further,

th e study in d i c a te d t h a t

s t a t u s c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h s t u d e n t GPA

a l p h a = .05).
C i e b o t e r (1969) e xami ned t h e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p be t we e n f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s ' GPAs, GRE s c o r e s ,
study.

Specifically,

country of o r i g i n ,

and m a j o r f i e l d

of

he a d d r e s s e d s e v e r a l q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e

i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p o f (1) GRE s c o r e s w i t h c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n a n d m a j o r

65

f i e l d and (2) GPA w i t h c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n ,
As a r e s u l t o f t h e o v e r a l l a n a l y s i s ,

ma j o r f i e l d ,

and GRE s c o r e s .

C i e b o t e r ,drew t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n-

clusions:
1.

F o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' GRE-V s c o r e s w e r e s u b s t a n t i a l l y

t h a n t h o s e o f t h e normal
2.

population.

GRE-V s c o r e s v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y a c c o r d i n g t o t h e d i s t a n c e

o'? t h e s t u d e n t ' s home fr om Amer i ca and Wes t er n c u l t u r e .
s t u d e n t ' s home t o t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s ,
3.

The f o r e i g n

s h o we d no s i g n i f i c a n t

e x c e p t f o r t h e GRE-Q f o r t h e E n g i n e e r i n g

De par t ment .
4.

The c l o s e r t h e

t h e h i g h e r h i s GRE-V s c o r e s .

s t u d e n t s ' GRE s c o r e s

v a r i a t i o n a c r o s s major f i e l d ,

'
GPA h a d a c o n s i d e r a b l e

geographical
5.

lower

relationship

with th e s tu d e n t's

region of o ri g i n .
GRE s c o r e s d i d n o t h a v e a c o n s i s t e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h

s t u d e n t s ' GPA.
6.

Finally,

t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r o f GPA was s t u d e n t s ' f i r s t -

s e m e s t e r GPA.
A c o m p r e h e n s i v e s t u d y t h a t exami ned t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of
a number o f b u s i n e s s - s c h o o l p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a was c a r r i e d o u t by Hendel
and D o y l e ( 1 9 7 8 ) .

The s t u d y

s a m p l e c o m p r i s e d 67 f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e

s t u d e n t s wor ki ng t o w a r d t h e i r m a s t e r ' s d e g r e e s i n a b u s i n e s s a d m i n i s ­
t r a t i o n program.
validity

The s t u d y was d e s i g n e d t o e x a m i n e t h e p r e d i c t i v e

of t h e f o l l o w i n g

variables:

b a c h e l o r ' s d e g r e e and g r a d u a t e s t u d y ;

( 1) a g e ;

(2) m o n t h s b e t w e e n

(3) q u a l i t y o f u n d e r g r a d u a t e

s c h o o l , a s r a t e d by t h e d i r e c t o r o f g r a d u a t e s t u d y i n b u s i n e s s ;

66

(4) o v e r a l l

UGPA; (5) UGPA 1n b u s i n e s s ;

(6) n u m b e r o f u n d e r g r a d u a t e

b u s i n e s s c o u r s e s t o be made up; (7) amount o f p r e v i o u s b u s i n e s s e x p e r i ­
e n c e ; a nd (8) s c o r e s on t h e ATGSB ( v e r b a l * q u a n t i t a t i v e * and t o t a l ) .
The c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s t h a t wer e used t o a s s e s s a c a de mi c s u c c e s s wer e
first-quarter

GPA*

cumulative

GPA,

number

of

incomplete

grades

r e c e i v e d , number of c o u r s e w i t h d r a w a l s * number o f c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d
with A or B grades,

number o f mont hs b e t we e n t h e b e g i n n i n g o f g r a d u a t e

s t u d y and g r a d u a t i o n , and g r a d u a t i o n s t a t u s .

The r e s e a r c h e r s p e r f o r me d

s e v e r a l s i m p l e and mul t i pi e - c o r r e l a t i on a n a l y s e s , b u t t h e r e s u l t a n t
c o r r e l a t i o n s showed no c o n s i s t e n t p a t t e r n .

However, f o r t h e f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t g r o u p w h o s e p r i m a r y l a n g u a g e wa s E n g l i s h , o n l y 7 o f t h e 77
b l v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s we r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f r om z e r o .
o t h e r hand,

f o r t h e n o n - E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g gr oup,

c i e n t s were s i g n i f i c a n t .
findings.

On t h e

24 c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i ­

T a b l e 5 s h o w s s o me o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n a l

The l a c k o f c o n s i s t e n c y i n t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s p r e v e n t e d t h e

r e s e a r c h e r s f rom d r a wi n g a g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n t h a t c o u l d be g e n e r a l i z e d
t o t h e e n t i r e group.

However, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s s t a t e d ,

No l i n e a r c o m b i n a t i o n of p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s dependa bl y p r e d i c t e d
any a v a i l a b l e c r i t e r i a .
More s u b t l e f i n d i n g s , l a r g e l y from I n s p e c ­
t i o n o f b l v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s , seemed t o s u g g e s t t h a t , i f p r e d i c t ­
a b l e a t a l l , s u c c e s s f o r t h e t wo t y p e s o f s t u d e n t s woul d be d i f f e r ­
e n t i a l l y p r e d i c t a b l e and t h a t d i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i a would be d i f f e r e n ­
t i a l l y p r e d i c t a b l e , (p. 414)

67

Table 5 . — C o r r e l a t i o n a l

f i n d i n g s o f t h e Hendel and Doyl e (1978) s t u d y .
Non-Engl i s h - S p e a k i ng

E n g l i s h - S p e a k i ng

Predictor

Age

Criterion

r

Age

# o f months
from e n t r y
t o gradua­
tion

. 34

.47

ATGSB-Total

F1rstquarter
GPA

.51

Criterion

r

# o f months
from e n t r y
t o gradua­
tion

.41

Reputation
o f un d e r ­
graduate
s chool

Predictor

Under­
graduate
GPA

Graduation
status

. 25

ATGSB-Q

ii

.39

ATGSBTotal

A/B c r e d i t

.27

ATGSB-V

•i

. 40

ATGSB-Q

A/B c r e d i t

. 29

ATGSB-Total

CGPA

.51

The American A s s o c i a t i o n o f C o l l e g i a t e R e g i s t r a r s and Admi s s i on
Officers

(1971) c o n d u c t e d a l a r g e - s c a l e s t u d y w i t h

1,004 f o r e i g n

stu­

d e n t s ( 43 8 u n d e r g r a d u a t e s a nd 566 g r a d u a t e s ) f r o m 40 c o u n t r i e s .

The

s t u d y was R e s i g n e d t o e x a m i n e t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f b i r t h y e a r »
v a r i o u s t y p e s of home-s chool
SAT-V a n d SAT-Q s c o r e s ,

qualities,

English scores,

a n d GRE-V a n d GRE-Q s c o r e s .

TOFEL s c o r e s ,
The c r i t e r i o n

me a s u r e s employed we r e f i r s t - s e m e s t e r GPA, s e c o n d - s e m e s t e r GPA, f i r s t y e a r GPA, AI = (GPA)^ x c r e d i t s e a r n e d ,
major advisor.

Correlational

and g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t r a t i n g by

analyses a t the undergraduate level

68

in d ic a te d t h a t a l l p r e d ic to r s c o r r e la te d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with a l l the
criterion

me a s u r e s .

Al t hough some o f t h e s e c o r r e l a t i o n s

negative,

the overall

w e r e low or

r e s u l t a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e exam­

i n e d p r e d i c t o r s had v a r y i n g d e g r e e s o f p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n
v a r i o u s c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s .

Also,

t h e f i n d i n g s showed t h a t SAT-Q was

t h e b e s t c o n s i s t e n t p r e d i c t o r o f t h e c r i t e r i o n me as ur e s .
tions

r a n g e d f r o m . 12 t o . 5 0 ,

with the

w i t h a m e d i a n o f . 48.

The c o r r e l a ­
Further,

the

m u l t i p l e - c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s i s r e s u l t was .61 u s i n g SAT-Q, Q^campus, and
a g e a s p r e d i c t o r s o f f i r s t - s e m e s t e r GPA.

F i n a l l y , t h e f i n d i n g s con­

f i r m e d t h a t t h e s u b g r o u p i n g a n a l y s i s by c o u n t r y , m a j o r f i e l d , and l e v e l
of English t e s t s co res c o n t r i b u t e d t o th e improvement of p r e d i c t o r
vali dity.
The a n a l y s i s

o f g r a d u a t e - s t u d e n t d a t a y i e l d e d a number of

sig n ifican t positive correlations.
institutional

The E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s a n d t h e

r a t i n g of s tu d e n t q u a l i t y

wer e t h e o n l y p r e d i c t o r s t h a t

c o n s i s t e n t l y had s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h a l l o f t h e c r i t e r i o n
me a s u r e s .
foreign

F a c u l t y r a t i n g p o s s e s s e d p r o m i s e a s a c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e of
graduate

students'

academic success.

Overall,

the

study

r e s u l t s s u g g e s t e d t h a t g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s wa s l e s s
p r e d i c t a b l e than t h a t of undergraduates.

Th i s o b s e r v a t i o n

is consis­

t e n t w i t h f i n d i n g s o f p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h c o n c e r n i n g Amer i can s t u d e n t s '
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .
Anot her s t u d y c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t was c on d u c t e d by Putman (1953)
with

a

sample

of

546

graduate

students.

Putman

examined

the

69

r e l a t i o n s h i p o f p r e v i o u s a c a d e m i c s t a n d i n g , f i r s t - t e r m GPA, v a r i o u s
me a s u r e s of E n g l i s h
status,

age,

backgr ound,

age,

s e x,

national

and m a j o r w i t h t h e s t u d e n t s ’ GPA.

origin,

admission

The a v a i l a b l e d a t a wer e

c om p ar ed a c r o s s n a t i o n and m a j o r f i e l d of s t u d y .

Further analyses

c o n c e r n e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s w i t h t h e GPA a c h i e v e d a t
Col umbi a U n i v e r s i t y .
total

T a b l e 6 shows some o f t h e f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n i n g t h e

s a mp l e and some o f t h e c o u n t r i e s f o r which t h e r e we r e c o m p l e t e

d a t a -.-?! an a d e q u a t e sampl e.
coefficients,
1.

By e x a mi n i n g t h e

identified

correlation

one can n o t i c e t h e f o l l o w i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s :

Converting undergraduate standing t o a s c a l e s i m i l a r t o th e

g r a d i n g s t a n d a r d a t C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y y i e l d e d an o v e r a l l p o s i t i v e
correlation
2.

(.23) w i t h t o t a l

GPA.

The v a r i o u s m e a s u r e s o f E n g l i s h backgr ound t e n d e d t o c o r r e ­

l a t e p o s i t i v e l y w i t h s t u d e n t GPA ( . 1 2 , . 3 3 , . 3 7 , a n d . 3 3 ) .
3.

F i r s t - t e r m GPA had t h e h i g h e s t p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y ,

with a

c o r r e l a t i o n o f .77 w i t h GPA.
When t h e c o r r e l a t i o n a l
subgroups,

a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r me d f o r t h e c o u n t r y

E n g l i s h backgr ound me a s u r e s and f i r s t - t e r m GPA c o n t i n u e d t o

have a c o n s i s t e n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n

with th e to ta l

GPA.

Other

v a r i a b l e s d i d n o t show c o n s i s t e n t e v i d e n c e 1n b o t h t y p e s o f c o r r e l a ­
tional

analyses.

Accordingly,

Putman recommended u s i n g c o n v e r t e d

u n d e r g r a d u a t e a c a d e mi c s t a n d i n g , E n g l i s h backgr ound, and a c a d e mi c back­
ground i n m a j o r f i e l d a s c r i t e r i a f o r j u d g i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a d mi s ­
sibility.

Ta b l e 6 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween p r e d i c t o r s and t o t a l GPA f o r t h e t o t a l
subgroups.
T o t a l
G ro u p

P r e d ic t o r

C o n v e r t e d
Y e a r s

p o s t s e c o n d a r y

P o i n t s
M ean

p r e a d m is s io n

p r e a d m is s io n

E n g l i s h
M ean
A g e

u n d e r g r a d u a t e

e x a m

GPA
a t

T erm

in

s t u d y
E n g l i s h

E n g l i s h

c o u r s e

g r a d e s

r a t i n g
E n g l i s h

c o u r s e s

e n t r a n c e

o f

e n r o l l m e n t

F i r s t - t e r m
T o t a l

s t a n d in g

C o lu m b ia

GPA

p o i n t s

Sour ce:

a t

e n r o l l e d

p e r

Putman (1953) .

te r m

Ch ina

sampl e and f o r n a t i o n a l i t y

P u e r t o
R ic o

1n d ia

P h i l i p p i n e s

, 2 3 ( ^ 7 )

.1 8 ( 6 2 )

.4 6 ( 9 9 )

.2 4 ( 1 3 2 )

- . 0 5 ( 4 3 )

.0 3 ( 5 3 8 )

.2 8 ( 7 3 )

- . 0 3 ( 9 9 )

- . 0 6 ( 1 5 7 )

.1 1 ( 4 6 )

.1 2 ( 1 5 5 )

.3 7 ( 5 2 )

.0 3 ( 9 8 )

•

.3 3 ( 1 5 5 )

.3 6 ( 5 7 )

.3 5 ( 9 8 )

• •

.3 7 ( 2 0 3 )

.7 2 ( 4 9 )

.4 0 ( 5 2 )

.3 3 ( 1 6 6 )

.3 6 ( 5 7 )

.3 5 ( 9 8 )

.12(5*15)

.0 1 ( 7 3 )

- . 0 6 ( 9 9 )

. . .

•

.

0 7 ( 5**6)

• •

• •

•

.4 4 ( 3 2 )
•

• •

.1 3 ( 1 6 3 )
• •

•

• s •

• •

•

• •

•

• • •

.2 0 ( 4 5 )
• • •

.7 7 ( 5 1 8 )

.7 2 ( 7 3 )

.7 5 ( 9 9 )

.7 9 ( 1 5 5 )

.8 6 ( 3 9 )

.1 7 ( 5 ^ 6 )

.29 (7 3 )

- 2 4 ( 9 9 )

.0 7 ( 1 6 3 )

.2 4 ( 4 6 )

71

Hount r a s

( 1955) d e s i g n e d a s t u d y t o e x a m i n e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p

between a number of n o n i n t e l l e c t 1 v e p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a and f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Mi chi gan.

Data on

s t u d e n t s ' sex, age a t a d m is sio n t i m e , m a r i t a l s t a t u s , t y p e of adm is­
s i o n , d e g r e e h e l d a t a d m i s s i o n , and f i n a n c i a l s t a t u s w e r e c o l l e c t e d
f r o m t h e f i l e s o f 597 f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s .
square, Fis her t - t e s t ,
ses.

Hountras

used c h i -

and a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e t o exami ne t h e h y p o t h e ­

On t h e b a s i s o f t h e a n a l y s i s

results,

h e dr ew t h e f o l l o w i n g

conclusions:
1.

G r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' s e x a n d a g e b e a r no s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a ­

t i o n s h i p t o t h e i r a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e me n t .
2.

V a r i a b l e s s uch as m a r i t a l s t a t u s , t y p e of a d m i s s i o n , d e g r e e

h e l d a t a d m i s s i o n , and f i n a n c i a l

s t a t u s showed a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n ­

s h i p w i t h s t u d e n t a c a d e mi c s t a t u s .
The f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s who wer e
married, received unconditional a d m i s s i o n ,
had s t a b l e f i n a n c i a l

had a d v a n c e d d e g r e e s , a n d

c o n d i t i o n s we r e l e s s l i k e l y t o i n c u r p r o b a t i o n a r y

s t a t u s t h a n t h o s e s t u d e n t s who w e r e s i n g l e ,

received a provisional

a d m i s s i o n , had a b a c h e l o r ' s d e g r e e , o r had been a d m i t t e d w i t h no f i n a n ­
cial

aid.

A n o t h e r s t u d y by H o u n t r a s

( 1 9 5 3 ) s h o we d t h a t c o u n t r y o f

o r i g i n and f i e l d o f s t u d y wer e p o s i t i v e l y
me n t .

r e la te d t o student achieve­

S t u d e n t s from t h e Far E a s t , t h e Near E a s t , and L a t i n America,

and s t u d e n t s i n s o d a !

and p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e s ,

probationary s t a t u s than o t h e r s t u d e n t s .

wer e more l i k e l y t o i n c u r

In g e n e r a l ,

e x a m i n a t i o n of

72

t h e noni n t e l l ecrti ve f a c t o r s as p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s * aca demi c
a c h i e v e m e n t di d n o t r e v e a l

consistent findings.

T e l l e n ( 1971) r e v i e w e d a n u m b e r o f s t u d i e s t h a t had e x a m i n e d
t h e p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of s e v e r a l n o n 1 n t e l l e c t i v e f a c t o r s .

The o v e r a l l

r e s u l t s o f t h e s t u d i e s showed l i t t l e e v i d e n c e o f a c o n s i s t e n t a s s o c i a ­
t i o n bet ween t h e n o n 1 n t e l l e c t l v e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e s t u d e n t ' s a c a de mi c
success,

a s m e a s u r e d by GPA.

The i n c o n s i s t e n c y o f f i n d i n g s may be

a t t r i b u t e d t o I n a d e q u a t e s a mp l e s i z e ,

inadequate s t a t i s t i c a l

analysis,

a nd p o o r s t u d y d e s i g n , o r I t may be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e l a c k o f a r e l a ­
t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s and a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t .
rate,

the final

word r e g a r d i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e s e

At a n y

predictors

can be d e r i v e d from c o n d u c t i n g a s t u d y t h a t e x a mi n e s t h e i r e f f e c t i v e ­
n e s s 1n m o d e r a t i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s w i t h
me a s u r e s o f a c a de mi c s u c c e s s .

Summary
The f o r e g o i n g

r e v i e w o f r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e f o c u s e d on s t u d i e s

t h a t we r e d e s i g n e d t o e s t i m a t e t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f a number of
p r e d i c t o r s t h o u g h t t o be e f f e c t i v e f o r f o r e c a s t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

The s t u d i e s we r e s e l e c t e d i n such a way a s t o i n s u r e

a comprehensive coverage of a l l
research.
criteria

Specifically,
as d e g r e e l e v e l ,

aspects of foreign-student predic tion

s e l e c t i o n o f t h e s t u d i e s was b a s e d on s u c h
s a mp l e s i z e ,

exa mi ne d, and method o f a n a l y s i s .

study design, t ype of p r e d i c t o r

Based on t h i s r e v i e w and t h e r e v i e w s

c o n d u c t e d by H a l e , S t a n s f i e l d , and Du r a n ( 1 9 8 4 ) , T e l l c e n ( 1 9 7 1 ) , and
Chai and Woehike (1979), t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s s e e n w a r r a n t e d :

73

1.

A l t h o u g h t h e n u m b e r a nd q u a l i t y o f p r e d i c t i o n s t u d i e s on

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a r e n o t c o m p a r a b l e t o t h o s e on Ameri can s t u d e n t s #
findings

of

research.

such

research

revealed

a promising

sign

for

the

future

F u r t h e r , t h e f i n d i n g s s u g g e s t e d t h e need f o r more s t u d i e s

th a t permit a full

control

of a l l t h e v a r i a b l e s t h a t d i r e c t l y or in d i­

r e c t l y a f f e c t t h e m a g n i t u d e of t h e main p r e d i c t o r ' s v a l i d i t y

coef-

f ici ent.
2.

P r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h on f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '

ac a de mi c a c h i e v e ­

me nt i s s u b j e c t t o t h e same d e f i c i e n c i e s i n h e r e n t in s t u d i e s of Ameri ­
can s t u d e n t s .

Further,

such r e s e a r c h i s s u b j e c t t o o t h e r d e f i c i e n c i e s

i m p o s e d by t h e d i v e r s i t y
E n g l i s h backgr ound,

of foreign stu d e n ts

and e d u c a t i o n a l

experience.

in t e r m s of c u l t u r e ,
Such d i v e r s i t y i n t r o ­

du c e s many p r o b l e ms t h a t p r e v e n t t h e r e s e a r c h e r f r om r e a c h i n g an ac c u­
r a t e e s t i m a t e o f t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d f r o m u s i n g a p a r t i c u l a r
s e l e c t i o n device.
ficulty

Additional

d e f i c i e n c i e s have r e s u l t e d f r om t h e d i f ­

i n v o l v e d 1n u s i n g s t u d e n t i n d i c e s o f p r e v i o u s a c h i e v e m e n t and

fr om t h e l a c k o f an a d e q u a t e a p t i t u d e t e s t t h a t would p r o v i d e a compar ­
a b l e me a s u r e o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a de mi c a p t i t u d e .
3.

The p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t

s e e m t o f a l 1 1n t o t w o c a t e g o r 1e s :
predictors.

i n t e l l e c t l v e a nd n o n i n t e l l e c t i ve

I n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d ic to r s are previous academic in dices,

standardized t e s t

scores,

and E n g l i s h t e s t

scores.

The f o r e g o i n g

r e v i e w r e v e a l e d t h a t c o n v e r t e d p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c i n d i c e s and s t a n d a r d ­
i z e d t e s t s c o r e s c a n be u s e d a s p r e d i c t o r s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a ­
demic ach iev em en t.

In p a r t i c u l a r ,

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' s c o r e s on t h e

74

mathematical

v e r s i o n o f a p t i t u d e t e s t s have shown c o n s i s t e n t e v i d e n c e

o f b e i n g a good p r e d i c t o r o f GPA.

However, a d e q u a t e use of p r e v i o u s

a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t and s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s r e q u i r e s a c c u r a t e I n t e r p r e ­
t a t i o n o f w h a t t h e d a t a on b o t h p r e d i c t o r s mean i n t e r m s o f t h e a c a ­
demic s t a n d a r d s a t a p a r t i c u l a r u n i v e r s i t y .

Such an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

s h o u l d be b a s e d on an e x a m i n a t i o n o f a l a r g e n u m b e r o f f o r e i g n s t u ­
dents'

previous grades

and t e s t - s c o r e

distribution

as they correspond

t o GPA d i s t r i b u t i o n a t a p a r t i c u l a r i n s t i t u t i o n .
F u r th e r , f in d i n g s suggested t h a t mastery of th e English la n ­
g u a g e - s e e m s t o be a l o g i c a l
spite

p r e d i c t o r of s u c c e s s ( S c h u r i n g ,

1980).

In

of t h e a rgum ent a g a i n s t t h e use of English t e s t s c o r e s as a

p r e d i c t o r of f o r e ig n s t u d e n t s ' academic achievem ent, th e p r e d i c t i v e
validity

o f t h e commonly used t e s t s

l e n d s s u p p o r t t o t h e i r u se in

s e l e c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r program.
the empirical
cal

evidence,

several

In a d d i t i o n t o

r e s e a r c h e f f o r t s have p r o v i d e d a l o g i ­

r a t i o n a l e for using English t e s t s c o re s

sio ns regarding foreign applican ts.

i n maki ng a d m i s s i o n d e c i ­

Such a l o g i c a l

r a t i o n a l e was based

on t h e a p p a r e n t e v i d e n c e o f a s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i o n bet wee n f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n t s ' Engl i s h t e s t s c o r e s a nd t h e i r s c o r e s on s t a n d a r d i z e d a p t i t u d e
tests.

The r a t i o n a l e was a l s o based on t h e f a c t t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '

a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s r e q u i r e s a d e q u a t e m a s t e r y o f t h e E n g l i s h l anguage.
The n o n i n t e l l e c t l v e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t showed a s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i o n
w i t h f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t wer e such v a r i a b l e s as age,
s e x , m a r i t a l s t a t u s , m a j o r f i e l d o f s t u d y , c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n , and s t u d y
habits.

Specifically,

a g e , m a j o r f i e l d , a nd c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n w e r e

75

f o u n d t o be e f f e c t l ve 1 n i n c r e a s i ng t h e v a l i d 1 t y o f t h e 1 n t e l l e c t i v e
predictors.
4.

The opti mum s i t u a t i o n 1n which one can e s t i m a t e t h e bene­

f i t s t o be g a i n e d from u s i n g p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s would be one
In which f u l l
all

control

of other va r ia b le s

1s e v i d e n t .

the variables t h a t d ire c tly or In directly

t h e main p r e d i c t o r ' s v a l i d i t y

Full c o n t r o l

of

a f f e c t t h e ma g n i t u d e o f

c o e f f i c i e n t r e q u i r e s t h e ex aminat ion of

l a r g e samples of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s .

Such s a m p l e s s h o u l d be l a r g e enough

t o p e r m i t a s e p a r a t e e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e main p r e d i c t o r ' s v a l i d i t y c o e f ­
f i c i e n t a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s t u d e n t s ' age,
and c o u n t r y of o r i g i n .

Anot her i d e a l

sex,

major f i e l d ,

degree l e v e l ,

s i t u a t i o n 1n whi ch one can e s t i ­

ma t e a c c u r a t e l y t h e v a l u e of p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a would be one i n whi ch
t h e r e s e a r c h e r can l o c a t e an a d e q u a t e s a mp l e o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s fr om a
p a r t i c u l a r c o u ntry , s tu d y in g in a p a r t i c u l a r c o l l e g e in a p a r t i c u l a r
Uni t e d S t a t e s i n s t i t u t i o n
5.

(Wi l cox,

1973).

The f i r s t - t e r m GPA a c h i e v e d a t t h e Ameri can s chool

seemed

t o be a p r o m i s i n g p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' f u t u r e p e r f o r ma n c e .
O v e r al l , t h e e x p l o r a t i o n of t h e l i t e r a t u r e about t h e p r e d i c t i o n
of

foreign

students'

a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s

of t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n ,

revealed t h a t t h e heterogeneity

t h e s ma l l

dent population a t a p a r t i c u l a r u n iv e rs i ty ,

s i z e of t h e forei gn s t u ­
lack of uniform data t h a t

c o u l d be used t o p r e d i c t t h e i r a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s ,

and t h e d i f f i c u l t y of

u s i n g t h e i r p r e v i o u s g r a d e s f o r t h e p u r p o s e of p r e d i c t i o n a r e t h e ma j o r
pr o b l e ms t h a t have p r e v e n t e d r e s e a r c h e r s f r om r e a c h i n g c o n s i s t e n t f i n d ­
ings

regarding

the

predictability

of

foreign

students'

academic

76

success.

Accor di ngl y#

t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y was d e s i g n e d 1n such a way as

t o permit adequate control
pr obl e ms .

o v e r t h e I n f l u e n c e s of t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d

To a c h i e v e t h i s g o a l ,

the researcher attempted to lo c ate a

l a r g e r s a m p l e , f r o m w h i c h s t a b l e f i n d i n g s c o u l d be d r a w n , a n d a t t h e
same t i m e p e r m i t a d e q u a t e c o n t r o l

over t h e s ources of p o pu l a t i o n h e t ­

e r o g e n e i t y t h a t a r e t hou gh t t o i n f l u e n c e t h e magnitude of t h e p r e d i c ­
t o r s ’ overall

predictive validity.

Furthermore,

t h e w r i t e r attem p ted t o examine th e e x t e n t to

whi ch f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c s t a n d i n g w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e
g r a d i n g s y s t e m of t h e i r home school c o u l d p r e d i c t t h e i r a c a d e mi c s u c ­
c e s s , a s m e a s u r e d by t h e d e f i n e d c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s .

Moreover, th e

s t u d y a t t e m p t e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e e x t e n t t o which GPA 1 - y e a r ,

GPA 2 -

year,

of th e

CGPA, a c a d e m i c c r e d i t

doctoral

load,

and t h e a d v i s o r ' s

rating

s t u d e n t ' s a c a d e mi c compe t e nc e c o u l d be used t o a s s e s s f o r e i g n

g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s i n Ameri can s c h o o l s .
s t u d y e x a m i n e d t h e p o w e r o f GPA 1 - t e r m a s a p o t e n t i a l
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

Finally,

the

p r e d i c t o r of

CHAPTER I I I

METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN

Hy p o t h e s e s and Res e a r c h Q u e s t i o n s
The p r e s e n t s t u d y was based on t h e a s s u mp t i o n t h a t
valid c r i t e r i a

for selection

of f o r e i g n

students

identifying

would h e l p a d m i s s i o n

d e c i s i o n ma ker s make a c c u r a t e d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g p r o s p e c t i v e f o r e i g n
students1 admissibility

i n t o p a r t i c u l a r g r a d u a t e pr ogr ams .

Using t h i s

a s s u m p t i o n , t h e I n v e s t i g a t o r f o c u s e d on e x a mi n i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g hypo t he ­
s e s , which r e l a t e d i r e c t l y t o t h e problem of p r e d i c t i n g t h e ac a dem ic
s u c c e s s o f f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s f r om t h e common p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a
r e q u i r e d by MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .
Hypothesis 1; Foreign g ra d u a te s t u d e n t s ' index of p rev io u s aca­
d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t ( a t t h e u n d e r g r a d u a t e l e v e l ) (IPAA) b e a r s no
s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y t o t h e i r g r a d u a t e ac a d e mi c s u c c e s s ,
a s m e a s u r e d by (a) f 1 r s t - t e r m GPA, (b) c u m u l a t i v e GPA a c h i e v e d 1 n
MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s , and (c) t h e ma j o r a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r s ' r a t i n g s
o f t h e i r o v e r a l l a c a d e mi c compet ence.
H y p o t h e s i s 2 : F o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' En g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s (ave­
r a g e ) , a s me a s u r e d by t h e t e s t o f E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y d e s i g n e d by
t h e En g l i s h Language C e n t e r a t MSU, b e a r no s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i v e
v a l i d i t y t o t h e i r a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s , a s meas ur e d by (a) f i r s t - t e r m
GPA, (b) c u m u l a t i v e GPA a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s , a nd ( c)
t h e major academic a d v i s o r s ' r a t i n g s of t h e i r o v e r a ll academic
compet ence.
H y p o t h e s i s 3 : F o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' En g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s , as
meas ur e d by t h e TOFEL, b e a r no s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y t o
t h e i r a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s , a s m e a s u r e d by ( a ) f i r s t - t e r m GPA, (b)
c u m u l a t i v e GPA a c h i e v e d 1n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s , and (c) t h e m a j o r
a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r s ' r a t i n g s o f t h e i r o v e r a l l a c a d e mi c c ompet enc e.

77

78

H y p o t h e s i s 4 : T h e r e 1s no s i g n i f i c a n t l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p bet ween
f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ’ s e x and t h e i r ac a d e m i c s u c c e s s , as
me as ur e d by (a) f i r s t - t e r m GPA, (b) c u m u l a t i v e GPA a c h i e v e d 1n MSU
g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s , and (c) t h e m a j o r a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r s ’ r a t i n g s of
t h e i r o v e r a l l a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .
H y p o t h e s i s 5 : T h e r e 1s no s i g n i f i c a n t l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p bet ween
f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ’ c h r o n o l o g i c a l age and t h e i r a c a d e m i c
s u c c e s s , a s m e a s u r e d by ( a ) f i r s t - t e r m GPA, (b) c u m u l a t i v e GPA
a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s , and (c) t h e m a j o r a c a d e mi c a d v i s ­
o r s ’ r a t i n g s o f t h e i r o v e r a l l a c a d e mi c compet enc e.
H y p o t h e s i s 6 : Th e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p bet ween
f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e , s t u d e n t s ' m a r i t a l s t a t u s and t h e i r a c a de mi c s u c ­
c e s s , a s m e a s u r e d by (a) f i r s t - t e r m GPA, (b) c u m u l a t i v e GPA
a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s , and (c) t h e m a j o r a c a de mi c a d v i s ­
o r s ' r a t i n g s o f t h e i r o v e r a l l a c a d e mi c compet enc e.
H y p o t h e s i s 7 ; F o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s in d i f f e r e n t f i e l d s of
s p e c i a l i z a t i o n do n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n t e r m s o f t h e i r a c a ­
demi c a c h i e v e m e n t , a s meas ur e d by (a) f i r s t - t e r m GPA and (b) cumu­
l a t i v e GPA a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .
Hypothesis 8 ;
T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t e r m s o f
a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t , a s m e a s u r e d by ( a) f i r s t - t e r m GPA a n d (b)
c u m u l a t i v e GPA, b e t w e e n f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t
countries.
Hypothesis 9 ;
T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t e r m s o f
a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t , a s m e a s u r e d by (a) f i r s t - t e r m GPA a nd (b)
c u m u l a t i v e GPA, among f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s a d m i t t e d t o MSU
g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s on t h e b a s i s o f d i f f e r e n t Engl 1s h - p r o f i c l e n c y
statuses.
H y p o t h e s i s 10:
F o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d a s c o r e of
80 o r a b o v e on t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t ( a v e r a g e ) do n o t d i f f e r s i g ­
n i f i c a n t l y i n t e r m s o f a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t , a s m e a s u r e d by ( a)
f i r s t - t e r m GPA a nd ( b) c u m u l a t i v e GPA, f r o m t h o s e who a c h i e v e d a
s c o r e below 80 on t h e same t e s t .
In a d d i t i o n t o t h e p r e c e d i n g n u l l

hypotheses,

the w riter also

e x a m i n e d t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f GPA 1 - y e a r , GPA 2 - y e a r , a n d a c a d e m i c
c r e d i t s a c c u m u l a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s in t h e g r a d u a t e program as
c r i t e r i a of forei gn gra du at e s t u d e n t s ' ac a d e m i c s u c c e s s .
a l s o exami ned t h e v a l u e o f f i r s t - t e r m

The w r i t e r

GPA (GPA 1 - t e r m ) a s a p o t e n t i a l

79

p r e d i c t o r of

f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ’ ac a de mi c s ucces s *

as meas ur e d

by c u m u l a t i v e GPA (CGPA) and a d v i s o r s ' r a t i n g s o f t h e i r a c a d e mi c compe­
tence.

Fu r t he r mor e * t h e I n v e s t i g a t o r a t t e m p t e d t o a n s w e r t h e f o l l o w i n g

research questions:
Re s e a r c h Qu e s t i o n 1:
To what e x t e n t can t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e ­
d i c t o r s ( s u c h a s s ex* a g e , m a r i t a l s t a t u s , n a t i o n a l o r i g i n , a nd
f i e l d o f s p e c i a l i z a t i o n ) be used as m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s t o i n c r e a s e
th e o v e r a ll p r e d i c t i o n accuracy of th e I n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s
(TOFEL, MSU-AETS, IPAA, and GPA 1 - t e r m ) ?
Re s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 2 :
What 1s t h e r e l a t i v e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of
each o f t h e s u b t e s t s c o r e s o f t h e En g l i s h t e s t d e s i g n e d by t h e MSU
E n g l i s h Language C e n t e r ?
Re s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 3 : To what e x t e n t do t h e MSU En g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s
( a v e r a g e and s u b t e s t s ) v a r y a c c o r d i n g t o d i f f e r e n c e s in f o r e i g n
g ra du at e s t u d e n t s ' f i e l d s of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n ?
Re s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 4 : Which o f t h e MSU En g l i s h s u b t e s t s c o r e s b e a r
more p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y t o f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c
a c h i e v e m e n t , a s meas ur e d by (a) f i r s t - t e r m GPA, (b) c u m u l a t i v e GPA
a c h i e v e d 1n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s , and (c) t h e m a j o r a c a demi c a d v i s ­
o r s ' r a t i n g s o f t h e i r o v e r a l l a c a d e mi c c ompet enc e?
N a t u r e o f t h e St udv P o p u l a t i o n and Sample
The l o g i c o f i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s s t a t e s t h a t e s t i m a t i o n o f a
p a r t i c u l a r p o p u l a t i o n p a r a m e t e r r e q u i r e s t h e c h o i c e o f an a d e q u a t e
s a mp l e t h a t i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n .

Theoretically,

a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a mp l e can be s e l e c t e d 1n many d i f f e r e n t ways.

Under

nor mal c o n d i t i o n s , t h e r e s e a r c h e r c a n e m p l o y c o m mo n l y u s e d s a m p l i n g
t e c h n i q u e s (random, s y s t e m a t i c , c l u s t e r , e t c . ) t o s e l e c t t h e s a m p l e ,
which w i l l
However,

pr oduc e an a c c u r a t e e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n p a r a m e t e r .

1n s o c i a l

s c i e n c e r e s e a r c h , t h e r e a r e many s i t u a t i o n s i n which

i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o a p p l y t h e l o g i c of s a m p l i n g p r o c e d u r e t o draw a
d e s i r a b l e s a mp l e from t h e t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n .

80

For ex am ple,

1n p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h w h e r e t h e r e s e a r c h e r i s

f o r c e d t o deal w i t h an e x p l i c i t s e l e c t e d gr oup, 1 t i s I m p o s s i b l e t o
s e l e c t a s a mp l e t h a t w i l l

r e p r e s e n t t h e whol e r a n g e o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n .

B e c a u s e o f t h e n a t u r e o f p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h and t h e d i f f i c u l t y

of

o b ta in in g data about t h e c r i t e r i o n measure of th e u n s e le c te d group,
r e s e a r c h e r s a r e f o r c e d t o deal o n l y w i t h t h e group of s t u d e n t s who wer e
a c c e p t e d o r r e ma i ne d i n a p a r t i c u l a r progr am.
of t h e common s e l e c t i o n
might r e s u lt
Generally,

Co n s e q u e n t l y , e s t i m a t i o n

devices never r eaches t h e o pti mal

level

that

i f t h e u n s c r e e n e d group were i n c l u d e d in t h e sample.

in a p r a c t i c a l

setting,

it

is d i f f i c u l t to c o l le c t data

a b o u t t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e from t h e u n s e l e c t e d group.

Therefore,

r e s e a r c h e r s have e s t i m a t e d and w i l l c o n t i n u e t o e s t i m a t e t h e u t i l i t y o f
s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e s u s in g a sample t h a t does n o t r e p r e s e n t t h e whole
domain o f s t u d e n t s .
Given t h e f o r e g o i n g l i m i t a t i o n ,

which has I n h i b i t e d t h e u t i l i t y

of p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h e r s , b e t t e r e s t i m a t i o n o f a s e l e c t i o n
validity

device's

c o e f f i c i e n t i s l i k e l y t o r e s u l t f r o m a s a m p l e t h a t c a n be

s e l e c t e d from t h e a v a i l a b l e p o p u l a t i o n a c c o r d i n g t o t h e r u l e s o f common
sampling techniques.

However, a p p l i c a t i o n of sampling t e c h n i q u e s i s

a p p r o p r i a t e when t h e r e s e a r c h e r has a l a r g e , homogeneous p o p u l a t i o n and
h a s c o m p l e t e d a t a on t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a .
t h e p o p u l a t i o n i s s ma l l

I n c o n t r a s t , when

and h e t e r o g e n e o u s and t h e r e s e a r c h e r does no t

have c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a ,
o f ' s a m p l i n g t e c h n i q u e s woul d be o f l i m i t e d v a l u e .

application

81

In g e n e r a l * t h e p r o b l e m s o f s a m p l e s i z e and s a m p l e s e l e c t i o n
a r e c o n s i d e r e d t o be t h e m a j o r f a c t o r s
predic tion research.

Inhibiting the findings

of

T h i s 1s p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e when s t u d e n t s c o m p r i s ­

ing t h e p o p u l a t i o n a r e from f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s .

As a r e s u l t o f t h e

h e t e r o g e n e i t y and t h e s m a l l n e s s o f t h e f o r e l g n - s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n * most
r e s e a r c h e r s have been f o r c e d t o deal * a t bes t *
c o n v e n i e n c e s a mpl e .

w i t h an i n c i d e n t a l

or a

Cons equent l y* o u t c ome s o f p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h w i t h

f o r e i gn s t u d e n t s h a v e b e e n i n c o n s i s t e n t a n d a r e o f 11 mi t e d v a l u e f o r
s e l e c t i o n purposes.
Th i s pr obl em has been r e c o g n i z e d by many r e s e a r c h e r s c on c e r n e d
w i t h p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s 1 a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .

Some i n v e s t i ­

g a t o r s h a v e s u g g e s t e d p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n s t h a t may a l l o w f o r s a m p l e
biases.

In t h i s r e ga r d *

Wi l cox (1973) s u g g e s t e d :

The i d e a l s i t u a t i o n 1n w h i c h t o p r e d i c t t h e a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s o f
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s w o u l d be t o f i n d an a d e q u a t e n u m b e r o f s t u d e n t s
from a p a r t i c u l a r c o u n t r y s t u d y i n g i n a p a r t i c u l a r U.S. i n s t i t u t i o n
a t a g i v e n l e v e l 1n a g i v e n f i e l d a t a g i v e n t i m e .
Wi t h t h e s e
v a r i a b l e s un d e r c o n t r o l * t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of p r e v i o u s a c a ­
demi c p e r f o r m a n c e * t e s t s c o r e s and o t h e r p r e a d m i s s i o n v a r i a b l e s
c o u l d be a s s e s s e d mor e o b j e c t i v e l y .
Unfortunately* t h i s s i t u a t i o n
does n o t e x i s t and i n v e s t i g a t o r s have been f o r c e d t o c o mpr omi s e t h e
h o mo g e n e i t y o f t h e i r s a mp l e i n o r d e r t o a c h i e v e an a d e q u a t e s a mpl e
size.
Some hav e p o o l e d s t u d e n t s f r om a v a r i e t y o f c o u n t r i e s , and
o t h e r s have poo l e d s t u d e n t s a c r o s s U.S. c o l l e g e s o r f i e l d s o f s t u d y
or time.
In a l l c a s e s , t h i s p o o l i n g t e n d s t o s u p p r e s s t h e l e v e l o f
a c t u a l p r e d i c t o r c r i t e r i o n r e l a t i o n s h i p , (pp. 623- 24)
Actually,

a homogeneous s a mp l e as d e s c r i b e d

e x i s t s when r e s e a r c h I n v o l v e s f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s .

by Wi l cox s el dom
The p o p u l a t i o n o f

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s 1n mo s t Ameri can s c h o o l s 1s v e r y s ma l l and h e t e r o g e n e ­
ous.

Un l i k e Ame r i c a ns ,

foreign

s t u d e n t s vary widely with

national origin* E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y *

respect to

previous educational

82

preparation,
reported.

a n d t h e way 1n w h i c h t h e i r p r e v i o u s g r a d e s h a v e be e n

Therefore,

1 t was d i f f i c u l t t o l o c a t e a s a m p l e t h a t m e t

Wilcox's c r it e r ia .
Given t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d l i m i t a t i o n

i mposed on t h e p r e d i c t i o n

o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t , 1 t became c l e a r t h a t p o o l i n g
students across colleges,

c o u n t r y of o r i g i n ,

and t i m e was n e c e s s a r y t o

g e n e r a t e an a d e q u a t e s a m p l e f r o m w h i c h a c c u r a t e a n d s t a b l e f i n d i n g s
c o u l d be drawn.

A f t e r e x a m i n i n g t h e s i z e o f t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t popu­

l a t i o n a t MSU, i t was d i f f i c u l t t o l o c a t e an a d e q u a t e s a mpl e t h a t me t
Wi l c o x ' s c r i t e r i a

for the

ideal

s i t u a t i o n for predic ting foreign s t u ­

d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .
A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r a t t e m p t e d t o pool t h e f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s over a period of fo u r years.
t i o n comprised a l l

As a r e s u l t , t h e s t u d y p o p u l a ­

f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s who we r e e n r o l l e d i n MSU

g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s bet wee n f a l l t e r m 1978 and s p r i n g t e r m 1982.
A f t e r t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n we r e d e f i n e d , t h e s a mpl e
was chos en i n a way t h a t would p e r m i t a d e q u a t e c o n t r o l

over t h e v a r i ­

a b l e s t h a t would d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y a f f e c t t h e m a g n it u d e of t h e
selec tio n device's v a lid ity c o e ffic ie n t.

To a c h i e v e t h i s g o a l , t h e

w r i t e r at t emp te d t o review t h e r ecor ds of a l l f o r e i g n g r ad uat e s t u d e n t s
who had c o m p l e t e d 12 o r more c r e d i t s .
d e n t s f r o m 33 c o u n t r i e s ( s e e T a b l e 3 ,

The s a mp l e i n c l u d e d 1,103 s t u ­
A p p e n d i x G).

Because of t h e

d i v e r s i t y of t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n w ith r e s p e c t t o E nglish
proficiency

a nd t h e

way

1n w h i c h t h e i r

previous

grades

had b e e n

r e p o r t e d , i t was d i f f i c u l t t o l o c a t e c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n on a l l o f t h e

83

i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s f o r t h e d e f i n e d s a mpl e .
However, t h e a v a i l a b l e s u b j e c t s w i t h c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n s e e m e d t o
f u l f i l l t h e p u r p o s e o f an o b j e c t i v e p r e d i c t i v e s t u d y .

( S e e T a b l e s 1,

2 , 3 , a nd 4 , A p p e n d i x G.)

P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a o f Gr a d u a t e Academic S u c c e s s

Predictors
B a s e d on t h e

study

h y p o t h e s e s a nd r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s ,

the

v a l i d i t i e s of t h e f o l l o w i n g p r e d i c t o r s were examined as t h e y were
r e l a t e d t o t h e c r i t e r i a of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a demi c s u c c e s s .
In tellec tiv e predictors.

The i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s exami ned

1n t h i s s t u d y wer e (1) TOFEL s c o r e s ,
age and s u b t e s t s ) ,

(2) MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s ( a v e r ­

and (3) t h e i n d e x of p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t

(IPAA) ( p r e v i o u s a c a d e m i c g r a d e s c o n v e r t e d t o a s c a l e s i m i l a r t o t h e
g r a d i n g s c a l e used a t MSU).

Further,

t h e w r i t e r a t t e m p t e d t o e x a mi n e

t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of f i r s t - t e r m GPA a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e school as
a potential

p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' l o n g - t e r m a c a de mi c s u c c e s s ,

a s me a s u r e d by CGPA and a d v i s o r s ' r a t i n g s o f s t u d e n t s ' a c a demi c compe­
tence.
N o n i n t e l 1e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s .

To ma x i mi z e p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y

and t o m i n i m i z e t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e s t u d y s u b j e c t s ' h e t e r o g e n e i t y on
t h e ma g n i t u d e o f t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ' v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t ,
s t u d y i n c o r p o r a t e d a number of n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s .

the

Although

mos t p r e v i o u s p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h has f o c u s e d on e x a mi n i n g t h e p r e d i c ­
tive validity

of i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ,

recent trends

in

prediction

r e s e a r c h have e mp h a s i z e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s .

84

Many r e s e a r c h e r s

have found t h e noni n t e l l e c t i v e

predictor to

be more

s t a b l e t h a n t h e I n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r 1n p r e d i c t i n g s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c
achievement

(Smith,

19 8 0 ;

Sokari,

1980).

Also,

1 t was f o u n d t h a t

c o n s i d e r i n g n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s 1n p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h 1s e f f e c ­
tive

1n I mpr ovi ng o v e r a l l

p r e d i c t i o n accuracy.

Th i s was p a r t i c u l a r l y

t r u e when n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s wer e used a s m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s
t o l o c a t e a s ubgr oup f o r whom a p a r t i c u l a r p r e d i c t o r o r s e t o f I n t e l ­
l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s p r e d i c t e d a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s mor e a c c u r a t e l y t h a n t h e y
d i d t h a t o f t h e t o t a l s t u d y s u b j e c t s a nd t h e o t h e r s u b g r o u p s ( S o k a r i ,
1980).
Accor di ng t o t h e f o r e g o i n g a r g u me n t ,

the w rite r attempted to

e x a mi n e t h e v a l u e o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' s e x , m a r i t a l

status,

age a t t h e

t i m e o f a d m i s s i o n , t y p e o f c u r r i c u l u m , and c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n i n p r e ­
d i c t i n g f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .
cally,

the u t i l i t y

More s p e c i f i ­

o f t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d v a r i a b l e s was e v a l u a t e d as a

p r e d i c t o r o f s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t and a s a m o d e r a t o r o f t h e
intellective

predictors'

validity coefficients.

C r i t e r i o n o f Gr a d u a t e
Academic Succes s
The c r i t e r i o n o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s i s one o f t h e uns o l v e d p r o b ­
l e m s 1n p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h .
research

1s

concerned

with

T h i s 1s p a r t i c u l a r l y
graduate

students'

A l t h o u g h GPA h a s b e e n f o u n d t o be a p r a c t i c a l
success a t t h e undergraduate l e v e l ,
a s s e s s i n g su cces s in g r ad ua t e school.

t r u e when s u c h

academic

success.

measure of academic

i t has been pr oven i n a d e q u a t e f o r
T h i s i s b e c a u s e a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s

85

a t t h e g r a d u a t e l e v e l I n v o l v e s v a r i o u s a s p e c t s t h a t c a n n o t be r e p r e ­
s e n t e d by f i r s t - t e r m or c u m u l a t i v e GPA.

F u r t he r mor e * t h e I nadequa cy o f

GPA as a c r i t e r i o n o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s 1s I n t e n s i f i e d when p r e d i c t i o n
re s e a rc h is concerned w ith f o r e ig n s t u d e n t s ' academic success.
add ition t o t h e shortcomings
s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s uc c e s s *
deficiencies,

In

i n h e r e n t i n GPA as a c r i t e r i o n o f American
foreign

s t u d e n t s ' GPA 1s s u b j e c t t o o t h e r

such as a d o u b l e s t a n d a r d i n g r a d i n g p r a c t i c e s and v a r i a ­

t i o n s among f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e d i f f i c u l t y of c o u r s e s
i n which t h e y e n r o l l and t h e number of c r e d i t s t h e y c a r r y each t e r m.
A l t h o u g h t h e p o t e n t i a l s h o r t c o m i n g s o f GPA a s a c r i t e r i o n o f
graduate s tu den t s' success are l e g i t i m a t e ,

GPA i s s t i l l

o f g r e a t i mpor ­

t a n c e t o d e c i s i o n maker s i n d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a p a r t i c u l a r s t u d e n t i s
a llo w e d t o c o n t i n u e h is program of s tu d y.
m a k e r s c o n s i d e r GPA t h e m a j o r c r i t e r i o n

Most a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n
a g a i n s t w h i c h t h e y ma ke a

j u d g me n t r e g a r d i n g t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f a s t u d e n t i n a p a r t i c u l a r p r o ­
gram.
B a s e d on t h e f o r e g o i n g a r g u m e n t * i t i s c l e a r t h a t GPA o f f o r ­
e i g n s t u d e n t s 1s w o r t h p r e d i c t i n g .

Accordingly,

the investigator

empl oyed f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' GPA as t h e m a j o r c r i t e r i o n o f t h e i r
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

Since th e f i r s t term i s a period of adjustment for

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s , and s i n c e s o me o f t h e m c a r r y j u s t a few c r e d i t s o r
e n r o l l i n l e s s - d e m a n d i n g c o u r s e s t o a c h i e v e t h e minimum g r a d e s r e q u i r e d
for continuation

1n t h e pr ogr a m,

f i r s t - t e r m GPA may n o t r e p r e s e n t t h e

whole p i c t u r e ab o u t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' lo n g - t e r m academic p o t e n t i a l .
First-year,

second-year,

and c u m u l a t i v e GPA we r e b e l i e v e d t o be more

86

reliable

a nd t h e r e f o r e w e r e u s e d i n a d d i t i o n t o f i r s t - t e r m

GPA a s

c r i t e r i a o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s 1n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .
B e c a u s e many r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e a r g u e d a g a i n s t u s i n g GPA a s a
me a s u r e o f g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s ,

the

investigator

also

a t t e m p t e d t o us e a d v i s o r s ' r a t i n g s o f s t u d e n t s ' a c a de mi c c o mp e t e n c e as
a c o mp l e me n t a r y c r i t e r i o n of d o c t o r a l s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

The

r e s e a r c h e r a l s o u s e d c r e d i t l o a d c o m p u t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s 1n t h e
g r a d u a t e pr ogr am a s a s econd c o mpl e me nt a r y c r i t e r i o n o f f o r e i g n g r a d u ­
ate students'

a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n and Data C o l l e c t i o n
The d a t a n e c e s s a r y f o r e x a m i n i n g t h e h y p o t h e s e s a n d r e s e a r c h
q u e s t i o n s were c o l l e c t e d from f o u r s o u r c e s .
d en ts' sex, age, m a r i t a l s t a t u s ,

Information about s tu ­

c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n , GPA, a n d c r e d i t

l o a d comput ed a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s 1n t h e g r a d u a t e progr am was c o l l e c t e d
from t h e s t u d e n t s '

p e r ma n e n t f i l e s s t o r e d

in t h e

university

c o mp u t e r .

I n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c g r a d e s was o b t a i n e d
from t h e s t u d e n t s ' perm anent f i l e s a t t h e R e g i s t r a r ' s O f f i c e .

The

t h i r d s o u r c e o f i n f o r m a t i o n was s t u d e n t s ' E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e t e s t s c o r e s
(TOFEL and MSU E n g l i s h t e s t ) ,

which wer e c o l l e c t e d f r om t h e i r f i l e s a t

t h e MSU E n g l i s h Language Ce n t e r .

La s t ,

advisors' r a ti n g s of doctoral

s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c c omp e t e n c e wer e c o l l e c t e d by means o f a r a t i n g s c a l e
d e s i g n e d by t h e r e s e a r c h e r .

( See Appendix H.)

Data we r e c o l l e c t e d unde r t h e s u p e r v i s i o n o f Dr. J a me s S t a l k e r ,
D i r e c t o r o f t h e En g l i s h Language Ce nt e r .

After t h e boundaries of th e

87

s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n and s a m p l e we r e d e f i ne d *

t h e s t u d y d i r e c t o r as ked an

o f f i c i a l in t h e main a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f f i c e t o p r o v id e t h e n e c e s s a r y
data.
To f a c i l i t a t e
i t y*

d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and t o p r o t e c t s u b j e c t s ’ anonym­

t h e r e s e a r c h e r d e s i g n e d t h e d a t a - c o l l e c t i o n c h a r t and t h e r a t i n g

s c a l e i n such a way t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t m i g h t I d e n t i f y p a r t i c u l a r
s t u d e n t s c o u l d be removed.

The i n f o r m a t i o n was g i v e n t o t h e r e s e a r c h e r

w i t h o u t any i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f I n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t s .

Method o f Usi ng P r e v i o u s G r a d e s a s a P r e d i c t o r
One p r o b l e m t h a t h a s p l a g u e d r e s e a r c h e r s c o n c e r n e d w i t h p r e ­
d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t has been t h e l a c k of
u n i f o r m i n f o r m a t i o n t o me a s u r e a c t u a l a c a d e mi c p o t e n t i a l .

The l a c k of

a d e q u a t e s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s and t h e d i f f i c u l t y of u s i n g p r e v i o u s g r a d e s
t o j u d g e s t u d e n t s ' p r o b a b i l i t y o f a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s h a v e f o r c e d many
r e s e a r c h e r s t o f o c u s on e x a m i n i n g t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y
t e s t scores.

However,

despite the difficulty

of E n g l is h

of i n t e r p r e t i n g f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s g r a d e s , t h e y a r e t h e mos t i m p o r t a n t me a s u r e used by
a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma ke r s 1n d e t e r m i n i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a d m i s s i b i l ­
i t y I n t o Ameri can g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .
I n s t e a d o f u s i n g o b j e c t i v e dat a* a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma ker s r e l y
h e a v i l y on e x p e r i e n c e and i n t u i t i o n t o I n t e r p r e t what f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '
p r e v i o u s g r a d e s mean in t e r m s o f t h e a c a d e mi c s t a n d a r d s o f t h e i r f o r m e r
schools.

Al t hough a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma ker s r e l y on f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '

p r e v i o u s g r a d e s when j u d g i n g t h e i r p r o b a b i l i t y of s u c c e s s i n a p a r t i c u ­
l a r p r o g r a m * l i t t l e e f f o r t h a s b e e n ma de t o e x a m i n e t h e a c c u r a c y o f

88

t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r t o d e t e r m i n e t h e v a l u e of such g r a d e s 1n making
a cc ur at e admission decisions.
In t h e p r e s e n t study* t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r a t t e m p t e d t o e v a l u a t e
t h e d e g r e e t o which f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' p r e v i o u s g r a d e s co u ld p r e d i c t
t h e i r academic achievem ent.

Ba s e d on p r e l i m i n a r y e x a m i n a t i o n o f a

sample of t r a n s c r i p t s * t h e w r i t e r found t h a t i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o use
actual

grades,

as they a r e reported*

t o p r e d i c t ac a de mi c a c h i e v e me n t .

T h i s i s b e c a u s e t h e wa y s i n w h i c h g r a d e s a r e r e p o r t e d d i f f e r w i d e l y
a c r o s s c o u n t r i e s a nd among u n i v e r s i t i e s w i t h i n e a c h c o u n t r y .

Also,

g r a d i n g s y s t e m s a r e so d i v e r s e t h a t none o f t h e t e c h n i q u e s us ed t o
e q u a t e Ameri can s t u d e n t s ' g r a d e s a c h i e v e d a t d i f f e r e n t u n i v e r s i t i e s i s
a p p r o p r i a t e f o r us e i n e q u a t i n g

foreign

students'

grades f o r purposes

of prediction.
However,

t h e r e s e a r c h e r n o t i c e d t h a t t h e g r a d i n g s y s t e m s 1n a

number o f c o u n t r i e s a r e s i m i l a r w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e s c a l e c a t e g o r i e s
used 1n r e p o r t i n g g r a d e s .

Accor di ngl y*

he assumed t h a t i f a s t u d e n t ' s

o v e r a l l p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c s t a n d i n g w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e g r a d i n g s y s t e m of
t h e school

from which he e a r n e d h i s d e g r e e c o u l d p r e d i c t h i s ac a de mi c

s t a n d i n g on MSU's g r a d i n g syst em* 1 t woul d p r o v i d e v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n
t h a t c o u l d be u s e d t o j u d g e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a d m i s s i b i l i t y

Into a

p a r t i c u l a r MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .
To t e s t t h e f o r e g o i n g a s s u m p t i o n ,

t h e t r a n s c r i p t s of stu den t s

f r o m c o u n t r i e s s hown i n T a b l e 4 , A p p e n d i x G, w e r e o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e
R eg istrar's Office.

The t r a n s c r i p t s

were given to th e r e s e a r c h e r

89

w i t h o u t a ny I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o t h e r t h a n c o u n t r y na me , c o u r s e t i t l e s ,
grades,

and a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e g r a d i n g s y s t e m.
To t r a n s f o r m t h e g r a d e s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s from v a r i o u s coun­

tries

in to a uniform s c a le ,

t h e g r a d in g system of each school

r e s c a l e d on t h e b a s i s o f a f o u r - p o i n t s c a l e .
G.)

was

(See T a b l e 5, Appendix

Then t h e r e s c a l e d g r a d i n g s y s t e m was u s e d t o c o m p u t e f o r e i g n

students' overall

p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c s t a n d i n g (IPAA).

Specifically,

the

s t u d e n t s ' g r a d e i n each c o u r s e was t r a n s f o r m e d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e
r e s c a l e d grading system of h is school.

Then a l l o f t h e t r a n s f o r m e d

g r a d e s we r e added t o g e t h e r and d i v i d e d by t h e number o f c o u r s e s t a k e n .
The r e s u l t a n t v a l u e was u s e d a s t h e s t u d e n t ' s i n d e x o f p r e v i o u s a c a ­
demi c a c h i e v e me n t .

Al t hough s uch a p r o c e d u r e had n o t been a t t e m p t e d

b e f o r e a nd t h e c o n v e r t e d p r e v i o u s g r a d e (IPAA) may o v e r e s t i m a t e o r
underestimate the student's previous achievem ent l e v e l ,

t h i s was t h e

o n l y p r o c e d u r e t h a t c o u l d e n a b l e t h e us e o f p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c g r a d e s as
a p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t i n MSU g r a d u a t e
school.
By u s i n g t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d p r o c e d u r e s ,

i t was p o s s i b l e t o

t r a n s f o r m t h e p r e v i o u s g r a d e s o f 346 f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f r om 12 c o u n t r i e s
( s e e Ta b l e 4,

Appendix G).

The a c t u a l

p r e v i o u s g r a d e s o f 127 o f t h e s e

s t u d e n t s wer e r e p o r t e d on a s c a l e o f 1 t o 100.

When t h e a c t u a l

grades

of th e s e s t u d e n t s were c o r r e l a t e d w ith th e c o rre s p o n d in g converted
g r a d e s (IPAA), t h e y y i e l d e d a c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 95 ( s e e T a b l e 7, p. 96) .
T h i s c o r r e l a t i o n s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n p r o c e d u r e was h i g h l y
c o n s i s t e n t and a c c u r a t e .

Therefore,

it

wa s

assumed t h a t

if

the

90

c o n v e r t e d p r e v i o u s g r a d e s c o u l d p r e d i c t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ GPA 1n MSU
g r a d u a t e s c h o o l # t h e p r o c e d u r e w o u l d be o f g r e a t h e l p t o a d m i s s i o n
d e c i s i o n ma ker s when j u d g i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ f u t u r e a c a d e mi c p o t e n ­
tial.

Also# t h e p r o c e d u r e w o u l d be v a l u a b l e f o r t h o s e i n t e r e s t e d 1n

a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e me n t .

Dat a A n a l y s i s
As s t a t e d e a r l i e r #

t h e s t u d y was u n d e r t a k e n t o e x a m i n e t h e

p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f a number o f p r e a d m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a used by a d m i s ­
s i o n d e c i s i on m a k e r s a t MSU t o j u d g e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' p o t e n t 1 al f o r
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s i n v a r i o u s g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .

After t h e av a i la b l e data

w e r e c o l l e c t e d a n d c ode d# t h e y w e r e a n a l y z e d i n l i g h t o f t h e s t u d y
h y p o t h e s e s and r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s .
At t h e f i r s t s t a g e of d a t a a n a l y s i s , z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n was
empl oyed t o comput e t h e

intercorrelation

c r i t e r i o n measures for the to ta l

of t h e study

study s u b je c t s .

p r e d i c t o r s and

Specifically# the

data a n a l y s i s a t t h i s s ta g e sought t o determine th e s e p a r a t e i n t e r c o r ­
r e l a t i o n s w i t h i n e a c h o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s a nd t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s .
Also# i t was i n t e n d e d t o comput e t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e i n t e l ­
l e c t i v e and n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s a s t h e y w e r e r e l a t e d t o t h e
c r i t e r i a o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s (GPA and c r e d i t l o a d a c c u m u l a t e d a t d i f ­
f e r e n t p o i n t s 1n t h e g r a d u a t e program and a d v i s o r s ’ r a t i n g s o f d o c t o r a l
students'

a c a d e mi c compet enc e) .

Be cause t h e s t u d y s a m p l e i n c l u d e d a number of homogeneous
s u b g r o u p s whose s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s may have i n f l u e n c e d t h e ma g n i ­
t u d e o f t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ' v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s when t h e y

91

wer e e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e t o t a l

h e t e r o g e n e o u s gr oup,

c o e f f i c i e n t was comput ed f o r a l l
analysis

was u n d e r t a k e n t o

r a te ly than fo r th e t o t a l

o f t h e i d e n t i f i a b l e gr oups .

identify

p r e d i c t o r o r s e t of p r e d i c t o r s

a separate validity

s ubgr oups

predicted

for

Such an

which a p a r t i c u l a r

a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s more a c c u ­

sample or th e o th e r subgroups.

The f i n a l

c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d b e t w e e n t h e c o u n t r y me a n s on t h e
p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i a .

In t h i s a n a l y s i s ,

zero-order correlation

was empl oyed t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o whi ch c o u n t r i e s ' means on t h e
p r e d i c t o r c o u l d p r e d i c t t h e i r me a n s on t h e c r i t e r i o n .

Furthermore,

r a n k - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n was used t o d e t e r m i n e how t h e c o u n t r y ' s s t a n d i n g
w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e o r d e r of i t s mean among t h e o t h e r c o u n t r i e s ' means
on t h e p r e d i c t o r c o u l d p r e d i c t i t s s t a n d i n g w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e o r d e r
o f i t s mean on t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s .
At t h e s econd s t a g e of d a t a a n a l y s i s , s t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s ­
s i o n was u n d e r t a k e n t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r some o p t i m a l w e i g h t e d combi na­
t i o n o f t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e and n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s would more
accurately

predict the foreign

students' c r i t e r i a

t h a n would ea c h p r e d i c t o r a l o n e .

Specifically,

o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s
t h i s a n a l y s i s was

I ntended t o d et e rmi ne t h e m u l t i p l e c o n t r i b u t i o n of t h e var io us p r e d i c ­
tors

in p r e d i c t i n g

foreign

s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t and t h e

e x t e n t t o which t h e i n c l u s i o n of n o n l n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s in t h e
r e g r e s s i o n model would e nha nc e o v e r a l l p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y .
a n a l y s i s wa s a i m e d a t d e t e r m i n i n g t h e m o s t p o w e r f u l

Al so, t h i s

predictor that

would c o n t r i b u t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f t h e d e f i n e d c r i t e ­
r i o n me a s u r e s f o r t h e v a r i o u s s u b g r o u p s and t h e t o t a l

study s ub je ct s .

92

S t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n 1s one o f t h e met hods t h a t 1s used
t o s e l e c t f rom a pool

of p r e d i c t o r s a small

s e t t h a t accounts for

a l m o s t a s much o f t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a n c e a s t h e t o t a l s e t o f p r e d i c ­
tors.

T r a d i t i o n a l l y , th e s te p w is e procedure gained wide p o p u l a r i t y

among r e s e a r c h e r s c o n c e r n e d w i t h p r e d i c t i n g s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s
b e c a u s e o f I t s p o w e r 1n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a t h a t
a c c o u n t f o r mo s t of t h e v a r i a n c e 1n t h e c r i t e r i o n measur e.
In t h e s t e p w i s e p r o c e d u r e , t h e o r d e r in which t h e p r e d i c t o r s
a r e s e l e c t e d t o e n t e r i n t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n i s u s u a l l y d e t e r m i n e d by t h e
r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n of each p r e d i c t o r t o t h e t o t a l
variance.

Accordingly,

possible explained

when t h i s method i s used t o s e l e c t t h e minimum

number of p r e d i c t o r s t h a t b e s t p r e d i c t t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s , one
mus t :
1.

comput e t h e s i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x b e t we e n t h e p o s s i b l e

p r e d i c t o r and t h e c r i t e r i o n measur e.
2.

s e l e c t t h e p r e d i c t o r with t h e h ig h e st c o r r e l a t i o n with th e

c r i t e r i o n and I n s e r t 1 t I n t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n model.
3.

e n t e r I n t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n model t h e n e x t v a r i a b l e w i t h t h e

h ig he st squared p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n with th e c r i t e r i o n .
4.

r e e x a m i n e t h e r e g r e s s i o n o f t h e p r e d i c t o r a l r e a d y 1n t h e

r e g r e s s i o n mo d e l a s i f i t i s t o e n t e r l a s t ,

and remove i t from t h e

model i f i t s p a r t i a l - s q u a r e c o r r e l a t i o n i s n o t d i f f e r e n t from z e r o .
5.

r e p e a t s t e p s 3 and 4 w i t h t h e r e m a i n i n g p r e d i c t o r s u n t i l no

more p r e d i c t o r s

a r e a d m i t t e d t o o r d e l e t e d from t h e r e g r e s s i o n model

( Dr aper & S mi t h ,

1979; M a r a s c u i l o & Levi n,

1983; P e dha z u r ,

1982).

93

Dur i ng t h e f i n a l

s t a g e of d a t a a n a l y s i s , t h e t - t e s t and one- way

ANOVA wer e used t o comp a r e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e mean o f
t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e p r e d i c t o r s
and t h e c r i t e r i o n

(MSU En g l i s h s c o r e s ,

TOFEL,

IPAA)

me a s u r e s (GPA and c r e d i t l o a d a c h i e v e d a t d i f f e r e n t

p o i n t s 1n t h e g r a d u a t e pr ogr am) .

The t - t e s t s we r e used when t h e com­

p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s i n v o l v e d t h e means o f two gr oups .

But when t h e a n a l y ­

s i s i n v o l v e d a c o m p a r i s o n o f m o r e t h a n t w o m e a n s , o n e - w a y ANOVA was
u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h v a r i o u s g r o u p s ' me a n s d i f f e r e d
from each o t h e r .

Then, t h e Tukey p a i r - c o m p a r i s o n p r o c e d u r e was used t o

d e t e c t t h e l o c a t i o n o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s when t h e ANOVA a n a l y s i s y i e l d e d
s i g n i f i c a n t differences.

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS OF THE DATA ANALYSIS

T o t a l St udy Sub. i ect A n a l y s i s

-

The main p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o e s t i m a t e t h e b e n e f i t »

in

t h e form o f a v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t

t o be g a i n e d from u s i n g a number o f

v a r ia b le s t o judge th e

of for eign graduate stu d e n t s'

probability

demi c s u c c e s s i n v a r i o u s MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .

aca­

Be ca us e g r a d u a t e s ch ool

a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n m a k e r s u s e v a r i o u s s t r a t e g i e s t o ma ke t h e f i n a l
admission decision,

and b e c a u s e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s who s e e k e n t r a n c e t o

t h e s e s c h o o l s a r e h e t e r o g e n e o u s , t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f common
a d m i s s i o n s v a r i a b l e s we r e e s t i m a t e d f o r a number of d i f f e r e n t gr oups .
S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f e a c h a d m i s s i o n v a r i a b l e was
estimated for the total
able.

s t u d y s u b j e c t s f o r whom t h e d a t a we r e a v a i l ­

I t was a l s o e s t i m a t e d f o r a number o f homogeneous s u b g r o u p s f o r

whom a p r e d i c t o r or s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s was t h o u g h t t o y i e l d more a c c u ­
rate predictive validity.

Because o f t h e l a r g e number o f c o r r e l a t i o n s

r e p o r t e d 1n t h i s s t u d y , t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n a nd d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e ma i n
fin dings i s l i m i t e d to those c o r r e l a t i o n s t h a t are r e l a t e d t o th e study
h y p o t h e s e s and r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s .

The r e m a i n i n g c o r r e l a t i o n s a r e

d i s c u s s e d when t h e y h e l p c l a r i f y t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h e mai n p r e d i c t o r s .
At t h e f i r s t s t a g e o f d a t a a n a l y s i s , z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s
were o b t a i n e d

( T a b l e s 7 a n d 8) . S p e c i f i c a l l y ,

9**

the analysis a t th is

95

s t a g e was d e s i g n e d t o e s t i m a t e t h e I n t e r c o r r e l a t l o n s w i t h i n and bet ween
t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s .

The i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s among t h e

i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s a r e s ho wn i n T a b l e 7 ,
reported correlations*
general*

37 we r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y

s e c t i o n A. Of t h e 43

d i f f e r e n t f r om z e r o .

In

t h e TOFEL s c o r e s a nd MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s ( a v e r a g e and

subtest scores) exhibited s ig n ific a n t i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s ,
from m o d e r a t e t o hi gh.

Further,

which ranged

t h e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s of t h e s t u d e n t

i n d e x o f p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t (IPAA) w i t h t h e TOFEL s c o r e s ,
and w i t h t h e MSU-English t e s t we r e u s u a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t and r anged from
low t o r o u g h l y mode r a t e .

Anot her f i n d i n g t h a t needs t o be me n t i o n e d i n

t h i s c o n t e x t i s t h e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 9 5 ° ^ b e t w e e n IPAA and t h e
actual

pAA.

Th i s f i n d i n g s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e s u l t s o f c o n v e r t i n g t h e

actual

pAA i n t o a u n i f o r m s c a l e (IPAA) were r e a s o n a b l y c o n s i s t e n t and

accurate.
The c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s a l s o e x h i b i t e d s i g n i f i c a n t I n t e r c o r r e l ations.

S t u d e n t GPA,

a c a d e mi c c r e d i t s a c c u mu l a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s

i n t h e g r a d u a t e p r o g r a m , and i n d i c e s o f a c a d e m i c a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g o f
s t u d e n t 's academic co m peten cies y ie ld e d o v e r a ll highly s i g n i f i c a n t
i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s ( T a b l e 7 , s e c t i o n C).
tions,

only

correlations

six turned out to

Of t h e 59 r e p o r t e d c o r r e l a ­

be n o n s i g n i f i c a n , t .

ranged from ,09 c t o .87c .

The s i g n i f i c a n t

The h i g h e s t i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s

wer e found among t h e i n d i c e s o f t h e m a j o r a c a demi c a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g and

^In succeeding pages, t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s a r e des ign at ed
as f o ll o w s :
a = p < .05
b = p < .01
c = p < . 001.

96

T a b le

7 , - - 1 n te rc o rre la tio n

i$
£
\

TOFEL

1
o

1 . 00

.37 C
100
1. 00

Grammar

£>
3

m
•-

c

u

*

3

»
<

j£
-

s a m p le .
*

*

*

*

-o t>

■a T3
L. 2
u V

T3 -O
t 2
° 2

*Q
i £
U *1

*■ “
° O E
*■* o

c
-

<
a.

. 16
46

.73C
19

J5b
268

< >o -

'o e
«*. <3
, 2 1C

268

. 0 06
266

.6 5C
550

.6 2c
469

M c
550

. 30c
551

.78c
551

.36c
166

.3 4c
340

. 1
124

.29c
513

,20c
513

. 17C
512

.6 3 c
<♦68

.38c

.7 8°
550

. 50c

5^9

.54c
550

124

. 35c
340

. 16*
124

- 25 c
512

. 22C
512

.48°
468

. 55c
469

,84c
469

,4 4c
165

.23C
296

. 09
107

.2BC
438

.27C
438

.36C
550

.72c
551

.45°
165

.06
341

. 04
124

.25C
515

. 72C
551

.49C
166

.29°
343

. 18*
125

. I8 C
517

.29C
340

.15 *
124

-.07
72
. 00

1. 00

1. 00
v

J

\

1.00

1. 00

In terview
IPAA

o f c re d its
c o m p le te d

“'-I 1<
<
c

<
-.02

2

QC -•

U.
A
£

£

266

.12*
237

. 03
272

.12
34

33

35

35

.23C
509

.20°
345

,20C
345

. 28c

-14c
545

.22

.13
52

.09

.09

547

.25*
53

53

53

.1 9C
511

.2 6 c
508

. ' 5C
345

. 17C
345

. 20c
546

.20

.04

544

. I0 b
544

53

52

.05
53

-.05
53

. 20c

.20c

.2 8c
463

. 7C
463

. 9C
466

. 19

294

.2 6c
294

.30*

437

.3 4c
435

45

45

,2 4c
515

. 14c
514

.2 8c
511

.19 C
347

,2 1C
347

. 17c
546

.ltc
546

.20°
548

.21
53

.2 2C
517

.09*
516

. 26c
513

. I8C
349

. 20c
349

.2 1C
550

. 13C
550

. 16C - . 0 5
552
54

. 32c
515

. 30c
515

.2 l c
514

.3 6c
511

■25C
347

.2 6°
347

. 30c
547

. 16C
544

.2 5C
549

.21
34

.2 6
157

,2 2c
157

.24c
157

.2 2c
157

. 26b
105

.13
105

.2 2b
169

.0 2
169

- 95 C
127

. 10c
327

.0 3
327

.04
327

.06
326

.12* - . 0 4
224
224

. 18C
346

.15*

122

.16*
122

. 10
122

. 10
89

.63c
965

.38c
962

.50c

959

.40 c
635

.25c
962

• 69 c
959
. 28c

I .14*
| 122

) . 00

1 . 00

GPA l - y e a r

959

i ts

1. 00

1 o f c re d i ts

545
.25c

.25

.26
12

-.36

10

.0 5
346

. 08
342

-.15
35

- .1 7
35

.07
35

-.02
35

.10
127

.02
12?

-.12

-.1 0

- .2 3
14

.14

.25C
635

.40°
965

.27 C
635

.4 7c
635

. 72c
635
.25C
635

17

14

14

14

. 12C
965

.07
959

.3 lc
110

,2bC
108

. 33c

.30'
111

.27 c
965

. 16C
965

.02

. 30c
100

. 36c

959

. 3 1c
110

112

. 33C
I 1t

. 15 C
635

.7 3c
962

.09c
962

.45c
109

.39c

. 33c

.31"

956

107

1 11

.74c
635

.27 c
959

.4 4c
959

. 5C
953

.2 2 b

.2 9 c
107

. 22b

. 16C
635

.91°

.06
635

. 06
632

. 56c
92

. 50c
90

.4 6 c
94

.4 0 c

635
. 12C
635

. 59c
635

. 5C
632

.08
92

.2 3 *
90

. 14

. 20c

109

112

11I

.2 6 b
1 10

93

94

.23*
93

. 2 4 c . 30c
1100
1093

.4 7 s

-43C

.33"

.29 '

110

106

112

111

1.00

-53c
1095

.17*

. 18*
108

.1 9 *
112

111

1. 00

.0 6

NO

1. 00

7j a

.2 2 *
112

. 10

108
.8oc
108

.eic
n o

.68"

. 70 c

108

. 8 1c
108

.00

,87c

-.04

1.00

TRC-A

53

126

110

ROAC-F

.15
53

1

©

R OA C-A

.23*
53
-.07
54

.1 4

CGPA

statu s

53
.03
54

-.02
171

1. 00

A cadem i c

.2 3 *

.2*
45

. 20

c o m p le te d

cred its
co m pleted

53

.25*
45

-.0 9

.17
52

1 .00

/ of

.2 3 *
52
-.12

.008

.25 *
53

1.00

GPA 2 - y e a r

111

109

1I i
i .00

TRC-F

^ S ig n ifican t a t
K ey:

° 1

.06
273

V

t

2
5

* c
a c
I 'I
g

V 3
e
< v>

.23C
183

. 28c

'l . 00

l-ter m

m l

1

e a
O. u
S "

.06
183

1. 00

PAA

*
< >■
O fV

•D

o o
O CD

.*48c
100

a

t o f c re d
comp I e t e d

< »S —

.33°
102

Wr i t >n g

GPA

to ta l

.22b
101

L isten in g

MSU-AETS

th e

,4 8c
74

1. 00

i ng

fo r

I

?•

cn
•<0

and c r i t e r i o n

.4 8c
100

1 . 00

V o c a b u la r y

R ead

b e tw e e n t h e p r e d i c t o r s

IPA A
PAA
R OA C-A
R Q A C -F
T RC -A
T RC -F

.O S .

^ S ig n ific a n t at .0 1 .

S ig n ifica n t at

.0 0 1 .

■ C on verted p re v io u s ac ad em ic sta n d in g
• A c tu a l p re v io u s a c ad em ic a c h ie v e m e n t r e p o r te d o n a s c a l e from 1 -10 0
- R atin g o v e r a ll acad em ic co m peten ce co m pared to A m erican s tu d e n ts
• R ating o v e r a ll acad em ic co m peten ce co m pared to fo re ig n s tu d e n ts
• T otal ra tin g com pared to A m erican s tu d e n ts
• T otal ra tin g com pared to fo re ig n s tu d e n ts

TOFEL

Gr a mma r

Vocabulary

Reading

Listening

Wr 1 1 I n g

Average

Interview
GPA
I-Term
o f Cred I t s
Completed
if

GPA
1- Y e a r
o f Cred I t s
Completed
if

GPA
2-Year
H of CredIts
Completed

CGPA

of Credits
Completed

H

Academi c
Status

ROAC C o m p a r e d
to American
ROAC C o m p a r e d
to Foreign
TRC-A

TRC- F

L6

98

♦

among t h e v a r i o u s t y p e s o f GPA c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s .
lowest i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s

In c o n t r a s t , t h e

we r e found bet ween t h e a c a d e mi c c r e d i t

l oa d

and t h e i n d i c e s o f t h e ma j o r a c a de mi c a d v i s o r ’s r a t i n g .
Contrary to th e foregoing

findings,

the

intercorrelations

b e t w e e n t h e 1n t e l l e c t i ve and noni n t e l l e c t i ve p r e d i c t o r s w e r e 1 ow o r
nonsignificant.
(age,

sex,

As shown i n T a b l e 8 , t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s

marital

status,

e t c . ) had a low b u t s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n

w i t h t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s (IPAA, pAA, TOFEL, a n d MSU E n g l i s h
te s t scores).

However, t h e s e x v a r i a b l e s e x h i b i t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s of

. 13^ w i t h IPAA a n d . 24 ^ w i t h pAA.

Also,

t h e age v a r i a b l e s y i e l d e d

c o r r e l a t i o n s o f - . 1 6 c w i t h IPAA and - . 1 5 c w i t h pAA.

These f i n d i n g s

Impl y t h a t f e m a l e s and young f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s t e n d e d t o have a b e t t e r
p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c

record than

di d ma l e s and ol d s t u d e n t s .

t h e p a t t e r n of t h e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s

bet ween age,

marital

Moreover,
status,

and

E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s s u g g e s t e d t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s who wer e s i n g l e ,
y o u n g , o r i n t h e Ph.D. p r o g r a m t e n d e d t o h a v e h i g h e r E n g l i s h s c o r e s
t h a n s t u d e n t s who wer e m a r r i e d , o l d , o r s t u d y i n g a t t h e m a s t e r ' s d e g r e e
level.
Al t hough t h e f o r e g o i n g f i n d i n g s a r e n o t d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o t h e
s t u d y h y p o t h e s e s and r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s , t h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n was n e c e s ­
sary

i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e n a t u r e of s i m p l e and m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s

bet ween t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s .
arity

( hi gh

Ex t r e me m u l t i c o l l i n e -

i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n among p r e d i c t o r s ) u s u a l l y l e a d s t o I mpr e­

c i s e and i n c o n s i s t e n t e s t i m a t e s of r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s .
correlation,

linear

or

nonlinear,

between

the

Al so,

intellective

hi gh
and

99

noni n t e l l e c t i v.e p r e d i c t o r s

( sex,

age,

etc.) always a f f e c t s t h e p r e d i c ­

t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e m a j o r i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s when t h e y a r e e s t i ­
mated f o r t h e t o t a l
predictors'

sample.

Therefore,

knowing t h e p a t t e r n o f t h e

i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n would p r o v i d e i n s i g h t

into in terp reta tio n

o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s ' v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t and s u g g e s t p o s s i b l e wa y s t o
i mp r o v e t h e a c c u r a c y o f t h e p r e d i c t i o n .
T a b l e 8 and s e c t i o n B of Ta b l e 7 p r e s e n t t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d ­
i t y o f each o f t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e and n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s a s t h e y
related to the criterion

me a s u r e s (GPAs,

a c a d e mi c l o a d s ,

r a t i n g o f t h e s t u d e n t ' s a c a d e mi c c o m p e t e n c i e s ) .

and a d v i s o r ' s

Based on t h e ma g n i t u d e

of t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s in t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d t a b l e s ,

the fol­

l o w i n g f i n d i n g s a r e s umma r i zed.
1.

The TOFEL s c o r e s y i e l d e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 1 5 ^ , , . 0 0 6 , . 0 6 ,

a nd . 06 w i t h t h e f o u r GPA c r i t e r i a , r e s p e c t i v e l y .

A l s o , TOFEL s c o r e s

showed c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 28c , . 21°, .23c , and . 12c w i t h a c a d e mi c c r e d i t s
c o m p l e t e d a t f o u r d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n t h e g r a d u a t e pr ogr am.

When t h e

i n d i c e s o f t h e ma j o r a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g we r e used a s c r i t e r i a of
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s , t h e TOFEL s c o r e s showed no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s .
2.

MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s ( a v e r a g e and s u b t e s t s c o r e s ) e x h i b ­

i t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h a l m o s t a l l o f t h e GPA and a c a d e m i c ­
l o a d c r i t e r i o n me a s ur e s .
nonsignificant.

Of t h e 56 c o r r e l a t i o n s r e p o r t e d , o nl y one was

The a v e r a g e o f MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s (MSU-AETS)

e x h i b i t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 3 2 c , . 2 1 c , . 2 5 c , and . 3 0 c w i t h t h e GPA c r i ­
teria.

Also,

i t y ie ld e d c o r r e l a t i o n s of .30°,

w i t h a c a d e mi c l oa d.

.36°,

. 2 6c , and . 16°

When t h e i n d i c e s o f t h e a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g we r e used

100

a s t h e c r i t e r i a o f a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s , t h e a v e r a g e E n g l i s h s c o r e s had
c o r r e l a t i o n s of .25a » .17,

. 2 0 , a n d .15 w i t h t h e f o u r I n d i c e s o f t h e

a d v i s o r 's rating.
3.

The I n d e x o f

previous

a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t (IPAA) had

c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 10c w i t h f i r s t - t e r m GPA (GPA 1 - t e r m ) ,
year,

and . 18° w i t h CGPA.

. 12a w i t h GPA 2 -

The r e m a i n i n g c o r r e l a t i o n s o f IPAA w i t h GPA

1 - y e a r , ac a d e m i c l o a d , and i n d i c e s of t h e a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g were very
low o r n o n s i g n i f i c a n t .
4.
s ch ool

The f i r s t - t e r m GPA (GPA 1 - t e r m ) a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e

e x h i b i t e d h i g h e r c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s t h a n

d i d TOFEL s c o r e s , MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s , a nd t h e i n d e x o f p r e v i o u s
a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t (IPAA).

As shown i n T a b l e 7, s e c t i o n B, GPA 1-

t e r m y i e l d e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 3 8 c w i t h GPA 1 - y e a r , . 4 0 c w i t h GPA 2 y e a r , and . 4 0 ° w i t h c u m u l a t i v e GPA.

Also, i t y ie ld e d c o r r e l a t i o n s of

. 63c , . 50c , . 25c , and . 1 2 c w i t h each o f t h e a c a d e m i c - l o a d c r i t e r i a .
When t h e i n d i c e s o f t h e a c a d e m i c a d v i s o r ' s

rating

of th e doctoral

s t u d e n t ' s o v e r a l l a c a d em ic com pete nc e were used as t h e c r i t e r i a of
a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s ,

GPA 1 - t e r m y i e l d e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f J l c ,

and . 30° w i t h t h e f o u r i n d i c e s ,
5.

. 26c ,

. 33c »

respectively.

Most of t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e

c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s w e r e e i t h e r l ow o r n o n s i g n i f i c a n t .
d i r e c t i o n of t h e s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n
and t h e GPA c r i t e r i a

However, t h e

be t we e n age and d e g r e e l e v e l

s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e s t u d e n t s who wer e young o r in

t h e d o c t o r a l program t e n d e d t o a c h i e v e h i g h e r GPAs t h a n t h o s e who wer e
ol d o r in t h e m a s t e r ' s pr ogram.

101

Al t hough mos t o f t h e r e p o r t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s

bet wee n t h e I n t e l ­

l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s we r e s t a t i s t i c a l l y
nificant

the practical

questionable.
criteria,

sig­

s i g n i f i c a n c e o f some o f t h e s e c o r r e l a t i o n s

1s

When e x a m i n i n g t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l

one can n o t i c e t h a t t h e h i g h e s t c o r r e l a t i o n d e t e c t e d bet ween

t h e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s p r e d i c t e d onl y a b o u t 10 p e r ­
c e n t o f t h e v a r i a n c e in t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e (GPA); 90 p e r c e n t o f t h e
v a r i a n c e r e ma i n e d u n p r e d i c t a b l e .

T h i s low l e v e l

of p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y

may be d u e , i n p a r t , t o t h e u n r e l i a b i 1 i t y a nd r e s t r i c t i o n o f r a n g e o f
t h e d a t a on b o t h t h e p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i a .

A l s o , i t may be d u e t o

t h e h e t e r o g e n e i t y of s u b j e c t s in t h e stu d y .

The s u b j e c t s d i f f e r e d

w i d e l y i n t e r m s o f s e x,
field,

marital

age,

country of o r i g i n ,

major

and t h e d e g r e e t h e y were s e e k i n g .
The a f o r e m e n t i o n e d

several

status,

s our ces of s u b j e c t

heterogeneity

represent

n o n l n t e l l e c t l v e v a r i a b l e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t a r e known t o be ver y

effective

in i mp r ovi ng o v e r a l l

p r e d i c t i o n accuracy.

These n o n i n t e l l e c -

t i v e p r e d i c t o r s suggested th e p resence of s e v e r a l d i s t i n c t subgroup
compositions withi n th e t o t a l study s u b je c t s ,

whose homogeneous c h a r a c ­

t e r i s t i c s may have i n f l u e n c e d t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a ’s p r e d i c t i v e
v a l i d i t y when i t was e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e t o t a l s t u d y s u b j e c t s .
t h i s pr obl em and t o ma x i mi z e p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y ,

To remedy

the following analy­

s i s s t r a t e g i e s wer e u n d e r t a k e n :
1.

First,

a s t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e - r e g r e s s 1 o n a n a l y s i s was u n d e r ­

t a k e n t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r some o p t i m a l c o m b i n a t i o n o f IPAA, MSU a v e r ­
age En g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s (MSU-AETS), GPA 1 - t e r m ,

and t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e

102

p r e d i c t o r s would r e s u l t

1n more a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n o f t h e GPA c r i t e ­

r i o n me a s u r e s t h a n woul d each o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s a l one .

Precisely, the

s t e p w i s e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r me d t o :
a.
p o we r f u l

I d e n t i f y t h e m a j o r p r e d i c t o r s t h a t wer e s i g n i f i c a n t l y more
1n p r e d i c t i n g t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s (GPA).

b.

D e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o which i n c l u s i o n o f t h e n o n i n t e l l e c -

t i v e p r e d i c t o r s i n t h e r e g r e s s i o n model would m o d e r a t e t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e
p r e d i c t o r s ’ v a l i d i t y and ma x i mi z e o v e r a l l
2.

p r e d i c t i o n a c c ur a c y.

Second, t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l - v a l i d i t y

p r o c e d u r e wa s u s e d t o

d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a p r e d i c t o r o r a s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s w o u l d be mo r e
a p p r o p r i a t e f o r p r e d i c t i n g t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r group t h a n
o f a n o t h e r gr oup,

and o f t h e t o t a l combi ned h e t e r o g e n e o u s gr oups.

Step-wise M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i on f o r t h e T o t a l Sample
In an a t t e m p t t o i n c r e a s e o v e r a l l p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y ,

stepwise

m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n was used t o e s t i m a t e t h e m u l t i p l e c o n t r i b u t i o n of
t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e and n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e a d m i s s i o n v a r i a b l e s in p r e d i c t ­
i n g t h e d e f i n e d GPA c r i t e r i a .

Because o f m i s s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on both

t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i o n (GPA 2 - Ye a r ) ,

the regres­

s i o n a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d on a n u m b e r o f d i f f e r e n t s t u d y - s u b j e c t
compositions.
The f i r s t

r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r me d on t h e t o t a l

s t udy

s u b j e c t s who h a d c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n on a l l t h e p r e d i c t o r s a nd GPA
c r i t e r i a (N=219, T a b l e 9).

Beca us e many of t h e s t u d e n t s c o m p l e t e d t h e i r

m a s t e r ’s d e g r e e b e f o r e t h e e n d o f t h e s e c o n d y e a r , t h e n u m b e r o f s u b ­
j e c t s who had i n f o r m a t i o n on GPA 2 - y e a r was l e s s t h a n t h e number who had

103

Table

9 . - - S t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i on s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y * t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r t o t a l s t u d y s u b j e c t s who had
c o m p l e t e d a t a on a l l t h e p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i a (GPA) (N *= 2 1 9 ) .
(A) F i r s t S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

Cr i t e r ion

Pred i c t o r

MR

R

B

(B) Se c ond S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

Pred i c t o r

MR

R

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m

MSU-AETS
Nat. S c i e n c e
Bus i n e s s
Eng i n e e r i ng

■30
. 38
.Al
.AA

.09
. 1A
. 17
.20

.27
.28
.19
.16

8.70
126
1 1A
87

GPA 1 - Ye a r

MSU-AETS
Commun i c a t .
Nat. Science

. 22
. 27
• 30

.0A
.07
.09

. 22
-.1A
. 13

2.50
-39
22

GPA 1 - t e r m
MSU-AETS
Commun i c a t .
Bus i n e s s

• 30
• 33
. 36
. 38

.09
.11
. 13
.1A

.26
.16
- .1A
. 13

• 9A
1 . 80
-A2
- 29

GPA 2 - Y e a r

MSU-AETS
E d u c a t ion
Nat. S c i en c e
IPAA
Eng i n e e r i ng

.21
.29
• 3A
• 37
.A0

,0A
.08
.12
.1A
.16

• 31
• 3A
,2A
.15
.1A

1.88
29
20
. 77
1A

GPA 1 - t e r m
E d u c a t ion
MSU-AETS
IPAA
Nat. Science
S o u t h Amer.

. 33
. 37
.Al
.AA
. A6
• A7

.11
. 13
. 17
.19
.21
. 22

.28
• 32
.22
.15
.13
. 12

. 55
27
1.36
. 78
11
-11

CGPA

MSU-AETS
De gr ee l e v e l
E d u c a t i on
Eng i n e e r i ng
Nat S c i e n c e

.23
.28
• 31
• 3A
.36

.05
.08
.10
.11
. 13

• 32
-.17
.21
.15
.15

2.03
- 13
19
16
13

GPA 1 - t e r m
MSU-AETS
Degree l ev e l
E d u c a t i on

■31
• 3A
. 37
.A0

. 10
. 12
.13
. 16

.26
. 22
- . 15
.16

• 52
'1 .Al
- 12
15

Key:

MR
R2
B
b

=
=
•=

*P
Table

Multiple c o rre latio n
Amount o f v a r i a t i o n o f c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e p r e d i c t e d by o n e o r mor e p r e d i c t o r s
Standardized beta
U nstandardized beta

i . 05.

1 0 . - ■Stepwise m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i buted
s i gn i f i c a n t 1y * t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r t o t a l s t u d y s u b j e c t s who had
c o m p l e t e d a t a j u s t on a l l t h e p r e d i c t o r s a n d GPA 1 - t e r m , GPA 1- y e a r , and
CGPA (N = 3 2 0 ) .
(B) Se c o nd S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

(A) F i r s t S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

Cr i t e r i on

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m

MSU-AETS
Nat. Science
Eng i n e e r i ng

.28
. 33
• 36

. 08
.11
. 13

.27
.19
.1A

9. 2 A
89
70

GPA 1 - Ye a r

Commun i c a t .
MSU-AETS
Bus i n e s s

.20

. 2A

-.22
.15
-.11

-60
2.07
-29

GPA 1 - t e r m
Commun i c a t .
Bus i n e s s

.27
• 32
• 3A

. 07
. 10
. 12

. 26
. 19

.27

.0A
.06
. 07

.11

. 10
-52
-30

Commun i c a t .
MSU-AETS

. 22
, .26

.05
.06

-.2A
.13

-A3
1.17

GPA 1 - t e r m
Commun i c a t .
Bus i n e s s

.32
.38
.A0

. 10
.15
.16

• 32
- .21
- .11

. 86
- 39
- 19

CGPA

*P 1

-05.

104

i n f o r m a t i o n on a l l t h e r e m a i n i n g GPA c r i t e r i a .
r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r me d on t h e t o t a l

T h ere fo re , a second
s t u d y s u b j e c t s who had

c o m p l e t e I n f o r m a t i o n on a l l t h e p r e d i c t o r s . GPA 1 - t e r m . GPA 1 - y e a r , and
c u m u l a t i v e GPA (N=320»
operations,

T a b l e 10).

In each of t h e r e g r e s s l o n - a n a l y s i s

the regression s t a t i s t i c

of p r e d i c t o r s .

was e s t i m a t e d f o r d i f f e r e n t s e t s

The f i r s t s e t c o mp r i s e d MSU-AETS, IPAA, and a l l

noni n t e l 1 e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s
country of o r ig in ,

(sex, m a r i t a l

and d e g r e e l e v e l ) .

status,

age, m ajo r f i e l d ,

The s e c o n d s e t

a d d i t i o n t o t h e f i r s t s e t of p r e d i c t o r s ,

of th e

included,

t h e s t u d e n t ’s f i r s t - t e r m

in
GPA

(GPA 1 - t e r m ) a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .
The r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s

fo r th e v a ria b le s th a t contributed

s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f t h e d e f i n e d GPA c r i t e r i o n a r e shown
i n T a b l e s 9 and 10.

Sect i on A of t h e s e t a b l e s p r e s e n t s t h e r e g r e s s i o n

s t a t i s t i c s f o r t h e f i r s t s e t of p r e d i c t o r s (IPAA and MSU-AETS) and t h e
n o n i n t e l 1 e c t i ve v a r i a b l e s .

S e c t i o n B shows t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c

f o r t h e s e c o n d s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s (IPAA, MSU-AETS, GPA 1 - t e r m ) a n d t h e
n oni n t e l l e c t i ve v a r i a b l e s .
According t o t h e r e g r e s s io n s t a t i s t i c s p res en te d in Tables 9
and 10, t h e m u l t i p l e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e combi ned p r e d i c t o r s was
higher than th e v a l i d i t y

of each p r e d i c t o r a lo n e.

In g e n e r a l ,

the

d i f f e r e n t t y pe s of p r e d i c t o r combinati ons y i e l d e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s
t h a t r a n g e d f rom .30 t o .47, w i t h a me di an o f .40.
m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s f r om combi ni ng IPAA,
l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ( sex,

marital

status,

S p e cific ally , the

MSU-AETS, and t h e n o n i n t e l -

age,

colleg e type,

c o u n t r y of

o r i g i n , a n d d e g r e e l e v e l ) w e r e . 4 4 , . 3 0 , . 4 0 , a n d . 36 a g a i n s t t h e f o u r

105

GPA c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s ( Ta b l e 9# s e c t i o n A).

When GPA 1 - t e r m was added

t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n mode l # t h e s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r y i e l d e d m u l t i p l e
correlations

o f . 38 w i t h GPA l - y e a r »

.47 w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r #

and .40 wi t h

CGPA ( T a b l e 9# s e c t i o n B).
T h e s e c o n d r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s pr oduced r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s
t h a t d i f f e r e d with

r e s p e c t t o t h e ma g n i t u d e o f t h e m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a ­

t i on #

and t h e o r d e r 1n whi ch p r e d i c t o r s wer e e n t e r e d i n t o

b e t a wei ght #

t h e r e g r e s s i o n model.

Ac c or di ng t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s

presented

i n T a b l e 10# s e c t i o n A, t h e f i r s t s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s e x h i b i t e d m u l t i p l e
c o r r e l a t i o n s o f 3 6 w i t h GPA 1 - t e r m ,
c u m u l a t i v e GPA.

.27 w i t h GPA 1-year #

and .26 w i t h

The second s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s y i e l d e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a ­

t i o n s o f . 34 w i t h GPA 1 - y e a r a n d . 40 w i t h c u m u l a t i v e GPA ( T a b l e 10#
s e c t i o n B).

Based on t h e c o m p a r i s o n o f r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s r e s u l t i n g

from t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d a n a l y s i s # t h e f o l l o w i n g f i n d i n g s were e v i ­
d e nce d:
1.

In general#

t h e magnitude of m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s r e s u l t ­

i n g f r o m t h e f i r s t r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s wa s h i g h e r t h a n t h a t o f t h e
m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s r e s u l t i n g from t h e s econd r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s .
2.

In both r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s # t h e se co n d s e t of p r e d i c t o r s

showed mor e power i n p r e d i c t i n g GPA c r i t e r i a t h a n di d t h e f i r s t s e t of
predictors.
3.

R e s u l t s o f bot h r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s d i f f e r e d w i t h

respect

t o t h e t y p e of p r e d i c t o r t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c ­
t i o n o f t h e d e f i n e d GPA c r i t e r i o n .

ALso# t h e y d i f f e r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o

o r d e r i n which p r e d i c t o r s we r e e n t e r e d i n t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n model.

For

106

e x a m p l e , when t h e f i r s t s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s wa s u s e d t o p r e d i c t GPA 1y e a r and c u m u l a t i v e GPA,

MSU-AETS s c o r e emer ged i n t h e f i r s t a n a l y s i s

as t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r o f t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c r i t e r i a .

In c o n t r a s t ,

second r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s produced unexpected r e s u l t s .
MSU-AETS,

the

I n s t e a d of

c o l l e g e t y p e ( c o mmu n i c a t i o n s ) came f o r t h a s t h e b e s t p r e d i c ­

t o r of t h e same GPA c r i t e r i a
4.

( Tabl e 10,

s e c t i o n A).

When t h e s econd s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s was used t o p r e d i c t GPA 1-

y e a r and CGPA, GPA 1 - t e r m and MSU-AETS emer ged i n t h e f i r s t a n a l y s i s a s
t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r s ( Tabl e 9,

s e c t i o n B).

In c o n t r a s t ,

t h e r e s u l t s of

t h e s e c o n d r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s s h o we d t h a t GPA 1 - t e r m c o n t i n u e d t o
contribute to the multiple correlation,

b u t MSU-AETS was dr opped from

t h e r e g r e s s i o n model ( Ta bl e 10, s e c t i o n B).
Accor di ng t o t h e f o r e g o i n g r e ma r k s , i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e s econd
r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s pr oduced a number of u n e x p e c t e d r e s u l t s .

However,

t h i s r e s u l t may be d u e , i n p a r t , t o t h e u n r e l 1 a b i 1 i t y and r e s t r i c t e d
r a nge o f d a t a on bot h p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a .

Al s o, i t may be a t t r i b ­

ut e d t o t h e p r e d i c t o r m u l t i c o l l i n e a r l t y ( hi gh c o r r e l a t i o n
predictors).

Green and C a r r o l l

bet wee n t h e

(1978) and Pedha uz e r (1982) s t a t e d t h a t

t h e p r e s e n c e o f mu l t i col 1i n e a r i t y among t h e p r e d i c t o r s may l e a d t o t h e
o c c u r r e n c e o f one o r mor e o f t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o b l e ms :
1.

Imprecise e s t i m a t i o n of t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c .

2.

D i f f i c u l t i e s in e s t i m a t i n g th e s e p a r a t e c o n t r i b u t i o n of a

particular predictor to multiple correlation.

107

3.
mo d e l

A p a r t i c u l a r p r e d i c t o r may be d r o p p e d f r o m t h e r e g r e s s i o n

Incorrectly

o r may e m e r g e t o

produce

unexpected

regression

coeff1ci ents.
4.

E s t i m a t i o n o f t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c may become i n c o n s i s ­

t e n t when comput ed f o r d i f f e r e n t s t u d y - s u b j e c t c o m p o s i t i o n s .

In such

c as es * t h e a d d i t i o n o r e l i m i n a t i o n o f a number o f s u b j e c t s may l e a d t o a
wi d e v a r i a t i o n i n v a l u e s o f t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s .
The r e s u l t s o f t h e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s p r e s e n t e d 1n T a b l e s 9
a n d 10 show a n u m b e r o f i n c i d e n t s t h a t a f f i r m t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e
p r e d i c t o r ' s m u l t i c o l 1 i n e a r i t y on t h e ma g n i t u d e o f t h e m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a ­
t i o n and t h e w e i g h t a p a r t i c u l a r p r e d i c t o r s h o u l d h ave r e c e i v e d in
p r e d i c t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r GPA c r i t e r i o n .

The emer gence of c o l l e g e t y p e

a s t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r o f GPA 1 - y e a r and c u m u l a t i v e GPA ( Ta b l e 10), and
t h e c l e a r v a r i a t i o n between th e v alu e s of th e r e g r e s s io n s t a t i s t i c s
( T a b l e s 9 a n d 10) a r e good e x a m p l e s o f t h e p r o b l e m s c a u s e d

by t h e

p r e s e n c e o f p r e d i c t o r mul t i c o l 1 i n e a r i t y , and t h e r e s t r i c t e d r a n g e of
d a t a on bot h of t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s (GPA).
D e s p i t e t h e p r o b l e ms c a u s e d by p r e d i c t o r m u l t i c o l l i n e a r i t y and
t h e r e s t r i c t e d r a n g e on b o t h p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i a , t h e r e s u l t s o f
the

regression

analysis

showed ( p a r t i c u l a r l y

the

first

o b s e r v a b l e i n c r e a s e i n p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y beyond i n d i v i d u a l
validity.

an

predictor

However, t h e h i g h e s t l e v e l o f c o r r e l a t i o n d e t e c t e d b e t we e n a

p a r t i c u l a r s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s and a p a r t i c u l a r c r i t e r i o n
correlation

phase)

was .47.

p r e d i c t e d o n l y 22 p e r c e n t o f t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a t i o n ;

r e m a i n i n g v a r i a t i o n was u n p r e d i c t e d .

This
the

The f a i l u r e o f t h e p r e d i c t o r

10 8

c o m b i n a t i o n t o ma x i mi z e p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y may be due t o h e t e r o g e n e i t y
of s t u d y s u b j e c t s .

As s t a t e d e a r l i e r ,

t h e s u b j e c t s we r e f o r e i g n s t u ­

d e n t s who d i f f e r e d w i d e l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o s ex,
t h e y we r e a t t e n d i n g ,

country of o r i g i n ,

marital status,

college

and d e g r e e t h e y we r e s e e k i n g .

These s o u r c e s o f v a r i a t i o n r e f e r t o a number of n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c ­
t o r s t h a t s u g g e s t t h e p r e s e n c e of s e v e r a l subgroups w i t h i n t h e t o t a l
subjects.

The h o m o g e n e o u s c h a r a c t e r o f t h e s e s u b g r o u p s m i g h t h a v e

i n t r o d u c e d a s o u r c e of p r e d i c t i o n e r r o r when t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e i n t e l ­
l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s was e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e t o t a l

study s u b je c ts ,

and

t h e r e f o r e r e d u c e d t h e m a g n i t u d e of t h e s a mp l e and m u l t i p l e e s t i m a t e s of
predictive validity.
A l t ho ug h t h e m e n t i o n e d n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s have been
found t o be l i n e a r l y u n c o r r e l a t e d w i t h bot h t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s
and t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s ,

t h e i r c o n s i d e r a t i o n in p r e d i c t i o n r esear ch

h a s b e e n f o u n d t o be v e r y e f f e c t i v e i n e n h a n c i n g o v e r a l l
accuracy.

prediction

E n h a n c e m e n t o f p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y was a c h i e v e d e i t h e r by

subdividing the to ta l

s t u d y s u b j e c t s on t h e b a s i s

n o n l n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r (moderator v a r i a b l e ) ,
subgroups s e p a r a t e l y ,

of a p a r t i c u l a r

and p r e d i c t i n g f o r each

o r by a d d i n g t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e

n o n i n t e l 1e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ( m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e s )

in t h e r e g r e s s i o n

mode l .
D e s p i t e t h e c l e a r i n f l u e n c e o f s t u d y - s u b j e c t h e t e r o g e n e i t y on
t h e magnitude of p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y ,

mo s t r e s e a r c h e r s

c o n c e r n e d wi t h

p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t have f a i l e d t o c o n t r o l
for its

influence.

Most i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have f o c u s e d on e s t i m a t i n g t h e

109

p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e on a h e t e r o g e n e o u s
g r o u p w i t h o u t c o n s i d e r i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e s 1n v a l i d i t y t h e s e l e c t i o n
d e v i c e m i g h t have f o r a homogeneous gr oup o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s w i t h i n t h e
t o t a l s tu d y group.

Consequently, s y s t e m a t i c d i f f e r e n c e s between th e

p r e d i c t a b l e and u n p r e d i c t a b l e g r o u p s i n t r o d u c e a t y p e o f p r e d i c t i o n
e r r o r t h a t r e d u c e s t h e m a g n i t u d e o f t h e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t and t h e r e ­
f o r e m i n i m i z e s o v e r a l 1 p r e d i c t i on a c c u r a c y .

R e s e a r c h e r s ' f a i 1u r e t o

c o n t r o l t h e s o u r c e s of s t u d y - s u b j e c t h e t e r o g e n e i t y , s uch a s s ex, c o l l e g e
type,

age,

and c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n ,

h a s r e s u l t e d i n l ow a nd m i s l e a d i n g

e s t i m a t e s of t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of s e l e c t i o n devices.
Many r e s e a r c h e r s c o n c e r n e d w i t h p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y have r e c o g ­
n i z e d t h e i n f l u e n c e of s t u d y - s u b j e c t h e t e r o g e n e i t y on t h e m a g n i t u d e o f
overall
control

p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y and have recommended a number of met hods t o
its

influence.

In a d d i t i o n

to

including

the

intellective

p r e d i c t o r s i n t h e r e g r e s s i o n m o d e l , many r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e a d v o c a t e d
subgroups a n a ly sis .

B a r t l e t t a n d O ' L e a r y ( 1 9 6 9 ) i n d i c a t e d t h a t "when

t h e n a t u r e o f t h e h e t e r o g e n e i t y can be i d e n t i f i e d ,

such as d i f f e r e n t

s e x e s , r a c e o r s o c i o - e c o n o m i c backgr ound, b e t t e r p r e d i c t i o n i s l i k e l y by
validating

separately

f o r each

i d e n t i f i a b l e gr oup" (p.

14).

They went

on t o say t h a t
The c o m b i n a t i o n o f h e t e r o g e n e o u s g r o u p s can a c t t o r e d u c e t h e a c c u ­
r a c y o f p r e d i c t i o n b e c a u s e of t h e i n t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t o f t h e h e t e r o ­
g e n e i t y on t h e c o r r e l a t i o n .
I mpr ovement o f p r e d i c t o r u t i l i t y s h o u l d
r e s u l t f rom s e p a r a t e v a l i d a t i o n on a l l p o s s i b l e gr o u p s [ r a t h e r ] t h a n
v a l i d a t i o n on one l ong h e t e r o g e n e o u s group, (p. 17)

110

Al s o, Krug (1966) a d v o c a t e d subgr oup a n a l y s i s . '

He w r o t e .

In v a l i d a t i n g a s e l e c t i o n t e c h n i q u e i t 1s a l w a y s d e s i r a b l e t o s t udy
a s many s e p a r a t e g r o u p s a s p o s s i b l e i n p r e f e r e n c e t o o n e l a r g e
h e t e r o g e n e o u s group. Holding N c o n s t a n t , a s e r i e s of c o r r e l a t i o n
c o e f f i c i e n t s , e a c h b a s e d on an i d e n t i f i a b l e s u b s a m p l e , i s a l w a y s
more i n f o r m a t i v e t h a n a s i n g l e c o e f f i c i e n t , (p. 34)

diction

In p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h ,

t h e f o r e g o i n g met hod o f i m p r o v i n g p r e ­

is

validity.

called

differential

Th i s met hod p o s t u l a t e s t h a t ,

i n a d d i t i o n t o random e r r o r of p r e d i c t i o n ,
tion error

a p a r t i c u l a r type of predi c­

i s c a u s e d by s y s t e m a t i c d i f f e r e n c e s bet wee n p r e d i c t a b l e and

u n p r e d i c t a b l e groups.
reduces t h e s e l e c t i o n
mi z e s o v e r a l l

When t h i s t y p e o f e r r o r i s l a r g e ,
d e v i c e ’s p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y

p r e d i c t i o n accuracy.

i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y ( s ex,

status,

lum, and c o u n t r y of o r i g i n ) were known,

age,

usually

and t h e r e f o r e m i n i ­

Since t h e s our ce s

marital

it

of het e ro g e n e it y

degree le v e l,

curricu­

f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s was u n d e r t a k e n

t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o which a s e p a r a t e e s t i m a t i o n o f p r e d i c t o r
v a l i d i t y would r e s u l t i n more a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n .

D i f f e r e n t i a l V al id ity Analysis
Based on t h e p r e c e d i n g a r g u me n t ,
tial

f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s s eemed e s s e n ­

t o c o n t r o l f o r p r e d i c t i o n e r r o r c a u s e d by s t u d y - s u b j e c t h e t e r o ­

geneity.

The p r i m a r y a n a l y s i s ,

sub ject composition,

along with the n atu re of th e study-

p r e s e n t e d c l e a r e v i d e n c e of t h e p r e s e n c e of a

number of s u b g r o u p s whose homogeneous c h a r a c t e r I n t r o d u c e d a t y p e of
prediction error.

This reduced th e i n t e l l e c t i v e predictors' validity

c o e f f i c i e n t s when t h e y w e r e e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e t o t a l
Therefore,

1n an a t t e m p t t o c o n t r o l

and t o m a x i m i z e o v e r a l l

study sub jects.

for t h i s type of pred ic tio n error,

prediction accuracy,

d i f f e r e n t i a l - v a l 1d i t y

Ill

p r o c e d u r e s w e r e p e r f o r m e d on a n u m b e r o f h o m o g e n e o u s s u b g r o u p s .
total
status,

s t u d y s u b j e c t s we r e s ubgr o uped a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r
age,

college type,

country of o r i g i n ,

sex*

and d e g r e e l e v e l .

s e p a r a t e e s t i m a t i o n of i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y

The

marital
Then a

was p e r f o r m e d

f o r a l l s u b g r o u p s t h a t h a d a d e q u a t e n u m b e r s f o r o b s e r v a t i o n (N > 10).
F u r t h e r , a s t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n was p e r f o r me d on s u b g r o u p s t h a t
had a d e q u a t e s a m p l e s i z e s (N > 3 0 ) .

T h i s a n a l y s i s wa s u n d e r t a k e n t o

e s t i m a t e t h e m u l t i p l e c o n t r i b u t i o n of t h e p r e d i c t o r s t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n
o f a p a r t i c u l a r s u b g r o u p ' s GPA c r i t e r i a

and t o d e t e r m i n e which s e t of

p r e d i c t o r s was mo s t a p p r o p r i a t e f o r p r e d i c t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r s u b g r o u p ' s
GPA c r i t e r i a .
Ta bl e s 1 n Ap p e ndi c e s A, B, a nd C show t h e p r e d i c t i ve v a l i d i t y
of t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s f o r t h e v a r i o u s s ubgr oups .

Al so,

tables

in Appendix E p r e s e n t t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s for th e i n t e l l e c t i v e
p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n of t h e
s u b g r o u p s ' GPA c r i t e r i o n

me as ur e s .

I n t h i s c o n t e x t o n e m u s t b e a r i n mi n d t h a t t h e m a g n i t u d e o f
m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n i s h i g h l y i n f l u e n c e d by t h e r a t i o o f t h e combi ned
p r e d i c t o r s t o t h e s i z e o f t h e sampl e.

P e dh a u z e r (1982) s t a t e d t h a t :

The d e g r e e o f t h e o v e r e s t i m a t i o n o f R i s a f f e c t e d , among t h i n g s , by
t h e r a t i o o f t h e number of i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s [ p r e d i c t o r s ] t o
t h e s i z e o f t h e sampl e. Ot h e r t h i n g s b e i n g e q u a l , t h e l a r g e r t h i s
r a t i o t h e g r e a t e r t h e o v e r e s t i m a t i o n o f R. . . . What t h i s means i s
t h a t when t h e n u m b e r o f p r e d i c t o r s 1s e q u a l t o t h e n u m b e r o f
s u b j e c t s m i n u s o n e , a p e r f e c t c o r r e l a t i o n w i l l be o b t a i n e d e v e n
when 1n t h e p o p u l a t i o n t h e p r e d i c t o r s have z e r o c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h
t h e c r i t e r i o n , ( p. 148)

112

To f a c i l i t a t e
tial

validity*

r e a d i n g and comparing t h e p r e d i c t o r s ’ d i f f e r e n ­

r e s u l t s o f t h e c o l l e g e and c o u n t r y - o f - o r 1 g 1 n

a n a l y s e s a r e s umma r i zed 1n T a b l e s 11 and 12.
each of t h e I n t e l l e c t i v e

predictors,

s ubg r ou ps

Each t a b l e p r e s e n t s ,

t h e range of t h e c o r r e l a t i o n

d e t e c t e d w i t h each c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e , a s w e l l a s t h e median.
t a b l e s show t h e number o f c o r r e l a t i o n s p e r f o r me d ,
nificant correlations,

for

Also, t h e

t h e number o f s i g ­

and t h e number o f s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s t h a t

were h ig h e r than th e c o rresp o n d in g v a l i d i t y d e t e c te d f o r th e t o t a l
study subjects.
Based on t h e ma g n i t u d e of t h e p r e d i c t o r s ' d i f f e r e n t i a l

validity

( t a b l e s i n A p p e n d i c e s A, B, a n d C) a n d t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s , t h e
f o l l o w i n g f i n d i n g s emer ged:
1.

Overall,

the

d i f f e r e n t i a l - v a l 1d i t y

i n c r e a s e 1n t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ' o v e r a l l
beyond t h e t o t a l - s t u d y - s u b j e c t

analysis.

analysis

l e d t o an

p re d ic tio n accuracy

In p a r t i c u l a r ,

the separate

e s t i m a t i o n s of p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r t h e v a r i o u s sub­
gr o ups o f c o u n t r i e s ,
an o v e r a l l
ther,
sex,

colleges,

and age c a t e g o r i e s 1n g e n e r a l e x h i b i t e d

i mpr ov e me nt i n t h e m a g n i t u d e of p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y .

the d i f f e r e n tia l - v a li d ity
marital

status,

Fur­

a n a l y s i s o f t h e d i f f e r e n t s u b g r o u p s of

and d e g r e e l e v e l

showed a number of i n s t a n c e s i n

which a p a r t i c u l a r p r e d i c t o r a p p e a r e d t o be more p r e d i c t i v e o f a p a r ­
t i c u l a r g r o u p ' s GPA t h a n t h a t of o t h e r gr oups .
2.

When t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ,

and d e g r e e l e v e l ,

sex,

marital

status,

we r e us ed a s a b a s i s f o r d e f i n i n g t h e s u b g r o u p s ,

differential-val idity

the

a n a l y s i s di d n o t i mpr ove t h e p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y

Table

11. --Summary t a b l e o f t h e p r e d i c t o r d i f f e r e n t i a l v a l i d i t y f o r t h e c o l l e g e s u b g r o u p s ( c o r r e l a t i o n r a n g e ,
n umb er o f s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s , a n d num be r o f s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s m o re t h a n c o r r e s p o n d e n t
study s u b je c ts).

#

GPA 1 - T e r m

*-.32-.39b
TOFEL

+8 ( 1 ) ( t )

Vocabulary

Reading

IPAA

H

of Credits
Completed

# of Credits
Completed

CGPA

- . 4 2 - .48b

.25

-.36-.29

.09

- - 3 5 - . 32 a

.28

-,20-.47b

.07

- . 2 7 - . 55b

.14

- - 1 8 - . 39a

.10

- . 3 8 - . 47a

.07

15c

8 ( 2 ) (1)

.28°

8(0)

.006

8(2)(2)

.21°

8(1)(1)

.06

8 ( 1 ) (1)

■2 3 C

8(1X1)

.06

8 ( 1 ) (1)

. 12a

-.04-.32

. I8a

-.17-.77b

.20a

- . 1 0 - . 46c

.27

- . 13 - . 7 1 c

.14

- . 1 3 - . 84b

.15

-.11 -. 48b

.10

-.01-.27

. 21

29C

9(3) 0 )

. 20c

9(5)(4)

• 17C

9 ( 4 ) (3)

.23°

9(3)(3)

,20c

9(4)(3)

. 20c

9(2) (I)

, 28 c

9 ( 0 (1)

. !4C

- . 0 3 - - **0 C

22b

.0 0 7 - .41c

,21a

- .1 l-.78b

. 11

- . 12 - . 6 2 a

,26b

- . 17 - . 5 1b

■3 2 b

- . 1 4 —. 8 0 b

-25b

-,03-.48c

. 12

- . 2 4 -.32

.16

9(4X3)

25C

9W (3)

•22C

9(3)(2)

.19°

9(5)(4)

,26c

9(5)(5)

. 15C

9 ( ‘■ M M

• 17c

9(3)(3)

•25c

9(1X1)

,10b

-.05-.62°

27b

-.07-.593

•29b

.28

-.01-.63

•37C

-.1 2 - . 54b

.40a

-.02-.58

• 35a

-.15-.55°

•33b

-.06-.403

■3 0 b

9 ( 5 ) (4)

28c

9(5)(3)

■2 7 C

9(4)(4)

.20c

9(7)(4)

■3 4 c

9(5)(5)

.20°

9(5)(4)

. 26c

9(6X6)

.28°

9(5X4)

.17°

-.0I-.493

22

,218

- . 1 6 - . 72b

.15

- . 3 0 - . 50c

.27

- .OM-,48b

,24a

- . 14-.689

.30

- - 1 3 - - 34c

.10

-.30-.36

.16

9(3)(3)

. 14c

9(3)(2)

. 28c

9(3)(3)

.21°

9(2)(2)

-I7C

9(D (I)

,llc

.10-.39
9(5)(3)

12

-.03-.46

.17

- . 1 0 - . 57a

.08

- . 0 2 - . 56c

18C

9(4)(2)

. 22C

9(3)(3)

•09a

5(4)(4)

S H Iu !

25c

-.01-.46
9(3)(2)

.26

-.04-.78c

• 193

9(4L(I)

. 30c

9(4)(2)

,21c

10

-.26-.17

.08

-.17-.45a

.08

-■32-.27a

10c

8(0)

.03

9(2)(2)

.04

8(3)(3)

33a

9(4)(3)

32c

-,28-.29a
8(0(1)

.15-.46

. 52c - . 83c
9(9)(3)
^Correlation

,04-.66c

,24c

.64°

GPA 1 - T e r m

Ke y :

GPA 2 - Y e a r

28 b

.09-.523
Average

o f Cred i t s
Completed

18

Listening

Wr i t i n g

ff

GPA 1 - Y e a r

9(5)(2)

I4-.420
G r a mm a r

o f Credi ts
Completed

m e d i a n , t o t a l number o f c o r r e l a t i o n s ,
c o r r e l a t i o n s d e t e c t e d on t h e t o t a l

•63°

,22c -.6 4 c
9(9)(6)

.44°
■3 8 c

. 1 0 - . 57C

• 19C

.26

-.08-.47c

. 21

-.11-.53

.24

-,05-.38c

.15

-.20-.43

.17

.26°

9(3)(3)

. I8C

9(3)(3)

.20°

9(3)(2)

,21c

9(2)(1)

. 13C

■3 7 a

- . 1 3 - - 72 b

•32a

- . 0 8 - .46c

.19

- -3 3 - . 42c

,22a

9(5)(5)

•2 5 c

9(6)(5)

.26c

9(4X4)

• 30c

9(4X4)

. 16C

.07

- . 50a - . 56b

.24

- . 54a - . 49a

. 01

-.I7-.54C

.18

- . 1 8 - . 34b

.09

.06

8(2)(2)

,123

8 ( 1 ) (1)

.04

8(4X4)

. 18C

8(1X1)

.05

. 42

-.08-.40c

,22b

. ^oc

9(4X4)

. 12 C

■3 8 a
■3 6 c

9(7)(4)

•34c - . 7 0 c
9(9)(6)

9(3)(3)

■5 5 c
•50c

.03-.65°

. 2 9 - - 57c
9(9)(4)

range and median.

T o t a l number o f c o r r e l a t i o n s .
( ) T o t a l number o f s i g n i f i c a n t
( ) T o t a l number o f s i g n i f i c a n t
Total sample c o r r e l a t i o n

correlations
correlations

higher

than

the

total

sample

correlation

.43°
.40c

.05-.64b
9(6)(5)

. 35c
•25c

.27-.56°
9(7)(3)

T a b l e 1 2 . — Summary t a b l e o f t h e p r e d i c t o r d i f f e r e n t i a l v a l i d i t y f o r t h e c o u n t r y s u b g r o u p s .
GP A

,i

:
i

32
-

TO^ EL

of

C r e r i i LS

GPA

C o n n 1e t e d

.21

.08-.1*5

•53

~ o' "

: - v e ; '■

Cred

- . 52a - . 5 fa

. 12

5 H ) (1 )

00c

-

C DA 2 - 'r e a r

C o ^ r 1e t e c

7

.05"-

of

C red•t 5

-

CGDA

Cor' ? 1e t e d

of

Credi ts

Conple!ed

-.28

- . C“ - . 5 o

• 32

- . 60-.66

.08

.08-

.Ob

5 ■:2 ' (' 2 *

•2 ; :

5 10 )

.0b

5 ( 0 ( 0

69b

. 12a

■2 5 a

-.37-.36

.17

13 f* 1 ; u ;

.20

1 3 ( 57.31

.28'

1 3 (2 1 ( 2 )

. 16c

. 21

- . 26- . 56b

_’ 5

- . 16- . 57a

. 22

- . 1 1-.37

. ’9

• 15C

12 ! 3) : 3)

. I"r

13 ' 3 ) ( 3 )

n-C
•2 b

13(0 )

. icb

.21*

- . 22- -55a

.23

- -3 0 - . 5?3

.23

- . 32- . 6; c

.26

. 20c

13(3)(3)

. 26C

13(5)(5)

.28c

13(3)(3)

. l ' :

5>a

.IP

- . 1 2 - . 8 Cb

.18

- . 16- . 51a

. 1A

- • 19 - • 37 a

_ 1c

5;

. lpc

16-.3) \3:

16(6) ( 3)

. i - C

16(3)(3'

I I

- , 2 f - .?.8 a

.22

- . 17 - . 5 r C

- . 28-.5 6 '

21

-2t :

16';'

. 1P C

16(6)(6'

1- -

. 21*

- . 18- . 6 ~ :

.2n

,36

16 ( 6 ■ 15 '

• 36

.

5'C)

j

-

1 - 7 e rrn

. 2 BC

. ’5b

5 0 ( 1

.33

-.05-.52

1q

- .O S -.81c

Jit

’3 (3 0 2 )

20C

13(2)(2)

17C

:

fc
' 0- . ^8b
Gra.-rjr-.ar
13

k}lk)

5(5) ' 3 1

. 2 1C

5 ;:)

- . 0 7 - .£ 2 C

. 11*

- . o f - . s r

.2 0

1 3 (3 1 *3)

7 7'
• *- J

13 f m ; U 1

.20C

.27

.
-.6 )-.6 2 '

. 26 c

1 3 (6 0 6 )

- . 1 Ci-

2 }

78c

.08-.5 2 '

j‘
i:
!
i

V o c a b u 1a r y

, 0 6 - . 6 BC

- . 1 6 - . 53b

.2 6

- . 1 7 - - (48a

06

-,2 6 -.6 7 C

11*

n ( 6 ) (6 )

•25C

13(5)(5)

22c

13(5M 5)

’ 9°

13 (5 O 5 1

- .\ 9 - .5 7 c

.20

-.3 2 -.5 7 b

21

-.2 0 -.5 5 C

11

-.16-.7R b

13 . 5 ) ( 6 )

, 28c

13(6){51

27C

1 3 (2 ) ( 2 )

20C

13(5)(6)

.

- , i 6 - . 6 Sc

. 29

- -1 5 - - 5 3 c

17

■26a - . 5 5 C

09

-,1 2 -.7 2 b

. 39

16(5)(5)

•25c

16(3)(3)

26c

16(2)12)

)AC

1 6 (6 ) ( 6 )

. 28c

-.0 ? -.6 0 b

.20

- . Ok- . 6 2 C

06

- • 3 6 - . 33b

I7

16

. 18C

I 6 ''2 l ( 2 )

. 22C

16 ; 2 O 2 '

09c

i
i
P-ead i n q
|

3

77

76c

1 3 0 0 2 )

Listening
j

1 6 ', 5)

„ jA

1 1 4

»

w

i
i
W- i t i r c

2)(?)

, 0 ) - . 66h
16(5)15)

1

i

i

. 35a

-,0 7 -.5 0 C

.13

- .0 - .7 :- b

1s

16(8 ) ( 8 )

. 32C

16(51(51

■3 0 c

16(6;(6;

: i c

1 6'503)

-. 2 3°- . 3 fa

. 1A

- . 3 6 ' - . 36s

.06

-. n - . 6f a

11

- . 2 6 - . 38s

11 :2 ) (2 ■

. 1 c,c

1 1 ■' ! I f I i

.03

1 1 ( 3 ) {3 7

C-L

! 1 ! 21 ! 2 1

IC -.5!C
Averagf

\

IPA.A

. ’f-.?C C
QPi

Ke v :

t-Terrr

16

Cor r c Ia t ion

ra m e

a nd

1 3 ) (g' i

7 r(c
83C

.03- .68c

. 20- .86c

- . 20- . 7 :
1615)(6‘

7cc

16 M 2 ! ( 8 1

c

-

.06

m

h
r r’
- 50'

-

'; ■
'

66i

r>c .

67

s a - ’r i i ? c r - r r p | a t i o r

co r re i a t io n r
c o r r e a t >on--

hiaher

than

tnr

total

sample

.20
.

o

1V , 7 . ( 3 -

cor r e t a : i o r

i:a

- .6 7 - . 6£8

22

1 6 ' 6 ’ .' 6

.20'

1 6 >6 ) ( 3 .

.2 !

- . C 6 - , 6 = fc

.27

- . C2 - . 8 0 C

• 1?

-. 12- . 66C

.22

16(6 ) ( 3 '

,2 ( C

1 6 ( 5 ) 1.5)

. 3GC

16(3)(3!

. 16C

- - 5 5 b - - 30

.0;

- . 13 - - 5 6 c

I'lO.I

.06

1 1 (6 ' ( 6 )

-

.77

-

r, U ~

median.

T o r a ! nu mn e- o f c o r r eI a I i o n s .
' > ’ n t o ' n' j t r hi ?r o ( > i n n ' f i c a n t
' ' ’ " ' t a ' n u n n e r o ‘" s i o n i f i c a n t

7C' “

1C

.?f0
.ACC

6 5 - .f ■

16 ' 6 ) 1 5

——c

.or-.
f.3 '

r

C

- . 0 6 - . 33a

.1 5

.tPc

25

11 ( 3 ) ( 3 )

.0 5

. v - fc

-

>0*

1 6 ( 3 ) (3)

53-

6 a tl

. 1C
. 12 ~

115

of t h e I n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s .
l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s (TOFEL,

For a l l

subgroups*

mos t o f t h e I n t e l ­

MSU-AETS* IPAA* pAA* and GPA 1 - t e r m ) e x h i b ­

i t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e s ame p a t t e r n o f c o r r e l a t i o n found 1n t h e t o t a l subject correlation analysis.

Howe ver * 1n t h e f o l l o w i n g

p a r t i c u l a r p r e d i c t o r showed d i f f e r e n t i a l
a.

For s e x - s u b g r o u p a n a l y s i s ,

instances a

validity.

f e m a l e s ' IPAA and pAA e x h i b i t e d

a c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r and CGPA t h a t was h i g h e r t h a n t h e v a l i d ­
i t y e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e m a le group and t h e t o t a l
females,

study su b je c ts.

For

IPAA showed c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 36b w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r and , 35c w i t h

CGPA, c o m p a r e d t o . 06 a n d . 1 3 a f o r t h e m a l e g r o u p a n d . ! 2 a a n d . 1 8 c f o r
t h e t o t a l sample.

A l s o , f em al e s ' pAA exh i bi t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .3 1a ,

. 4 3 b, . 5 4 b , a n d . 5 1 c w i t h t h e f o u r GPA c r i t e r i a , c o m p a r e d t o . 1 3 , . 1 2 ,
.04,
total

and . 0 4 f o r t h e m a l e g r o u p a nd . 1 4 a , . 1 6 a , . 1 0 , a n d . 10 f o r t h e
s a mp l e (Appendix A, T a b l e s 1 and 2).
b.

Doctoral

s t u d e n t s ' TOFEL s c o r e s e x h i b i t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f

. 3 8 ° w i t h GPA 1 - t e r m , . 2 3 a w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r , a n d . 2 3 a w i t h c u m u l a t i v e
GPA, c o m p a r e d t o . 0 4 , - . 0 0 3 ,

a nd - . 0 2 f o r s t u d e n t s

1n t h e m a s t e r ' s

p r o g r a m a n d . 1 5 b , . 06, a n d . 06 f o r t h e t o t a l s t u d y s u b j e c t s ( A p p e n d i x
A, Tabl e s 5 and 6) .
c.

Doc t or a l

s t u d e n t s ' GPA 1 - t e r m showed a c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 50°

w i t h CGPA, c o m p a r e d t o . 3 7 c f o r s t u d e n t s 1n t h e m a s t e r ' s p r o g r a m a n d
•40c f o r t h e t o t a l
d.

s ampl e.

The p a t t e r n

of th e subgroups' re g re ssio n s t a t i s t i c

e s s e n t i a l l y c o n s i s t e n t with t h e t o t a l
The m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n

was

sample's re g ressio n s t a t i s t i c .

f r o m t h e f i r s t s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s (MSU-AETS,

116

IPAA,

and t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ) and t h e second s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s

(MSU-AETS,

IPAA, GPA 1 - t e r m ,

and t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e

s im ila r to those detected for the total

predictors)

study subject s.

However,

wer e
the

f i n d i n g s p r e s e n t e d i n Appendix E showed a number o f i n s t a n c e s i n which
t h e s econd s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s e x h i b i t e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s t h a t wer e
h i g h e r f o r a p a r t i c u l a r group t h a n a n o t h e r .

Accor di ng t o t h e r e s u l t s

of t h e s e x - s u b g ro u p a n a l y s i s , t h e second s e t of p r e d i c t o r s e x h i b i t e d
m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .45 w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r a n d . 40 w i t h CGPA f o r
females,

compar ed t o .37 and . 32 f o r ma l es .

The same s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s

s h o w e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 38 w i t h GPA 1 - y e a r , . 40 w i t h GPA 2 y e a r , and . 3 8 w i t h CGPA f o r t h e m a r r i e d g r o u p , c o m p a r e d t o . 2 1 , . 3 0 ,
a n d . 28 f o r t h e s i n g l e g r o u p .

F u rth e r , th e second s e t of p r e d i c t o r s

y i e l d e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 43 w i t h GPA 1 - y e a r , .4 8 w i t h GPA 2 y e a r , a n d . 40 w i t h CGPA f o r d o c t o r a l s t u d e n t s , c o m p a r e d t o . 2 2 , . 27,
and .31 f o r m a s t e r ’s s t u d e n t s .
predictor;

i n one i n s t a n c e ,

In mo s t c a s e s ,

GPA 1 - t e r m was t h e b e s t

f e m a l e IPAA emer ged a s t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r

o f GPA 2 - y e a r .
3.

When t h e t o t a l

t h e i r a ge a t t h e t i m e o f a d m i s s i o n ,
showed an o v e r a l l
Tables 7-9,

s t u d y s u b j e c t s we r e d i v i d e d on t h e b a s i s o f
t h e di f f e r e n t i a l - v a l i d i t y a n a l y s i s

i n c r e a s e in t h e p r e d i c t o r s ’ p r e d i c t i o n accuracy (see

Appendi x A).

A number o f p r e d i c t o r s emerged t o show more

p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f t h e y o u n g g r o u p ' s GPA t h a n t h e y d i d f o r t h e o l d e r
group and t h e t o t a l

sampl e.

S p e c i f i c a l l y , MSU-AETS showed c o r r e l a t i o n s

o f . 3 3 ^ w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r a n d . 4 5 ° w i t h CGPA f o r t h e y o u n g g r o u p , com­
p a r e d t o , 1 3 a a n d . 1 4 a , , 2 7 b a n d . 1 7 a , a n d . 2 9 a a n d .05 f o r t h e o l d e r

117

gr oups .

Also,

GPA 1 - t e r m e x h i b i t e d a c o r r e l a t i o n o f . 47c w i t h CGPA of

t h e young group c om p a r e d t o . 4 1 c , . 3 4 c , and . 46° f o r t h e o l d e r g r o u p s
a nd . 40 f o r t h e t o t a l

subjects.

Further,

the p red ic to r's m ultiple

c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n of GPA 2 - y e a r was h i g h e r f o r t h e young
group.

The s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r showed a m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n o f .56

f o r t h e y o u n g g r o u p c o m p a r e d t o . 3 3 , . 3 8 , a n d . 47 f o r t h e o l d e r g r o u p s
and t h e t o t a l
overall

s u b j e c t s (see Tables 8-10,

Appendix E).

In g e n e r a l ,

the

r e s u l t o f t h e a g e - s u b g r o u p a n a l y s i s showed t h e young group t o

be m o r e p r e d i c t a b l e t h a n t h e o l d e r g r o u p .

T h i s r e s u l t s e e m s t o be

c o n s i s t e n t w i t h c o r r e l a t i o n s of t h e age v a r i a b l e w i t h t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n
m e a s u r e s ( s e e T a b l e 8, p. 97).
4.

College-subgroup analyses (d if f e r e n tia l

validity)

r e s u l t e d i n mor e a c c u r a t e e s t i m a t i o n s of t h e p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y c o e f f i ­
c i e n t t h a n di d t h e t o t a l - s t u d y - s u b j e c t a n a l y s e s .

The s e p a r a t e e s t i m a ­

t i o n s o f t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s l e d t o an
observable inc re as e in o v er al l

p r e d i c t i o n accuracy.

The f i n d i n g s p r e ­

s e n t e d i n T a b l e s 1- 9,

Appendi x C,

d i c t o r s d i f f e r e d with

r e s p e c t t o t h e i r power in p r e d i c t i n g t h e GPA of

s tu d e n t s in a p a r t i c u l a r col lege.

i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e pre­

C e r t a i n p r e d i c t o r s showed more power

t h a n o t h e r s i n p r e d i c t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r GPA o f s t u d e n t s i n a s p e c i f i c
college.

Whereas t h e TOFEL s c o r e c o n t i n u e d t o e x h i b i t t h e same p a t t e r n

of c o r r e l a t i o n d etected fo r t h e t o t a l

s a mp l e ,

IPAA,

MSU-AETS,

and GPA

1 - t e r m t e n d e d t o e x h i b i t c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h GPA t h a t w e r e h i g h e r f o r
some c o l l e g e s t h a n o t h e r s

and f o r t h e t o t a l

study s u b j e c t s .

Based on

t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l v a l i d i t y s u m m a r y ( T a b l e 11) a n d t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e

also

118

available

regression s t a t i s t i c s

f o r c o l l e g e s t h a t h ad an a d e q u a t e

number of s t u d e n t s w i t h c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n *

th e follow ing general

findings are cited:
a.

The TOFEL s c o r e e x h i b i t e d t h e s a m e p a t t e r n

co efficien ts for all
sis.

of v a l i d i t y

c o l l e g e s a s was f ound 1n t h e t o t a l - s u b j e c t a n a l y ­

The v a r i o u s e s t i m a t e s o f t h e TOFEL' s p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y s h o we d

o n l y a f ew i n s t a n c e s 1n w h i c h i t e x h i b i t e d m o r e p o w e r i n p r e d i c t i n g a
p a r t i c u l a r GPA of s t u d e n t s in a s p e c i f i c c o l l e g e t h a n 1n o t h e r c o l l e g e s
o r of t h e t o t a l
b.

study sub jects .

Unl i ke t h e TOFEL s c o r e ,

t h e MSU-AETS showed s e v e r a l t i m e s a

v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t t h a t was h i g h e r f o r a p a r t i c u l a r c o l l e g e t h a n f o r
othe r co l le g es or for t h e t o t a l

study su bject s.

Of t h e 36 c o r r e l a t i o n s

p e r f o r me d bet ween MSU-AETS and t h e f o u r GPA c r i t e r i a ,
c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from z e r o .

17 wer e s i g n i f i ­

Of t h e 17 s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s ,

higher than the c o r r e l a t i o n e s ti m a t e d f o r th e t o t a l

14 wer e

study subjects.

The

r e m a i n i n g c o r r e l a t i o n s we r e a l m o s t a l w a y s p o s i t i v e b u t we r e n o t s t a t i s ­
t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t because of c o l l e g e s i z e .
c.

Al t hough t h e IPAA c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h t o t a l - s t u d y - s u b j e c t GPAs

d i d n o t e x c e e d .18, t h e summary of t h e c o l l e g e d l f f e r e n t i a l - v a l i d i t y
a n a l y s i s p r e s e n t e d 1n T a b l e 11 s h o we d a n u m b e r o f I n s t a n c e s i n w h i c h
IPAA e x h i b i t e d s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h GPA t h a t we r e h i g h e r t h a n
the co rrelatio n estim ated

for the to tal

sample.

In g e n e r a l ,

IPAA

s h o w e d m o r e p o w e r i n p r e d i c t i n g CGPA i n c o l l e g e s s u c h a s b u s i n e s s ,
a g r i c u l t u r e , and s o c i a l s c i e n c e .

As p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e s 1, 3 , and 9 ,

119

A p p e n d i x C, IPAA e x h i b i t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 5 4 ° , . 4 5 c , a nd , 3 3 b w i t h
CGPA o f t h e s t u d e n t s 1n t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c o l l e g e s ,
d.

respectively.

GPA 1 - t e r m a c h i e v e d 1n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l

p r e d i c t o r o f s t u d e n t CGPA i n t h e v a r i o u s c o l l e g e s .

was t h e b e s t

According to th e

d i f f e r e n t i a l - v a l i d l t y summary p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 11, GPA 1 - t e r m showed
25 o u t o f 27 c o r r e l a t i o n s t h a t wer e s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f r om z e r o .
Of t h e 25 s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s ,

13 w e r e h i g h e r t h a n t h e t h o s e

r e s u l t i n g fr om t h e t o t a l - s t u d y - s u b j e c t a n a l y s i s .

Mor eover , t h e c o r r e ­

l a t i o n s o f GPA 1 - t e r m w i t h CGPA r anged from .27° t o . 56c , w i t h a median
o f . 42c.
that

Thi s s u g g e s t s t h a t GPA 1 - t e r m y i e l d e d a d e q u a t e u n i f o r m d a t a

are appropriate for

predicting

foreign

s t u d e n t s ' f u t u r e a c a de mi c

success.
e.

The r eg r e s s i on s t a t i s t i c e s t i m a t e d f o r c o l 1 e g e s w 1t h a d e ­

q u a t e o b s e r v a t i o n s s h o w e d an o v e r a l l i n c r e a s e i n p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y
beyond t h e t o t a l - s t u d y - s u b j e c t r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s .
c o r r e l a t i o n s f r om GPA 1 - t e r m ,
predictors

r anged from

MSU-AETS,

.33 t o .78.

IPAA,

The m u l t i p l e

and t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e

The s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r e x h i b ­

i t e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .47 w i t h GPA 1 - y e a r ,
and .72 w i t h CGPA f o r e n g i n e e r i n g s t u d e n t s .

.61 w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r ,

Also, t h e y showed m u l t i p l e

c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 8 8 , . 7 5 , a n d . 78 a g a i n s t t h e t h r e e c r i t e r i a , r e s p e c ­
tively,

f o r s t u d e n t s 1n t h e b u s i n e s s c o l l e g e .

F u r t h e r , t h e same s e t of

p r e d i c t o r s had m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .30, .38,
. 72,

a n d . 3 6 , a n d . 33 ,

and .60 a g a i n s t t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c r i t e r i a f o r s t u d e n t s i n n a t u ­

r a l s c i e n c e and a g r i c u l t u r e ,

respectively.

In mo s t s i t u a t i o n s , GPA 1-

120

t e r m and MSU-AETS we r e t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r s , e x c e p t 1n t w o s i t u a t i o n s 1n
whi ch s e x emer ged a s t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r ( Ta bl e s 11—14* Appendix E).
5.

When t h e t o t a l

s t u d y s u b j e c t s wer e s ub gr ouped on t h e b a s i s

o f c o u n t r y of o r i g i n , t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l a n a l y s i s l e d t o more a c c u r a t e
e s t i m a t i o n of th e I n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t .

As p r e ­

s e n t e d i n T a b l e s 1- 14, Appendix B, a number of I n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s
emer ged t o show more power 1n p r e d i c t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r GPA o f s t u d e n t s
f r om a p a r t i c u l a r c o u n t r y t h a n f rom o t h e r c o u n t r i e s .

The f i n d i n g s a l s o

showed a number o f i n s t a n c e s 1n which a p a r t i c u l a r p r e d i c t o r e x h i b i t e d
a h i g h e r p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t of a p a r t i c u l a r GPA t h a n i t s
validity

estimated

for

t h e combined study s u b j e c t s .

s e p a r a t e e s t i m a t i o n of t h e p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t ,
of th e

d i f f e r e n t i a l - v a l 1di t y

analysis

( Tabl e 12),

Ba s e d on t h e
t h e summary

and r e g r e s s i o n s t a ­

t i s t i c s e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e c o u n t r i e s w i t h a d e q u a t e number s o f o b s e r v a ­
t i o n s w i t h c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i a , t h e
f o l l o w i n g f i n d i n g s a r e s umma r i z e d ( T a b l e s 11-14, Appendi x E)„
a.

The TOFEL s c o r e e x h i b i t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e same p a t t e r n of

c o r r e l a t i o n f ound i n t h e t o t a l - s t u d y - s u b j e c t a n a l y s i s f o r a l l c o u n t r i e s
e x c e p t China.

A c c o r d i n g t o t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e di f f e r e n t i a l - v a l 1 d i t y

a n a l y s i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 2 , A p p e n d i x B, t h e TOFEL s c o r e y i e l d e d
c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 1 7 , . 1 7 , . 3 1 a , a nd . 2 5 a w i t h t h e f o u r GPA c r i t e r i a o f
t h e Ch i n e s e s t u d e n t s .
b.

The MSU-AETS s h o w e d a c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e GPA c r i t e r i a

t h a t d i f f e r e d ma r k e d l y a c r o s s t h e v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s .

Of t h e 52 c o r r e ­

l a t i o n s comput ed be t we e n t h e MSU-AETS and t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s of

121

s t u d e n t s from t h e v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s , 23 c o r r e l a t i o n s w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y
d i f f e r e n t f r om z e r o .

Of t h o s e s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s , 22 we r e h i g h e r

t h a n t h e MSU-AETS e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e t o t a l

study s u bj ec t s .

In g e n e r a l ,

MSU-AETS s e e m e d t o be m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r p r e d i c t i n g t h e GPAs o f
s t u d e n t s from G r e e c e , K u w a i t , I n d o n e s i a , V e n e z u e l a , Mexico, J o r d a n ,
Iran,

a n d S o u t h Ko r e a ( T a b l e s

14, 9 ,

10, 7 ,

a n d 12,

respectively,

A p p e n d l x B).
c.

IPAA o f s t u d e n t s f r o m C h i n a , B r a z i l , a nd J a p a n e x h i b i t e d

a d e q u a t e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s .
t o t h e di f f e r e n t i a l - v a l 1 d i t y a n a l y s i s summary ( Ta b l e 12),
more power 1n p r e d i c t i n g CGPA.
IPAA and CGPA o f

students

Accor di ng
IPAA showed

Of t h e 11 c o r r e l a t i o n s comput ed bet ween
from t h e v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s ,

four

were

s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from z e r o and h i g h e r t h a n t h e v a l i d i t y e s t i ­
mat ed on t h e t o t a l
d.

study subjects.

GPA 1 - t e r m was t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r which showed a hi gh con­

s i s t e n c y 1n p r e d i c t i n g t h e CGPA o f s t u d e n t s f r o m v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s .
Accor di ng t o t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l - v a l 1 d 1 t y
t h r o u g h 14,

a n a l y s i s p r e s e n t e d 1n T a b l e s 1

Appendix B, GPA 1 - t e r m y i e l d e d a hi gh p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y

o f t h e CGPA o f s t u d e n t s f r o m C h i n a , M e x i c o , J a p a n , I n d i a , I r a n , T h a i ­
land,

and Sout h Korea.

In c o n t r a s t ,

t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f GPA 1-

t e r m f o r s t u d e n t s from t h e r e m a i n i n g c o u n t r i e s was n e g a t i v e o r n o n s i g ­
nificant.
e.

The r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c o f t h e f i r s t a n d s e c o n d s e t o f

p r e d i c t o r s e s t i m a t e d f o r s t u d e n t s f r om China,

Sout h Korea,

and J a pa n

showed an i n c r e a s e i n t h e s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s ' m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n

12 2

beyond t h e

m ultiple

correlation

estimated

Acco r di ng t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s

for

the

total

p r e s e n t e d 1n T a b l e s

sample.

15 t h r o u g h

17, A p p e n d i x E, t h e s e c o n d s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s y i e l d e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e ­
l a t i o n s o f . 70 w i t h GPA 1 - y e a r , . 64 w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r , a n d . 60 w i t h CGPA
for Chinese stu d en ts.

Also,

t h e second s e t of p r e d i c t o r s y i e l d e d

m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 3 4 , . 6 0 , a n d .55 a g a i n s t t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d
GPA c r i t e r i a f o r s t u d e n t s f r o m S o u t h K o r e a .

F u rth e rm o re , t h e second

s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s e x h i b i t e d m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 49 w i t h GPA 1y e a r and .63 w i t h CGPA f o r s t u d e n t s from Japan.
G e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l - v a l i d1 t y a n a l y s i s l e d t o
an

observable

coefficient.

increase

in

the

i ntel lectlve-predictor

validity

In p a r t i c u l a r , t h e s u b g r o u p a n a l y s i s p e r f o r m e d on a g e -

c a t e g o r y , c o l l e g e , and c o u n t r y s u b g r o u p s showed s e v e r a l t i m e s t h e IPAA,
MSU-AETS, a n d GPA 1 - t e r m t o h a v e a h i g h e r p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y t h a n
t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g v a l i d i t i e s f o r t h e combi ned h e t e r o g e n e o u s gr oups.
T h i s f i n d i n g s u g g e s t e d t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f rom d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s ,
colleges,

and age c a t e g o r i e s s h o u l d n o t be gr ouped f o r t h e pu r p o s e of

e s t i m a t i n g t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of t h e preadmissi on c r i t e r i a .
The f i n d i n g o f t h e subgr oup d i f f e r e n t i a l a n a l y s i s a f f i r m e d t h a t
t h e p r a c t i c e o f c o mb i n i n g h e t e r o g e n e o u s gr o u p s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f o r
p r e d i c t i o n p u r p o s e s 1s l i k e l y t o l i m i t t h e u t i l i t y o f t h e p r e d i c t o r
validity coefficient.

When a h e t e r o g e n e o u s gr oup i s used f o r v a l i d a t ­

i ng a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n

device,

d i c t a b l e and u n p r e d i c t a b l e g r o u p s

t h e d i s c r e p a n c i e s bet wee n t h e p r e ­
introduce a type of sy stem a tic

123

p r e d i c t i o n e r r o r t h a t a c t s t o reduce th e magnitude of th e s e l e c t i o n
d e v i c e ’s v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t .
Separate est1 matlons of th e In tel l e c tiv e - p r e d 1 c to r v a l Id i ty
c o e f f i c i e n t a n d t h e d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e g r o u p d a t a on b o t h
t h e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i a showed s e v e r a l

e x a mp l e s of d i s c r e p a n ­

c i e s bet wee n t h e p r e d i c t a b l e and u n p r e d i c t a b l e g r o u p s a f f e c t i n g t h e
ma g n i t u d e of t h e p r e d i c t o r

validity coefficient,

f o r th e combined hetero g en eo u s groups.
s ubgr oup a n a l y s i s ,

significantly

means

validity

whose means on t h e MSU-AETS and c r i t e r i a

differ significantly.
whose

According t o th e co u n try -

t h e MSU-AETS emer ged t o show equal

number of c o u n t r i e s

tries

which was e s t i m a t e d

Al s o,
on

the

different.

i t showed eq ual
predictor

Further,

validity

MSU-AETS a n d

for a

di d n o t

f o r o t h e r coun­
criteria

were

i t showed d i f f e r e n t v a l i d i t y

for a

number o f c o u n t r i e s whose means on t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a d i f f e r e d
significantly.

The f o r e g o i n g e x a m p l e o f v a r i a t i o n s among c o u n t r y

g r o u p s was a l s o t r u e f o r IPAA and GPA 1 - t e r m.
A l t h o u g h t h e d1 f f e r e n t i a l - v a l i d i t y a n a l y s i s s u c c e e d e d 1n con­
t r o l l i n g t h e v a r i a t i o n c a u s e d by t h e s t u d y s u b j e c t s ' h e t e r o g e n e i t y and
b r o u g h t a d e q u a t e I n c r e a s e s 1n t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ' v a l i d i t y
c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r a number o f s u b g r o u p s ,

t h e in fl uen ce of th e following

f a c t o r s on t h e p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t r e ma i n e d e v i d e n t f o r a
number of s u b g r o u p s .
1.
criteria

The r e s t r i c t e d r a n g e of d a t a on bot h t h e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e

l e d a number o f

predictors to yield

f o r a number o f s u b g r o u p s .

low p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y

The I n f l u e n c e o f t h i s p r o b l e m was c l e a r

124

when t h e p r e d i c t 1! v e v a l 1 d 1 t y o f MSU-AETS was e s t 1 m a t e d f o r s t u d e n t s
from China.

The r e s t r i c t e d

r a n g e o f t h e i r s c o r e s on t h e MSU-AETS

r e s u l t e d 1n a low p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y when t h e s e s c o r e s we r e c o r r e l a t e d
w i t h t h e i r GPA c r i t e r i a .
2.

The s e c o n d f a c t o r t h a t I n f l u e n c e d t h e p r e d i c t o r v a l 1d 1t y

c o e f f i c i e n t s when t h e y we r e e s t i m a t e d f o r t h e s u b g r o u p s was t h e l a c k o f
u n i f o r m g r a d i n g p r a c t i c e s among MSU f a c u l t y members.

Different faculty

members in d i f f e r e n t c o l l e g e s a s s i g n e d g r a d e s a c c o r d i n g t o v a r i o u s
standards.

Consequently*

a particular

group of

foreign

students

s t u d y i n g i n a s p e c i f i c c o l l e g e may h a v e a c h i e v e d a GPA t h a t d o e s n o t
r e f le c t th e ir actual

academic achievement.

Such v a r i a t i o n s a c t t o

r e d u c e t h e q u a l i t y o f GPA a s a v a l i d and r e l i a b l e I n d i c a t o r of g r a d u a t e
ac a de mi c s u c c e s s .
3.

A t h i r d f a c t o r was l a c k o f c o m p a r a b i l i t y o f f o r e i g n s t u ­

d e n t s f r om v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e i r IPAA,
GPA 1 - t e r m *

a nd t h e c o u r s e s t h e y h ad t o c o m p l e t e t o g a i n a c e r t a i n

d eg ree from a p a r t i c u l a r c o l l e g e .

Although t h e i n d i c e s of p r e v io u s

a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t have been found t o be v e r y e f f e c t i v e i n p r e d i c t i n g
g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' GPA,

t h e I ndex of p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t o f

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s from a number o f c o u n t r i e s has f a i l e d t o p r e d i c t t h e i r
GPA a c h i e v e d i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .

Th i s may be b e c a u s e some f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s had e a r n e d hi gh g r a d e s a t p o o r - q u a l i t y s c h o o l s and di d p o o r l y
1n t h e i r g r a d u a t e work a t MSU* whe r e a s o t h e r s t u d e n t s had e a r n e d o n l y
m o d e r a t e g r a d e s a t h i g h - q u a l i t y s c h o o l s and di d w e l l i n t h e i r g r a d u a t e
wo r k a t MSU.

U s i n g t h e s a m e a r g u m e n t , t h e f a i l u r e o f GPA 1 - t e r m t o

125

p r e d i c t t h e CGPA o f s t u d e n t s from a number o f c o u n t r i e s may be a t t r i b ­
ut e d t o t h e q u a l i t y of c o u r s e s t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f r om a p a r t i c u l a r
c o u n t r y c o m p l e t e d d u r i n g t h e i r f i r s t t e r m a t MSU.
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s may ha v e begun w i t h
c o u r s e s and a c h i e v e d hi gh grades*
academic p o te n tia l
d e gr e e .

Also*

P a r t i c u l a r gr oup s of

fewer c r e d i t s

or less-demanding

which does n o t r e f l e c t t h e i r a c t u a l

as th e y advance to w ard t h e c o m p l e t i o n of t h e i r

I t may be a s c r i b e d t o t h e v a r i a t i o n among f o r e i g n s t u ­

d e n t s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e c o l l e g e o r d e p a r t m e n t 1n w h i c h t h e y a r e
studying,
etc.)

t h e s t a n d a r d s and r e q u i r e m e n t s ( t e r m p a p e r s ,

a g a i n s t which t h e i r

grades are assigned,

i n - c l a s s exams,

and t h e q u a l i t y

of

c o u r s e s t h e y mus t c o m p l e t e t o e a r n t h e i r degr ee.
Beca us e t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e f o r e g o i n g f a c t o r s

was e v i d e n t in

t h e subgr oup a n a l y s e s , f u r t h e r a n a l y s e s seemed n e c e s s a r y t o e x t r a c t t h e
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' h e t e r o g e n e i t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o (1) t h e q u a l i t y

of

t h e i r IPAA, MSU-AETS, TOFEL, GPA 1 - t e r m , number o f c r e d i t s c a r r i e d each
t e r m , and t h e t y p e s o f c o u r s e s r e q u i r e d f o r a p a r t i c u l a r d e g r e e ; and
(2)

the

standards

against

which

the

foreign

a s s i g n e d 1n t h e v a r i o u s d e p a r t m e n t s and c o l l e g e s .

students'

GPAs w e r e

Accordingly,

assumed t h a t 1f t h e c o u n t r y r a t h e r t h a n t h e I n d i v i d u a l

i t was

s t u d e n t 1s used

a s t h e u n i t o f a n a l y s i s , t h e a v e r a g e p e r f o r m a n c e o f e a c h c o u n t r y on
each p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n woul d p r o v i d e a more r e l i a b l e and s t a b l e
I n d i c a t o r of fo r e ig n s t u d e n t s ' o v e r a l l
t h e i r f u t u r e a c a d e mi c p o t e n t i a l

p r e a d m i s s i o n a t t r i b u t e s and

1n g r a d u a t e school t h a n would I n d i v i d ­

u a l s c o r e s . . A l s o , i t w o u l d p r o v i d e an I n d e x o f p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a an
c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s (GPA) t h a t 1s n o t i n f l u e n c e d by t h e d i v e r s i t y o f

126
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s w 1 t h r e s p e c t t o t h e q u a ! i t y o f t h e l r IPAA, p r e v i o u s
E n g l i s h i n s t r u c t i o n , GPA 1 - t e r m , a n d s t a n d a r d s a g a i n s t w h i c h t h e i r
g r a d e s i n v a r i o u s c o l l e g e s and d e p a r t m e n t s we r e a s s i g n e d .
Based on t h e

preceding assumption,

t h e average performance of

s t u d e n t s from v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s on t h e p r e d i c t o r s
t e s t score,

(TOFEL,

MSU En g l i s h

IPAA, and GPA 1 - t e r m ) and t h e c r i t e r i a (GPA c r i t e r i o n meas­

u r e s ) wer e comput ed.

Then z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n and r a n k - o r d e r c o r r e ­

l a t i o n w e r e e m p l o y e d ( 1) t o d e t e r m i n e t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h t h e c o u n ­
tries'

average performance

on t h e

predictors

a v e r a g e p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n

would p r e d i c t t h e i r

me a s u r e and (2) t o d e t e r m i n e

t h e e x t e n t t o whi ch t h e o r d e r of t h e c o u n t r i e s ' means on t h e p r e d i c t o r s
would p r e d i c t t h e o r d e r o f t h e i r means on t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n

me as ur e s .

B a s e d on t h e m a g n i t u d e o f t h e p r e d i c t o r r a n k - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n and
zero-order correlation,

t h e f o l l o w i n g f i n d i n g s a r e s umma r i z e d ( Tabl es

13 and 1 4) :
1.

As p r e s e n t e d

i n T a b l e s 13 a nd 14 ,

a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e same p a t t e r n o f c o r r e l a t i o n

t h e TOFEL e x h i b i t e d

a s f ound i n t h e t o t a l -

s t u d y - s u b j e c t a n a l y s i s and t h e s ubgr oup a n a l y s i s .
2.

The MSU-AETS e x h i b i t e d r a n k - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s

GPA 1 - t e r m and . 7 2 a w i t h CGPA.

o f .49 w i t h

Also, i t y i e l d e d z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a ­

t i o n s o f . 36 a n d . 7 9 ° a g a i n s t t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s
( Tab! e s 13 and 1 4 ) .
3.

The f o r e i g n s t u d e n t I nde x o f p r e v i o u s a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t

(IPAA) showed r a n k - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s

o f .41 and . 54° w i t h GPA 1 - t e r m

127

TOFEL

.5 0

o

Q)

l

CGPA

it o f C r e d i t
C o m p le t e d
2 - Y e a r

2 - Y e a r
GPA

# of
C r e d i t
C o m p le t e d
1 -Y e a r

1 -Y e a r
GPA

# of C r e d i t
C o m p le t e d
1 -T erm

GPA

1 -T erm

Ta bl e 13-“ -Rank o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n bet ween t h e c o u n t r y means on
p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a (GPA and c r e d i t s compl e t e d a t
d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s in t h e g r a d u a t e p r o g r a m) .

- . 2 6

.4 6

9

8 3 b
9

9

9

•

. 8 0 b

- . 3 3
9

9

9

. 5 4 a
6

• 5 3 a
15

.2 3
15

•4 7 a
15

.3 8
15

. 06
15

. 6 1 b
15

.ksa

. 08

15

.41
15

, 4 4 a

15

. 6 2 b
15

.08

15

• 5 7 a
15

R ead ing

. 4 8 a
15

•6 7 b
15

.2 8
15

•5 3 a
15

.1 4
15

.14
15

. 6 2 b
15

Li s t e n i n g

.2 5
15

. 4 8 a
15

.3 0
15

.2 7
15

.1 4
15

- . 1 3
15

. 6 0 b
15

Wr i t i ng

.1 8
15

• 32
15

.0 7
15

.3 0
15

.01
15

.2 8
15

.3 2
15

A v e r a g e

.**9a
15

•6 3 b
15

.31
15

• 5 3 a
15

.3 0
15

.0 7
15

.7 2 a
15

IPAA

.41
12

■5 1 b
12

- . 0 5
12

.4 4
12

.0 3
12

.1 3
12

•5 4 s
12

.8 1 °
23

.7 5 °
2 2

•4 7 a
2 2

. 5 6 b
23

G ram m ar

V o c a b u l a r y

GPA

1 -T e r m

•8 o c
12

. 5 1 b
23

15

128

Ta b l e \ k . — Z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n bet ween t h e c o u n t r y means on
p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a (GPA and c r e d i t s compl et e d a t
d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s in t h e g r a d u a t e pr o g r a m) .

cn
E
Lto

I—
1
<
n
CD

I/)
U
TO

L.
**□ "O

TOTO

TO
TO

O d) E

1

M - 'o . 0)
O E 1-

TO 1
«—

TOFEL

.**7
9

.hi

G ram m ar

.3 7
15

.b 3 a

V o c a b u l a r y

.3 7
15

R ead i ng

9

<r\
CD

- . 0 6
9

XJ “D
T
i O4T
i—O
i'
U (1) L
r— TO
M- Q. TO
O yE\ >TO 1I

—

s T.O
1
CN

<

-O “U
TO T
i*—
i O1i
4—
O TO ^
»— TO
c - a to
O E >

<

1a 1.

OTO c s• l

CD

CJ

•6 9 a
9

.kl

.2 2
15

.11
15

■

15
5 3 a
15

.03
15

.3 7
15

•6

9

.7 ^ b
9

- . 1 9
9

.1 0
15

.h2

15

•

5 7 a
15

.0 7
15

•

.2 7
15

•

5 3 a
15

.0 3
15

.3 6
15

- . 0 3
15

. 16
15

. 7 5 c
15

L i s t e n i ng

.3 0
15

• 5 2 a
15

.28

•32
15

.0 8
15

- . 0 6
15

•7 2 c
15

W ri t i n g

.2 6
15

• 5 0 a
15

-.06

- . 0 2
15

.2 0
15

•6 3 b
15

A v e r a g e

.3 6
15

.5 8
15

.1 8
15

.7 9 °
15

IPAA

. U]
12

.

M

GPA 1 - T e r m

•

15

15

.^ 5 a
15

.1 0
15

.h 8a
15

.0 8
15

5 ^ a
12

.0 3
12

.3 8
12

.0 8
12

.3 0
12

9 0 c
23

.6 8 °
23

.8 3 °
23

.if

•

2 2

5 6 b
22

lh c
15
7 b
15

12

•5 7 b
23

129

and CGPA,

respectively.

Al so,

i t showed z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .41

and .43 w i t h t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c r i t e r i o n me a s ur e s .
4.

GPA 1 - t e r m e m e r g e d i n b o t h a n a l y s e s a s t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r

t h a t showed a c o n s i s t e n t l y hi gh c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e v a r i o u s c r i t e r i o n
measures.

As s h o wn i n T a b l e s 13 and 14 , 1n b o t h a n a l y s e s GPA 1 - t e r m

e x h i b i t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .56^ and .57^ w i t h CGPA.
A l t h o u g h s o me o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s d i d n o t r e a c h s i g n i f i c a n c e
b e c a u s e o f t h e s ma l l

observation size,

t h e d i r e c t i o n and m a g n i t u d e of

th e c o r r e l a t i o n s r e f l e c t e d a p o s iti v e sign.
t h e rank-order c o r r e l a t i o n s suggested t h a t ,

O v e r a l l , t h e p a t t e r n of
on t h e a v e r a g e ,

countries

t h a t r anked hi gh w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e o r d e r of t h e i r means on p r e d i c t o r s
(MSU-AETS, IPAA, a n d GPA 1 - t e r m ) among t h e o t h e r c o u n t r i e s u s u a l l y
t e n d e d t o m a i n t a i n a hi gh s t a n d i n g w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e o r d e r o f t h e i r
GPA m e a n s .

Also, t h e r e s u l t s of t h e z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n Im p l ie d

t h a t t h e h i g h e r t h e c o u n t r y ’s mean on t h e p r e d i c t o r s ,

t h e more l i k e l y

s t u d e n t s fr om t h a t c o u n t r y wer e t o m a i n t a i n a hi gh a v e r a g e p e r f o r m a n c e
w i t h r e s p e c t t o GPA 1 - t e r m and CGPA.

Means Comparison A n a l y s i s
In p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h , t h e h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f t h e s t u d y s u b j e c t s
1s known, among o t h e r t h i n g s ,
d i c t i o n accuracy.
t i v e purposes,
of

lim ited

as t h e m a j o r f a c t o r t h a t i n f l u e n c e s p r e ­

When h e t e r o g e n e o u s gr o u p s a r e combi ned f o r p r e d i c ­

t h e r e s u l t s of t h e p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y

value.

The* g r e a t e r t h e v a r i a b i l i t y

a r e l i k e l y t o be

of th e group with

r e s p e c t t o t h e v a l i d i t y a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e may have f o r t h e
various

groups,

and

the

sampling

distribution

( me a n ,

standard

130

d e v i a t i o n ) o f t h e i r s c o r e s on t h e p r e d i c t o r s a n d t h e c r i t e r i a *

the

h i g h e r t h e p r e d i c t i o n e r r o r and t h e l o w e r t h e p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y .
In g e n e r a l *

when h e t e r o g e n e o u s g r oups a r e combi ned f o r v a l i d a t ­

ing a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n device,

several

t y p e s o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s may

emer ge and a c t t o r e d u c e p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y .

For exa mpl e , a p a r t i c u ­

l a r s e l e c t i o n d e v i c e such a s t h e TOFEL may y i e l d equal

validity

for a

number o f s u bgr oups whose means on bot h t h e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i a
differ significantly.

A l s o , i t may e x h i b i t e q u a l v a l i d i t y f o r o t h e r

g r o u p s w h i l e t h e i r me a n s on t h e p r e d i c t o r s a nd t h e c r i t e r i a do n o t
d iffer significantly.

F u r t h e r m o r e , i t may y i e l d e q u a l v a l i d i t y f o r

o t h e r g r o u p s f o r w h i c h o n l y t h e me a n s on e i t h e r t h e p r e d i c t o r o r t h e
criteria

differ significantly.

Under t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c o n d i t i o n s of

mean d i f f e r e n c e s , t h e TOFEL may a l s o y i e l d d i f f e r e n t v a l i d i t y , o p p o s i t e
validity,

o r no v a l i d i t y f o r a p a r t i c u l a r group w i t h i n t h e t o t a l

study

subjects.
As one o r more o f t h e f o r e g o i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s o c c u r s In a p r e ­
d i c t i o n s t u d y , t h e c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e gr o u p s w i l l a l m o s t a l wa y s pr odu c e
l ow v a l i d i t y and t h e r e f o r e l e s s - a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n .

In t h e p r e s e n t

s t u d y , t h e p r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s of t h e combi ned gr oups produced s e v e r a l
e x a m p l e s 1n w h i c h a n u m b e r o f p r e d i c t o r s y i e l d e d v e r y low v a l i d i t y
coefficients.

Such low c o e f f i c i e n t s wer e a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e s

1n v a l i d i t y t h a t t h e p r e d i c t o r s had f o r t h e d i f f e r e n t gr oups .

The low

c o e f f i c i e n t s wer e a l s o a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e d i s c r e p a n c i e s among t h e v a r i ­
ous gr o u p s w i t h

respect

t o t h e s a mp l i n g d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e i r s c o r e s

(mean and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n ) on bot h t h e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i a .

131

Because t h e f i n d i n g s

of t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l

validity

analyses

p r o v i d e d s e v e r a l e x a m p l e s 1n whi ch t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a d i f f e r e d w i t h
r e s p e c t t o t h e i r p r e d i c t i o n o f v a r i o u s g r o u p s ’ GPAs,

it

is worthwhile

t o compar e t h e v a r i o u s g r o u p s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r a v e r a g e p e r f o r m a n c e
on t h e p r e d i c t o r s

(TOFEL and MSU En g l i s h t e s t

s c o r e ) and t h e c r i t e r i a

(GPAs a nd a c a d e m i c c r e d i t s a c c u m u l a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s
g r a d u a t e pr ogr am) .

The f i n d i n g s o f such a c o m p a r i s o n ,

fin d i n g s of t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l

validity analysis,

in th e

along with th e

woul d p r o v i d e v a l u a b l e

i n s i g h t i n t o how t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y ca n be i n t e r p r e t e d
and us ed p r o p e r l y .
T a b l e s 1 t h r o u g h 6,
and t - t e s t r e s u l t s .

Appendix D, p r e s e n t a summary o f t h e ANOVA

A l s o , T a b l e s 1 t h r o u g h 15, A p p e n d i x F, show t h e

f i n d i n g s of post-hoc comparison a n a l y s i s

(Tukey p r o c e d u r e )

f o r GPA 1-

t e r m , a c a de mi c c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d by t h e end of t h e f i r s t t e r m , and CGPA
fo r th e various groups t h a t d if f e r e d

significantly.

Ba s e d on t h e

f i n d i n g s p r e s e n t e d 1n t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d t a b l e s , t h e f o l l o w i n g o b s e r v a ­
t i o n s a r e made:
1.

The r e s u l t s o f t h e t - t e s t a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t ma l e s and

f e m a l e s p e r f o r me d a t t h e same l e v e l on a l l
teria

e x c e p t t h e l i s t e n i n g t e s t and CGPA.

o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i ­
The t - t e s t v a l u e s s u g g e s t e d

t h a t f e m a l e s t e n d e d t o a c h i e v e h i g h e r s c o r e s on t h e E n g l i s h l i s t e n i n g
t e s t a nd a h i g h e r CGPA t h a n t h e m a l e g r o u p ( T a b l e s 1 a nd 2 , A p p e n d i x
D).
2.

S i n g l e g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s h a d s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r me a n s

than married s tu d en ts with re s p e c t t o t h e i r

p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e TOFEL

132

test., grammar, l i s t e n i n g ,
significantly

w r i t i n g , and t h e MSU-AETS.

h i g h e r me a n s w i t h

They a l s o had

r e s p e c t t o t h e number of c r e d i t s

a c c u m u l a t e d a t t h e e nd o f t h e f i r s t t e r m and t h e f i r s t y e a r .
o t h e r hand, bot h gr oups p e r f o r me d s i m i l a r l y on v o c a b u l a r y ,
GPAs t h e y

a c c u mu l a t e d a t

different

points

in t h e i r

On t h e

r e a d i n g , and

g r a d u a t e pr ogr ams

( T a b l e s 1 a n d 2, A p p e n d i x D).
3.

S t u d e n t s 1n t h e d o c t o r a l p r o g r a m d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y

fr om t h o s e i n t h e m a s t e r ’s program w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r mean s c o r e s on
E n g l i s h r e a d i n g , w r i t i n g , and t h e MSU-AETS.

They a l s o d i f f e r e d s i g ­

n i f i c a n t l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o mean GPA a c h i e v e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n
t h e i r g r a d u a t e p r ogr ams .

The t - v a l u e s r e v e a l e d t h a t d o c t o r a l

students

t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e h i g h e r E n g l i s h s c o r e s a n d h i g h e r GPAs t h a n d i d
s t u d e n t s i n t h e m a s t e r ’s pr ogr am ( T a b l e s 1 and 2, Appendix D).
4.

The f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d a s c o r e o f 80 o r above on

t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t ( a v e r a g e and s u b t e s t s ) t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e h i g h e r
GPAs t h a n t h o s e who a c h i e v e d a s c o r e o f 80 o r below on t h e same t e s t s .
For exampl e,

s t u d e n t s who s c o r e d h i g h e r t h a n 80 on t h e MSU-AETS accumu­

l a t e d GPAs o f 2 . 5 9 , 3 . 3 6 , 3 . 4 1 , a n d 3 . 3 6 .

In c o n t r a s t ,

s t u d e n t s who

s c o r e d b e l o w 80 on t h e MSU-AETS a c c u m u l a t e d GPAs o f 1 . 4 5 , 3 . 0 0 , 3 . 2 2 ,
and 2.93.

The o v e r a l l

p a t t e r n o f t h e t - t e s t r e s u l t s and t h e d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n o f GPAs s u g g e s t e d t h a t s t u d e n t s who s t a r t e d t h e i r a c a de mi c progr am
w i t h s c o r e s bel ow 80 on t h e MSU-AETS t e n d e d by t h e end o f t h e i r pr ogram
t o a c c u m u l a t e l o w e r GPAs t h a n di d s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d s c o r e s h i g h e r
t h a n 80 on t h e same t e s t ( Tabl es 3 and 4,

Appendix D).

133

5.

F o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s whose a c a d e mi c r e c o r d s I n d i c a t e d

t h a t t h e i r a c a d e m i c p r o g r e s s was normal t e n d e d t o s t a r t t h e i r a c a demi c
pr ogr a ms w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r s c o r e s on t h e TOFEL and MSU E n g l i s h
t e s t ( a v e r a g e and s u b t e s t s ) t h a n t h o s e whose r e c o r d s I n d i c a t e d t h e i r
a c a d e mi c p r o g r e s s was n o t n or mal .

Also,

normal s t u d e n t s t e n d e d on t h e

a v e r a g e t o a c c u m u l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r GPAs and more c r e d i t s t h a n
nonnormal

s t u d e n t s ( T a b l e s 1 and 2, Appendix D).

6.

When t h e f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s wer e gr ouped i n t o d i f ­

f e r e n t a g e c a t e g o r i e s ( 2 0 - 2 4 , 2 5 - 2 9 , 3 0 - 3 4 , and 35 and a b o v e ) , t h e y
d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o p e r f o r ma n c e on t h e TOFEL and MSU
English t e s t .

Young g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s

(20-29) t e n d e d t o s c o r e h i g h e r

on t h e TOFEL and t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t t h a n di d o l d e r g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s
( age > 30).

Also,

t h e y d i f f e r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r mean GPA and t h e

n u m b e r o f c r e d i t s t h e y h a d a c c u m u l a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p e r i o d s 1n t h e
g r a d u a t e progr am.

The ANOVA r e s u l t s I n d i c a t e d t h a t s t u d e n t s d i f f e r e d

w i t h r e s p e c t t o GPA 1 - t e r m (F = 9 . 9 9 , d f = 3 , 9 2 0 , p < . 0 0 1 ) , a c a d e m i c
c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d by t h e end o f t h e f i r s t t e r m (F = 9.59,
< .001),

a nd

CGPA (F = 2 . 6 9 ,

df

= 3,922,

p < .05).

d f = 3, 9 2 0 ,
Overall,

p

the

f i n d i n g s o f t h e p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s (Tukey p r o c e d u r e ) r e v e a l e d
t h a t t h e y o u n g g r o u p t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e a s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r GPA
and t o c a r r y s i g n i f i c a n t l y mor e c r e d i t s t h a n t h e o l d e r s t u d e n t s .
7.

When t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s w e r e g r o u p e d on t h e b a s i s

of

c o l l e g e they were a t t e n d i n g , t h e com parison a n a l y s i s in d i c a te d they
d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r means on t h e TOFEL and t h e
MSU En g l i s h t e s t ( a v e r a g e and s u b t e s t s ) .

Al so,

s tu d e n t s in th e various

134

c o l l e g e s d i f f e r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r means on GPA and c r e d i t s a c c u ­
m u l a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s 1n t h e g r a d u a t e program.

In general*

the

r e s u l t s o f t h e ANOVA and t h e p o s t - h o c c o mp a r i s o n a n a l y s e s r e v e a l e d t h a t
f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s a t t e n d i n g c o l l e g e s such as a r t s and l e t t e r s *
natural

science,

engineering,

and e d u c a t i o n t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e s i g ­

n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r mean GPAs, p a r t i c u l a r l y GPA 1 - t e r m , t h a n s t u d e n t s
studying communications,

business,

and a g r i c u l t u r e .

Further,

the

r e s u l t s im p l i e d t h a t s t u d e n t s in b u s i n e s s te nded t o c a r r y a s i g n i f i ­
cantly

heavier

academic

load than

s t u d e n t s in t h e o t h e r c o l l e g e s

( T a b l e s 4 , 5 , a n d 6, A p p e n d i x F).
8.

When s t u d e n t s f r o m s i n g l e c o u n t r i e s ( C h i n a , C a n a d a , e t c . )

and gr ouped c o u n t r i e s
speaking c o u n t r i e s ,

(Sout h Ameri ca,

Mi ddl e Ea s t ,

Far East,

English-

Eur ope, and c o u n t r i e s 1n which E n g l i s h i s a second

l a ngua ge ) wer e compar ed, t h e ANOVA r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t s t u d e n t s f r om
t h e s i n g l e c o u n t r i e s and t h e gr ouped c o u n t r i e s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y
w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r means on t h e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i a .
all,

Over­

t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h e ANOVA a nd t h e p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s e s

pe r f o r me d on s t u d e n t s f r om t h e s i n g l e c o u n t r i e s and t h e gr ouped coun­
tries

we r e h i g h l y s i m i l a r ( Ta bl e s 7- 1 2 ,

Appendix F).

The f i n d i n g s o f

t h e p o s t - h o c c o mp a r i s o n a n a l y s i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t s t u d e n t s f r om E n g l i s h speaking c o u n t ri e s ,

Eur ope, and c o u n t r i e s i n which E n g l i s h i s a s econd

l a n g u a g e t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r GPAs and t o c o m p l e t e
more c r e d i t s by t h e end o f t h e f i r s t t e r m t h a n t h o s e from South Amer­
ica,

the

Far East,

A p p e n d i x F).

and t h e

Middle East

(Tables 7,

8,

10,

and

11,

When s t u d e n t s f r o m t h e v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s a n d g r o u p s o f

135

c o u n t r i e s we r e compar ed w i t h r e s p e c t t o CGPA,

t h e p o s t - h o c c o mp a r i s o n

a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t s t u d e n t s from E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o u n t r i e s ,
Europe,

and t h e Far E a s t t e n d e d t o a c h i e v e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r CGPAs

t h a n s t u d e n t s fr om t h e M i d d l e E a s t , South A m e r i c a , and c o u n t r i e s in
which En g l i s h 1s c o n s i d e r e d a second l a nguage.
t h a t s t u d e n t s from t h e Far E ast,
students,

p a r t i c u l a r l y C h i n e s e and J a p a n e s e

had managed t o I mpr ove t h e i r a c h i e v e m e n t as t h e y advanced i n

t h e i r g r a d u a t e pr ogr ams .
significantly
tries,

This f i n d i n g suggested

Although t h e i r f i r s t - t e r m

p e r f o r m a n c e was

l o w e r t h a n t h a t o f s t u d e n t s from E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g coun­

E ur ope , and c o u n t r i e s i n whi ch E n g l i s h i s a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e ,

t h e i r CGPA was s i g n i f i c a n t l y

h i g h e r from t h a t o f s t u d e n t s from South

A m e r i c a , t h e M i d d l e E a s t , a n d c o u n t r i e s 1n w h i c h E n g l i s h i s a s e c o n d
l a n g u a g e ( s e e T a b l e s 9 and 12,
9.

The f i n a l

Appendi x F).
c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d on GPA a nd

a c a d e mi c c r e d i t l o a d means o f t h e f o l l o w i n g gr o u p s , which d i f f e r e d w i t h
r e s p e c t t o t h e i r E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e s t a t u s when t h e y a p p l i e d t o MSU g r a d ­
u a t e s chool .
a.

S t u d e n t s who s c o r e d h i g h e r t h a n 5 50 on t h e TOFEL t e s t a n d

wer e a l l o w e d t o s t a r t t h e i r a c a d e mi c pr ogr ams .
b. < S t u d e n t s who s c o r e d below 550 on t h e TOFEL t e s t and had t o
t a k e t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t and t h e n s t a r t e d t h e i r a c a d e mi c pr ogr ams .
c.

S t u d e n t s who j u s t t o o k t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t a nd s t a r t e d

t h e i r a c a d e mi c pr ogr ams .
d.

S t u d e n t s who t o o k t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t a n d ,

b e c a u s e of

t h e i r low s c o r e s , s t u d i e d f o r a number o f t e r m s a t t h e E n g l i s h Language

136

Center;

a f t e r me e t i n g t h e u n i v e r s i t y s t a n d a r d (MSU-AETS s c o r e o f 80 o r

above) , t h e y s t a r t e d t h e i r a c a d e mi c pr ogr ams .
e.
countries,

S t u d e n t s w i t h no E n g l i s h r e c o r d s ( f r o m E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g
some European c o u n t r i e s ,

and c o u n t r i e s i n whi ch E n g l i s h i s

c o n s i d e r e d a s econd l a n g u a g e ) .
f.

S t u d e n t s w i t h no E n g l i s h r e c o r d s ( t r a n s f e r r e d from a n o t h e r

g.

S t u d e n t s w i t h no E n g l i s h r e c o r d s ( f r o m t h e M i d d l e E a s t ,

s c h o o l ).

Sout h Ameri ca, and some c o u n t r i e s i n A f r i c a and t h e F a r Ea s t ) .
The ANOVA r e s u l t s r e v e a l e d t h a t t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d g r o u p s d i f ­
f e r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r means on a l l t h e GPA m e a s u r e s and ac a de mi c
c r e d i t s a c c u mu l a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n t h e g r a d u a t e pr ogr am.

Spe­

c i f i c a l l y , t h e F - v a l u e s I n d i c a t e d t h e y d i f f e r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o GPA
1 - t e r m (F = 3 6 , d f = 6 , 9 6 4 , p < . 0 0 1 ) , c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d by t h e e nd o f
t h e f i r s t t e r m (F = 5 8 . 7 3 ,

df = 6,958,

p < . 0 0 1 ) , a n d CGPA (F = 6 . 8 0 ,

df

In g e n e r a l ,

the

= 6,1099,

p < .001).

results

of th e

post-hoc

c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s o f t h e gr oup means on t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c r i t e r i a
s u g g e s t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g ( s e e T a b l e s 13- 15,
1.

Appendix F):

When t h e v a r i o u s g r o u p s wer e compar ed w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r

m e a n s on GPA 1 - t e r m ,

g r o u p s A,

C,

E,

F,

G,

a nd B,

in t h a t o rd e r,

a c c u m u l a t e d h i g h e r GPAs by t h e end o f t h e f i r s t t e r m t h a n di d gr oup D.
W h e r e a s g r o u p D a c c u m u l a t e d a GPA o f o n l y 2 . 1 0 , t h e r e m a i n i n g g r o u p s
a c c u m u l a t e d GPAs t h a t r a n g e d f r om 3.13 t o 3. 38 ( s e e T a b l e 13,
F) .

Appendix

137

2.

G r o u p s E, A, F, C, G, and B, i n t h a t o r d e r * c o m p l e t e d m o r e

academic c r e d i t s

by t h e e n d o f t h e

first

Where as s t u d e n t s from gr oup D c o m p l e t e d *

term

than

did

on t h e a v e r a g e ,

group

D.

o n l y 3. 57

c r e d i t s by t h e e n d o f t h e f i r s t t e r m , t h e r e m a i ni ng g r o u p s com pi e t e d
f r o m 6. 81 t o 8 . 5 9 c r e d i t s ( s e e T a b l e 2* A p p e n d i x F).
3.

When t h e v a r i o u s g r o u p s wer e compared w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r

mean CGPA, t h e p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t g r o u p s E, B,
A, a n d G a c c u m u l a t e d h i g h e r CGPAs t h a n g r o u p D.

Overall, the pattern

o f t h e c o mp a r i s o n a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s who came t o
MSU w i t h low E n g l i s h a b i l i t y and s t u d i e d a t t h e E n g l i s h Language C e n t e r
t e n d e d t o p e r f o r m a t a l o w e r l e v e l t h a n t h e r e m a i n i n g gr oups ( s e e Ta b l e
15, A p p e n d i x F).

Gener al D i s c u s s i o n
P r e d i c t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s ' b e h a v i o r has been a s u b j e c t of g r e a t
i n t e r e s t t o r e s e a r c h e r s i n t h e f i e l d s o f e d u c a t i o n and ps ychol ogy.

Of

g r e a t I m p o r t a n c e o f e d u c a t o r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h o s e who d e a l w i t h t h e
p r obl e m of s e l e c t i o n and p l a c e m e n t o f s t u d e n t s i n a p a r t i c u l a r program
f o r advanced l e a r n i n g ,

1s p r e d i c t i o n o f a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e me n t .

Because

o f t h e u n c e r t a i n t y I n h e r e n t 1n m a k i n g s e l e c t i o n d e c i s i o n s , d e c i s i o n
ma k e r s need p r e c i s e d a t a f o r j u d g i n g s t u d e n t s ' p r o b a b i l i t y of a c a demi c
success

in a p a r t i c u l a r

program.

Consequently,

concerned r es ear che rs

have c o n d u c t e d a v a s t amount of p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h t o I d e n t i f y s t u d e n t
a t t r i b u t e s t h a t b e a r a s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p t o f u t u r e a c a d e mi c p o t e n ­
tial.

The f i n d i n g s o f t h e s e s t u d i e s h a v e c o n t r i b u t e d g r e a t l y t o t h e

a c c u m u l a t i o n of s c i e n t i f i c

knowl edge a b o u t t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f aca demi c

138

a c h i e v e me n t .

D e c i s i o n ma ker s have found t h i s knowl edge ve r y h e l p f u l in

maki ng a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t s a b o u t p a r t i c u l a r s t u d e n t s * p o t e n t i a l

success

in a s p e c i f i c pr ogram.
As t h e number o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s has i n c r e a s e d i n mos t Ameri­
can u n i v e r s i t i e s , a d m i s s i o n d e c i s i o n ma k e r s hav e a g a i n been p l a c e d i n a
p o s i t i o n of ne e d i n g p r e c i s e c r i t e r i a
sions.

Accordingly,

several

on which t o b a s e a d m i s s i o n d e c i ­

r e s e a r c h e r s have a t t e m p t e d t o use t h e

lo g ic of p r e d i c t io n theory t o determine t h e a t t r i b u t e s t h a t b e s t pre­
d ic t foreign

students'

f u t u r e a c a d e mi c p o t e n t i a l .

Al t hough t h e l o g i c

o f p r e d i c t i o n t h e o r y 1s a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t , t h e o v e r a l l

out c ome of such p r e d i c t i o n i s

l e s s a c c u r a t e t h a n t h a t f o r t h e Amer i can s t u d e n t .

The f i n d i n g s o f t h e

p r e s e n t s t u d y , a s w el l a s t h o s e of p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h ,

revealed th a t

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c p o t e n t i a l can be p r e d i c t e d fr om p r e a d m i s s i o n
d a t a r e q u i r e d by Ameri can u n i v e r s i t i e s .

However,

b e c a u se of f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s ' d i v e r s i t y w i t h r e g a r d t o c u l t u r e , E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y , and
previous educational experience;

t h e l a c k o f a u n i f o r m s c a l e t h a t can

be used t o me a s u r e t h e i r a c t u a l

a c a d e mi c a p t i t u d e ;

arrd t h e d i f f i c u l t y

o f l o c a t i n g a l a r g e number o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s w i t h c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a ­
t i o n on t h e p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i a ,

p r e d i c t i o n s of t h e i r academic

s u c c e s s a r e l e s s c o n s i s t e n t and l e s s a c c u r a t e t h a n f o r American s t u ­
dents.

These p r o b le m s ,

along w ith

the c rite rio n

difficulty,

and

r e s t r i c t i o n o f t h e r a n g e of d a t a on bot h p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n meas ­
ures,

have c o n t r i b u t e d l a r g e l y t o t h e r e d u c t i o n o f p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y

139

and h a v e p r e v e n t e d r e s e a r c h e r s f r o m r e a c h i n g c o n s i s t e n t c o n c l u s i o n s
r eg ar d in g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of c u r r e n t preadmission c r i t e r i a .
Contrary t o t h e f i n d i n g s of previous research#

t h e f i n d i n g s of

t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y I n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e TOFEL s c o r e f a i l e d t o e x h i b i t
c o n s i s t e n t p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e ­
me nt # a s m e a s u r e d by GPA# a c a d e m i c c r e d i t l o a d # a n d i n d i c e s o f t h e
m a j o r a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r ' s

rating

o f t h e s t u d e n t ' s a c a d e mi c compet enc e.

According t o th e f i n d i n g s of th e t o t a l - s t u d y - s u b j e c t a n a ly sis #

the

TOFEL y i e l d e d a p o s i t i v e s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o n l y w i t h GPA 1 - t e r m
and t h e number o f c r e d i t s a c c u mu l a t e d a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n t h e g r a d u ­
ate

program.

However#

t h e m a g n i t u d e of t h e p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n

bet wee n t h e TOFEL and c r e d i t l o a d t e n d e d t o d e c r e a s e a s we moved a l on g
t h e scale to th e final cumulative c re d i ts .
When t h e p r e d i c t o r s ' v a l i d i t y

coefficients

we r e e s t i m a t e d

for

t h e v a r i o u s subgroups# t h e TOFEL c o n t i n u e d t o e x h i b i t a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e
same p a t t e r n o f c o r r e l a t i o n found on t h e t o t a l

s a mp l e e x c e p t f o r s t u ­

d e n t s from China# s t u d e n t s 1n t h e d o c t o r a l program# and s t u d e n t s 1n t h e
engineering college.

Accor di ng t o t h e f i n d i n g s

presented

i n T a b l e 7#

t h e TOFEL s c o r e t e n d e d t o e x h i b i t d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n s o f c o r r e l a t i o n s
f r o m t h o s e f o u n d on t h e t o t a l s a m p l e a n d t h e o t h e r s u b g r o u p c o m p a r i ­
sons.

P r e c i s e l y # t h e TOFEL y i e l d e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f , 3 8 c , . 1 1 , . 2 3 a ,

a n d . 2 3 a a g a i n s t t h e f o u r GPA c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s f o r a t u d e n t s i n t h e
d octo ra l program.

Al so# 1 t s h o w e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .17# . 1 7 , . 3 1 a , and

• 2 5 a a n d . 3 9 b » .10# . 4 7 b » a n d .13 a g a i n s t t h e f o u r GPA c r i t e r i a

for

140

s t u d e n t s f rom China and s t u d e n t s

1n t h e e n g i n e e r i n g c o l l e g e ,

respec­

tively.
In g e n e r a l ,
y e a r , GPA 2 - y e a r ,

t h e f a i l u r e o f t h e TOFEL s c o r e t o p r e d i c t GPA 1a n d CGPA may be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e r e s t r i c t i o n

r a ng e o f d a t a on t h e s e GPA me a s u r e s .

of

In mos t a n a l y s e s , t h e TOFEL s c o r e

t e n d e d t o e x h i b i t a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h f i r s t - t e r m GPA and a c a ­
d e m i c l o a d , and a l ow o r n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e r e m a i n i n g GPA
me a s ur e s .

T h i s 1s b e c a u s e t h e f i r s t - t e r m GPA and c r e d i t l o a d t e n d e d t o

va r y more t h a n di d GPA 1 - y e a r ,

GPA 2 - y e a r ,

and CGPA.

T h i s f i n d i n g may a l s o be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t E n g l i s h
proficiency,

as me a s ur e d by t h e TOFEL, does n o t c o r r e l a t e w i t h s t u d e n t

GPA a f t e r t h e s t u d e n t a c h i e v e s a s c o r e above t h r e s h o l d v a l u e .
words, E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y ,

In o t h e r

as me a s ur e d by t h e TOFEL, t e n d e d t o p r e d i c t

t h e s t u d e n t ’s GPA a t a low l e v e l of p r o f i c i e n c y ,

and once t h e s t u d e n t ’s

E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y e x c e e d e d a p a r t i c u l a r t h r e s h o l d v a l u e , t h e TOFEL
f a i l e d t o a s s o c i a t e w i t h t h e s t u d e n t ' s GPA.

Hence, once a s t u d e n t

r e a c h e s a l e v e l o f E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y w h e r e l a n g u a g e i s no l o n g e r a
b a r r i e r t o a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t ,

additional

i mpr ovement on t h e TOFEL

has o nl y a n e g l i g i b l e I n f l u e n c e on i mp r o v i n g o v e r a l l a c a d e mi c p e r f o r m ­
ance,

a s me as ur e d by GPA.
The MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e e x h i b i t e d a d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n o f

c o r r e l a t i o n with th e v a r io u s c r i t e r i o n measures.
total-study-subject

analysis,

t h e MSU En g l i s h t e s t

According t o th e
s c o r e ( a v e r a g e and

s u b te s ts ) tended t o y i e l d s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s with a l l
and a c a d e m 1 c - c r e d i t c r i t e r i a .

Also,

o f t h e GPA

i t t e n d e d t o show a p o s i t i v e

141

correlation

w i t h a d v i s o r ’s r a t i n g ,

but because of th e s i z e of th e

s a mp l e mos t of t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s wer e n o t s i g n i f i c a n t .
number o f s u b g r o u p s ,

Further,

for a

t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e e x h i b i t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s

w i t h c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s t h a t we r e h i g h e r t h a n t h o s e f ound i n t h e t o t a l study-subject analysis.

However,

when s t u d e n t s we r e subgr ouped i n t o

t h o s e who t o o k t h e t e s t a n d p a s s e d a n d t h o s e vtho t o o k t h e t e s t a n d
s t u d i e d a t t h e Engl 1sh L a n g u a g e C e n t e r , t h e p a t t e r n s o f c o r r e l a t i o n s
wer e t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t .

The E n g l i s h s c o r e s o f t h e f o r m e r group t e n d e d

t o show a v e r y weak a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e v a r i o u s c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s
( Ta b l e 12, Appendix A).
13,

In c o n t r a s t , s c o r e s o f t h e l a t t e r group ( Tab l e

Appendix A) and o f t h e combi ned g r o u p s ( Tabl e 7) t e n d e d t o e x h i b i t

p o s i t i v e , s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w ith a l m o s t a l l of t h e c r i t e r i a .
This fin d in g re a ffirm e d th e aforem entioned f a c t concerning English
p ro fic i en cy — t h a t English p r o f i c i e n c y ,

a s m e a s u r e d by v a r i o u s t e s t s ,

t e n d s t o p r e d i c t s t u d e n t a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s up t o a p a r t i c u l a r t h r e s h o l d
value.

Once t h e s t u d e n t ' s s c o r e e x c e e d s t h i s v a l u e , t h e i n f l u e n c e o f

E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y on i m p r o v i n g a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t (GPA) w i l l be
marginal.
T a b l e 15 p r e s e n t s t h e m e a n s a n d s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f t h e
f o r e g o i n g g r o u p s on bot h t h e p r e d i c t o r (MSU-AETS) and t h e c r i t e r i a (GPA
1-term,
CGPA).
7,

number o f c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d by t h e end o f t h e f i r s t t e r m ,

and

Based on t h e s e f i n d i n g s and t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s p r e s e n t e d i n Ta bl e

1 t can be c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e f a i l u r e o f t h e f i r s t g r o u p ' s ( t h o s e who

p a s s e d t h e t e s t t h e f i r s t t i m e ) MSU-AETS t o p r e d i c t t h e i r a c a d e m i c
a c h i e v e m e n t may be a t t r i b u t e d t o a g r e a t e r r e s t r i c t i o n o f r ange and t h e

142'

low l e v e l o f v a r i a b i l 1 t y o f t h e d a t a on b o t h t h e p r e d i c t o r s a nd c r i ­
teria.

Al so,

1 t may be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e E n g l i s h p r o f i ­

c i e n c y o f s t u d e n t s 1n t h i s

group r e a c h e d a l e v e l a t whi ch t h e En g l i s h

l a n g u a g e was n o t a m a j o r b a r r i e r t o t h e i r a c a de mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .

T a b l e 1 5 . — Means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f s e l e c t e d g r o u p s on t h e
MSU-AETS, GPA 1 - t e r m , number o f c r e d i t s c o mp l e t e d f i r s t
t e r m , and CGPA.
GPA
1-Term

MSU-AETS
. X

SD

X

# Credits

1-Term
SD

X

SD

CGPA
X

P a t t e r n of
Correlation

SD

1. Pa s s e d

88 4 . 3 9

3.36

.51

7.87 3.40

3. 41 .31

Very few
positive
correlations

2. S t u d i e d
a t ELC

83 6 . 5 9

2. 11 1. 56

3 . 5 7 4. 41

3 . 2 4 .35

Most r ' s were
significant &
pos i t i v e

2 . 8 7 1. 35

6. 76 4.00

3 . Combined
( 1&2)

84 6 . 4 0

Overall,
English t e s t s

English
tended

defined c r i t e r i a .
tional

3 . 3 8 . 56

Most r ' s were
significant &
positive

p r o f i c i e n c y as measur ed by t h e TOFEL and MSU

( up t o a c e r t a i n t h r e s h o l d v a l u e ) t o

predict

Once t h e s t u d e n t ' s s c o r e exceeded t h a t v a l u e ,

addi­

I m p r o v e m e n t s 1n t h e s c o r e s on b o t h t e s t s t e n d e d t o show no

association

w i t h GPA.

Such l a c k o f a s s o c i a t i o n may be a t t r i b u t e d

e i t h e r t o t h e r e s t r i c t i o n o f r a n g e o r t h e f a c t t h a t Engl 1sh s k i l l s do
n o t i n t e r v e n e w i t h a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t a f t e r a s t u d e n t becomes f l u e n t

143

in English.

If this

1s t r u e *

t h e v a r i a t i o n s 1n s t u d e n t s ’ a c a d e m i c

a c h i e v e m e n t a s me as ur e d by GPA and a c a d e mi c c r e d i t l o a d may be a s c r i b e d
t o o t h e r f a c t o r s * such a s a c a d e mi c background* m o t i v a t i o n * p e r s i s t e n c e *
major fiel d*

and s t u d y h a b i t s .

In a d d i t i o n t o E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y , t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y a t t e m p t e d
t o e xa mi ne t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d f rom u s i n g t h e i nde x o f p r e v i o u s
a c a de mi c a c h i e v e m e n t (IPAA) a s an i n d i c a t o r of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ s u c ­
c e s s in g r a d u a t e s c h o o l.

B e c a u s e o f t h e d i v e r s i t y o f wa y s i n w h i c h

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' g r a d e s we r e r e p o r t e d ,

i t was d i f f i c u l t t o us e t h e i r

actual grades to p r e d i c t academic achievement.
prediction,

For t h e p u r p o s e o f

t h e g r a d e s we r e so d i v e r s e t h a t no a v a i l a b l e e q u a t i n g model

wa s a p p r o p r i a t e t o u s e t h e m a s p r e d i c t o r s o f g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ’ a c a ­
demi c s u c c e s s .

Therefore,

f or e i g n s t u d e n t s ' grades were convert ed t o a

s c a l e s i m i l a r t o MSU's g r a d i n g s c a l e .

The c o n v e r t e d s c o r e s wer e t h e n

used as a p r e d i c t o r of g r a d u a t e a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s .

Although t h e con­

v e r t e d s c o r e s may n o t be e x a c t l y equal t o t h e a c t u a l s c o r e s , t h e c o r r e ­
l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e a c t u a l s c o r e ( r e p o r t e d on a s c a l e f r o m 1 - 1 0 0 , n =
127) and t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n t c o n v e r t e d - g r a d e IPAA was . 95c.

Th i s c o r r e ­

l a t i o n s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n p r o c e d u r e was h i g h l y c o n s i s ­
t e n t and a c c u r a t e .
When IPAA was c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e c r i t e r i a o f a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s ,
i t y i e l d e d c o r r e l a t i o n s o f . 10° w i t h GPA 1 - t e r m ,
and . 1 8 c w i t h CGPA.

I n c o n t r a s t , t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f IPAA w i t h t h e

r e m a i n i n g c r i t e r i a wer e e i t h e r l ow,
ever,

. 1 2 a w i t h GPA 2 - y e a r ,

negative,

or nonsignificant.

How­

when p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y was e s t i m a t e d s e p a r a t e l y f o r t h e v a r i o u s

144

s u b g r o u p s , IPAA emer ged t o e x h i b i t d i f f e r e n t v a l i d i t y for; t h e d i f f e r e n t
gr oups.

Specifically,

t h e IPAA of s t u d e n t s f rom Chi na,

Kuwa i t ,

Brazil,

and J a p a n showed more power 1n p r e d i c t i n g GPA, p a r t i c u l a r l y CGPA, t h a n
did

the

IPAA o f

students

from

other

countries.

Also,

the

IPAA

e x h i b i t e d m o r e p o w e r 1n p r e d i c t i n g t h e GPA o f s t u d e n t s 1n e d u c a t i o n ,
social

science,

Moreover,

business,

and a g r i c u l t u r e t h a n

1n o t h e r c o l l e g e s .

t h e IPAA y i e l d e d a h i g h e r c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h GPAs o f you n g

students,

females,

m a r r i e d s t u d e n t s , and t h o s e 1n t h e m a s t e r ’s pr ogram

t h a n w i t h GPAs o f o l d e r s t u d e n t s ,

ma l e s ,

single students,

and t h o s e in

t h e Ph.D. p r o g r a m .
The l a c k o f c o n s i s t e n c y

1n t h e IPAA's p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y

be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s
t o t h e q u a l i t y of t h e i r home g r a d i n g s y s t e m.

may

d i f f e r e d with r e s p e c t

For exa mpl e , a p a r t i c u l a r

g r o u p o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s m i g h t come t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s w i t h h i g h
grades achieved a t p o o r-q u a li ty
school.

s c h o o l s and do p o o r l y i n MSU g r a d u a t e

A n o t h e r g r o u p m i g h t c o me w i t h m o d e r a t e g r a d e s f r o m h i g h -

q u a l i t y s c h o o l s and do w e l l

i n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .

r e p r e s e n t one p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e
predictive

validity.

Further,

These v a r i a t i o n s

inconsistency

i n t h e IPAA’s

v a r i a t i o n s 1n t h e g r a d i n g s t a n d a r d s i n

v a r i o u s c o l l e g e s a n d d e p a r t m e n t s a t MSU may h a v e c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e
inconsistency

1n t h e IPAA's p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y .

D es pi te t h e problems

involved

in u s i n g f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s ' , aca­

demi c a c h i e v e m e n t a s a p r e d i c t o r o f t h e i r a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s 1n MSU g r a d ­
uate school, the overall

p a t t e r n of th e f in d i n g s suggested t h a t th e

145

h i g h e r t h e s t u d e n t s ' IPAA, t h e m o r e l i k e l y t h e y w i l l be t o m a i n t a i n
b e t t e r a c a d e mi c s t a t u s .
The p r e s e n t s t u d y has a l s o a t t e m p t e d t o e x a mi n e t h e e f f e c t i v e ­
n e s s o f GPA 1 - t e r m a s a p r e d i c t o r of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s
1n g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .

The f i n d i n g s o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y w e r e h i g h l y

c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h o s e r e p o r t e d by P u t n a m ( 1 9 5 3 ) a n d C i e b o t e r ( 1 9 6 9 ) .
Ac c or di ng t o t h e t o t a l - s u b j e c t a n a l y s i s ,

GPA 1 - t e r m e x h i b i t e d c o r r e l a ­

t i o n s with th e v a rio u s c r i t e r i o n measures t h a t were high er than th e
c o r r e l a t i o n s o f E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s and IPAA ( s e e Ta b l e 7).

Also,

GPA

1 - t e r m showed hi gh c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h CGPA i n mos t s u b g r o u p s a n a l y s e s
e x c e p t when t h e t o t a l
origin.

s a mp l e was subgr ouped on t h e b a s i s o f c o u n t r y of

GPA 1 - t e r m f a i l e d t o p r e d i c t t h e CGPA o f s t u d e n t s from coun­

t r i e s i n t h e Mi ddl e E a s t , South Amer i ca, and t h e F a r E a s t ( e x c e p t J a p a n
and China).

In g e n e r a l ,

t h e f a i l u r e of GPA 1 - t e r m t o p r e d i c t t h e CGPA

was due i n p a r t t o t h o s e s t u d e n t s ' low l e v e l o f E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y .
Foreign s t u d e n t s

fr om t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d r e g i o n s e n c o u n t e r more a c a ­

demi c a d j u s t m e n t p r o b l e ms w i t h t h e Amer i can e d u c a t i o n a l s y s t e m t h a n do
s t u d e n t s f r om Europe, E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o u n t r i e s , o r c o u n t r i e s 1n whi ch
English

1s a second l a n g u a g e .

be h i g h e r o r l o w e r t h a n t h e i r

Therefore,
actual

t h e i r GPA 1 - t e r m may a l w a y s

a c a d e mi c p o t e n t i a l .

Particular

gr o u p s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s may s t a r t w i t h j u s t a few c r e d i t s o r l e s s demandi ng c o u r s e s and a c h i e v e a hi gh GPA,
academic p o te n tia l

which does n o t r e f l e c t t h e i r

as t h e y advance t o more demanding c o u r s e s .

In

c o n t r a s t , o t h e r s t u d e n t s may b e g i n w i t h v e r y d e m a n d i n g c o u r s e s a n d
a c h i e v e l o w e r g r a d e s t h a n t h e i r a c t u a l a c a de mi c p o t e n t i a l .

However,

146

the findings

of th e p r e s e n t study,

as w ell

a s t h o s e o f P u t n a m and

C i e b o t e r , r e v e a l e d t h a t GPA 1 - t e r m p o s s e s s e s a ve r y p r o m i s i n g s i g n a s a
good

Indicator

of

foreign

students'

f u tu r e academic achievement.

A c c o r d i n g l y , 1f each c o l l e g e or d e p a r t m e n t r e q u i r e d I t s s t u d e n t s t o
s t a r t w i t h a u n i f o r m number o f c o u r s e s t h e f i r s t t e r m t h a t would ex p o s e
them t o v a r i o u s a c a d e mi c e x p e r i e n c e s ( t er m p a p e r , e s s a y exam, o b j e c t i v e
test,

e t c . ) , GPA 1 - t e r m w o u l d p r o v i d e good u n i f o r m i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t

c o u l d be u s e d i n c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h o t h e r p r e a d m i s s i o n d a t a t o ma ke
a c c u r a t e judgm ents about f o re ig n s t u d e n t s ' p r o b a b i l i t y of academic
s u c c e s s i n a p a r t i c u l a r g r a d u a t e program.
In an a t t e m p t t o i mpr ove p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y , t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y
a l s o exami ned t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f a number of n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c ­
tors

in p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n

predictors

s t u d e n t s ' ac a d e mi c s u c c e s s .

did not e x h i b i t

adequate lin e a r

Al t hough t h e s e

correlations

with

the

d e f i n e d c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e , t h e i r i n c l u s i o n i n t h e s t u d y was found t o be
ve r y e f f e c t i v e .

S pecifically, the nonintellective predictors (particu­

l a r l y a g e , c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n , a nd c o l l e g e t y p e ) w e r e f o u n d t o be v e r y
e f f e c t i v e when t h e y wer e used t o m o d e r a t e t h e
the

intellective

predictors.

predictive validity

By s u b g r o u p i n g t h e t o t a l

of

study s u b j e c t s

on t h e b a s i s o f t h e n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s , p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y was
i n c r e a s e d and t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s e m e r g e d t o show d i f f e r e n t
p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y f o r t h e v a r i o u s gr oups .

In g e n e r a l ,

n o n in te lle c tiv e predictors contributed highly to control

t h e us e o f t h e
of pr e d ic ti o n

e r r o r ca us e d by s t u d y - s u b j e c t h e t e r o g e n e i t y a n d l e d t o m o r e a c c u r a t e
estim ation

of th e i n t e l l e c t i v e

predictors'

validity

coefficients.

147

Accor di ngl y#

foreign

s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t c o l l e g e s #

countries#

and

age c a t e g o r i e s s h o u l d n o t be combi ned f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f v a l i d a t i n g a
particular

s e le c tio n device.

Better prediction

1s m o r e l i k e l y t o

r e s u l t f r om a s e p a r a t e e s t i m a t i o n of p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y f o r each I de n­
t i f i a b l e homogeneous s ubgr oup.
As a r e s u l t of t h e pr obl em I n h e r e n t 1n u s i n g GPA a s a c r i t e r i o n
of g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s * a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s #

th e pres en t study attempted to

use t h e a c a d e mi c a d v i s o r s ’ r a t i n g s o f s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c competence#
c omp l e me n t a r y c r i t e r i a t o t h e GPA.
return,

dictors

Beca us e o f t h e low q u e s t i o n n a i r e

and l a c k o f c o m p l e t e d a t a on t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a #

number of d o c t o r a l

as

the

s t u d e n t s w i t h c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n on bot h t h e p r e ­

and t h e c r i t e r i o n

(advisor rating)

was n o t e n c o u r a g i n g .

How­

ever# u s i n g t h e a v a i l a b l e dat a# t h e f i n d i n g s r e v e a l e d t h a t a d v i s o r
ratings

seem t o p o s s e s s an e n c o u r a g i n g s i g n as a c r i t e r i o n o f f o r e i g n

s t u d e n t s ' . a c a d e mi c s u c c e s s .
In c o n c l u s i o n ,

p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e mi c

s u c c e s s 1n Ameri can s c h o o l s i s a d i s c o u r a g i n g p r o c e s s .
a well-designed

prediction

study

T h i s 1s be c a us e

re q u ir e s t h e examination of a la rge

number o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s who have c o m p l e t e I n f o r m a t i o n on t h e p r e a d ­
m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a and t h e c r i t e r i o n me a s u r e s .

The d e v e l o p me n t o f such a

s t u d y r e q u i r e s t h e t i m e and c o o p e r a t i o n o f a l l o f f i c i a l s c o n c e r n e d w i t h
th e qu es ti on of

foreign

students'

a c a d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t .

Al t hough t h e

p r e s e n t study a tte m p te d t o examine t h e academic r e c o rd s of a l a r g e
n u mb e r o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s # t h e f i n a l d a t a n e e d e d w e r e n o t c o m p l e t e .
Because o f t i m e l i m i t a t i o n s # v a r i o u s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e g u l a t i o n s #

and

148

o t h e r l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s t u d y ,

i t was d i f f i c u l t

t o g a t h e r c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n on a l l o f t h e s t u d y v a r i a b l e s .

However,

compared t o p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h , t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y managed t o c o n t r o l f o r
a number o f v a r i a b l e s

th at

had c a u s e d

Inco n sisten cies

in

form er

re s e a rc h findings.
Based on f i n d i n g s d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r ,

i t 1s c l e a r t h a t e s t i m a t ­

in g t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d from u s i n g a p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n

device

f o r ju d g i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ academ ic s u c c e s s in A m erican g r a d u a t e
s c h o o l s r e q u i r e s a l a r g e s am p l e f o r whom c o m p l e t e d a t a a r e a v a i l a b l e on
a l l t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a .

Such a s am p l e s h o u ld be l a r g e enough

to perm it fu ll control of all th e v a ria b le s t h a t d ir e c tly or in d ir e c tly
a f f e c t t h e m a g n itu d e o f t h e main p r e d i c t o r s ' v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s .
When t h e f o r e g o i n g c o n d i t i o n 1s m e t ,
validity

co efficien ts w ill

id e n tifia b le

b e t t e r e s t i m a t e s of p r e d i c t o r

r e s u l t from v a l i d a t i n g s e p a r a t e l y f o r each

group r a t h e r th a n f o r th e t o t a l

h e t e r o g e n e o u s group.

F u r t h e r m o r e , c o r r e c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f what t h e d a t a on t h e TOFEL, MSUAETS, IPAA, and s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s mean i n t e r m s o f a c a d e m i c s t a n d a r d s
i n MSU g r a d u a t e school

1s l i k e l y t o r e s u l t from e x a m in in g t h e d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n o f d a t a on t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d p r e d i c t o r s a s t h e y c o r r e s p o n d t o
s t u d e n t GPA d i s t r i b u t i o n .

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary
The p r i m a r y p u r p o s e of t h i s s t u d y was t o e s t i m a t e t h e p r e d i c ­
t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e common p r e a d m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a u s e d by a d m i s s i o n
d e c i s i o n m akers t o s c r e e n f o r e ig n s tu d e n ts in to th e various graduate
pro gr ams a t MSU.

In p a r t i c u l a r ,

effectiv en ess

foreign

of

th e w r ite r attem pted to evaluate th e

s t u d e n t s ’ IPAA E n g l i s h

E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e and TOFEL s c o r e s ) ,

test

scores

(MSU

and d e m o g ra p h i c - a n d b i o g r a p h i c a l

d a t a 1n p r e d i c t i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ’ g r a d u a t e a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s ,

as

m e a s u r e d by v a r i o u s t y p e s o f GPA a n d a c a d e m i c c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d a t
d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s in t h e g r a d u a t e program.

F urther, th e p re d ic tiv e

v alid ities

w ere e s ti m a t e d

related

of th e aforem entioned c r i t e r i a

t o t h e m a jo r a ca d em ic a d v i s o r s '

aca dem ic compe tenc e.

Moreover,

ra tin g s of doctoral

as they
students'

t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r a t t e m p t e d t o exa m ine

t h e v a l u e o f f i r s t - t e r m GPA a s a p o t e n t i a l p r e d i c t o r o f f o r e i g n s t u ­
d e n t s ’ l o n g - r u n a ca d em ic s u c c e s s .
B e c a u s e o f t h e n a t u r e o f p r e d i c t i o n r e s e a r c h and t h e h e t e r o ­
g en eity of th e study pop u la tio n ,

th e research e r attem pted to lo c a te a

l a r g e s a m p l e from which s t a b l e f i n d i n g s c o u l d be drawn.

Accordingly,

t h e s t u d y s u b j e c t s w e r e p o o l e d f r o m t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s who w e r e
e n r o l l e d 1n MSU g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s b et w ee n f a l l t e r m 1978 and s p r i n g t e r m

149

150

1982.

The t o t a l

s t u d y s u b j e c t s c o m p r i s e d 1,103 s t u d e n t s who had com­

p l e t e d 12 c r e d i t s o r more.

A f t e r t h e n e c e s s a r y d a t a w ere c o l l e c t e d and

coded , t h e y w ere a n a l y z e d 1n t e r m s o f t h e s t u d y h y p o t h e s e s and r e s e a r c h
questions.
During t h e f i r s t p ha se o f d a t a a n a l y s i s ,

zero-order co rrelatio n

was employed t o e s t i m a t e t h e 1 n t e r c o r r e l a t 1 o n o f t h e s t u d y p r e d i c t o r s
and c r i t e r i o n
th e

measures f o r t h e t o t a l

In tellectiv e

and n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e

s t u d y s u b j e c t s and t o d e t e r m i n e
p red icto rs1 v alid ity

r e la te d to th e d efined c r i t e r i o n m easures.

as they

Th en, t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l

v a l i d i t i e s o f t h e i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s w ere e s t i m a t e d f o r a l l o f t h e
i d e n t i f i a b l e s ub gr oup s.

In t h a t a n a l y s i s ,

the n o n in tellectiv e predic­

t o r s w ere used a s a b a s i s f o r s u b g r o u p i n g t h e t o t a l s t u d y s u b j e c t s i n t o
homogeneous su b g ro u p s.

Then z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n was e m p l o y e d t o

e s t i m a t e t h e 1n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s ' v a l 1d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s a s t h e y
r e l a t e d t o c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s o f t h e v a r i o u s s u bgr oup s.

Further c o rre ­

l a t i o n a n a l y s i s was p er f o r m e d on t h e c o u n t r i e s ' means on t h e p r e d i c t o r s
and c r i t e r i a .

In t h a t a n a l y s i s ,

z e r o - o r d e r and r a n k - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n

we re used t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e c o u n t r y ' s mean (magni­
t u d e o r o r d e r ) on t h e p r e d i c t o r c o u l d p r e d i c t t h e m a g n i t u d e o r t h e
o r d e r o f i t s mean on t h e c r i t e r i o n m e asu re (GPA).
D uring

th e

second

phase

of

data

an alysis,

th e

stepw ise

m u l t i p l e - r e g r e s s i o n t e c h n i q u e was u n d e r t a k e n t o e s t i m a t e t h e m u l t i p l e
c o n t r i b u t i o n o f t h e v a r i o u s v a r i a b l e s 1n p r e d i c t i n g t h e t h e t o t a l s tu d y
s u b j e c t and t h e su bg ro up GPA c r i t e r i o n m e a su re s (CGPA).

This te ch n iq u e

151

was a l s o e m p l o y e d t o s p e c i f y t h o s e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t a c c o u n t e d f o r a s
much of t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a n c e a s did t h e t o t a l s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s .
D u r i n g t h e f i n a l s t a g e o f d a t a a n a l y s i s , t - t e s t s and o n e - w a y
ANOVAs were used t o com par e t h e v a r i o u s s u b g r o u p s o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s
with

r e s p e c t t o t h e i r a v e r a g e p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e ­

rio n measures.

When t h e ANOVA y i e l d e d a s i g n i f i c a n t F - t e s t ,

post-hoc

c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s e s ( T u c k e y ) w e r e u s e d t o l o c a t e t h e m ea ns t h a t d i f ­
f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from each o t h e r .
I n v i e w o f t h e f i n d i n g s c i t e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e s t u d y and t h e
d i s c u s s i o n o f t h o s e f i n d i n g s , t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s were drawn.

1.

The TOFEL s c o r e f a i l e d t o c o n s i s t e n t l y

p re d ic t foreign

s t u d e n t s ’ ac ad em ic s u c c e s s , as me asured by t h e v a r i o u s c r i t e r i o n meas­
ures.
ity

Although t h e TOFEL t e n d e d t o y i e l d s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d ­
for f ir s t- te r m

GPA and a c a d e m i c c r e d i t l o a d ,

t h e m a g n it u d e o f i t s

v a l i d i t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e r e m a i n i n g GPA m e a s u r e s and t h e i n d i c e s of
t h e ac a d em ic a d v i s o r s ’ r a t i n g s w er e low,
Such f a i l u r e was a t t r i b u t e d ,

in l a r g e p a r t ,

nonsignificant,

or negative.

t o t h e low l e v e l

of v a ria ­

b i l i t y o f t h e d a t a on b ot h t h e p r e d i c t o r s and t h e c r i t e r i a .
2.

The o v e r a l l

correlational

analysis

r e v e a l e d t h a t MSU-AETS

was a good p r e d i c t o r of f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' g r a d u a t e aca dem ic s u c c e s s , as
mea sure d by GPA and a c a d e m i c c r e d i t s
t h e g r a d u a te program.

However,

achieved a t d i f f e r e n t p o in ts

1n

when t h e i n d i c e s o f t h e a d v i s o r s '

152

r a t i n g s w e r e u s e d a s t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s , t h e MSU-AETS t e n d e d t o
yield a positive co rrelatio n ,
tion,

most o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s w e r e n o t s i g n i f i c a n t .
3.

TOFEL,

but because of t h e s i z e o f t h e observa­

The f a i l u r e o f t h e E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s ,

p a r tic u la r ly the

t o y i e l d a p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y t h a t was s t a t i s t i c a l l y and p r a c ­

t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t was a t t r i b u t e d , t o a g r e a t d e g r e e , t o t h e r e s t r i c ­
t i o n o f r a n g e o f t h e d a t a on b o t h t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a , and t o
th e h e te ro g e n e ity of th e study s u b je c ts .

The e v i d e n c e from t h e d i f f e r r

ential

validity

a n a l y s i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t when t h e ran ge o f t h e d a t a on

both t h e E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s and t h e c r i t e r i o n

m e a su r e s was a d e q u a t e ,

t h e TOFEL and t h e MSU-AETS te n d e d t o y i e l d a p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y t h a t
was s t a t i s t i c a l l y and p r a c t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t .

Also, an e x a m i n a t i o n of

t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f E n g l i s h s c o r e s c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of
GPAs r e v e a l e d t h a t s t u d e n t s who s t a r t e d t h e i r a ca d em i c work w i t h h ig h
E n g l is h s c o r e s were more l i k e l y t o a c c u m u l a t e h i g h e r GPAs and t o e a r n
m o r e c r e d i t s t h a n t h o s e who s t a r t e d t h e i r a c a d e m i c p r o g r a m w i t h low
E n g lish scores.
4.

MSU E n g l i s h s u b t e s t s (grammar, l i s t e n i n g , and r e a d i n g ) were

the best p re d ic to rs of fo reig n s tu d e n ts' graduate success,
by GPA 1 - t e r m .

a s me asured

But when CGPA was used a s t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e ,

t e n i n g an d w r i t i n g s u b t e s t s c o r e s w e r e t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r s .

lis­

In c o n ­

t r a s t , when a c a d e m i c c r e d i t l o a d c o m p l e t e d a t v a r i o u s p o i n t s o f t h e
«

g r a d u a t e program was used a s t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e ,
ing s u b t e s t s c o r e s w e r e t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r s .

r e a d i n g and l i s t e n ­

153

5.

The Index o f p r e v i o u s aca dem ic a c h i e v e m e n t (IPAA) ap p e a r e d

t o p r e d i c t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' g r a d u a t e s u c c e s s , a s m e a s u r e d by GPA 1term ,

GPA 2 - t e r m ,

Indices of

and CGPA.

a d v i s o r s ' r a t i n g s were usedas t h e c r i t e r i a

ac ad em ic s u c c e s s , t h e
6.
predicted

B u t when GPA 1 - y e a r , c r e d i t l o a d ,

power o f IPAAas a

and

ofg r a d u a te

p r e d i c t o r was v er y weak.

GPA 1 - t e r m was t h e b e s t s i n g l e p r e d i c t o r t h a t c o n s i s t e n t l y
foreign

students' graduate success,

as measu red by t h e v a r ­

ious c r i t e r i o n measures.
7.

The n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e

p red icto rs,

such

as

sex,

m arital

s t a t u s , ag e, d e g r e e l e v e l , c o u n t r y of o r i g i n , and ty p e of c u r r i c u l u m ,
f a i l e d t o y i e l d c o n s i s t e n t p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of t h e defined c r i t e r i o n
m easures.

However,

betwe en s t u d e n t s '

th e

d irectio n

of th e

age and d e g r e e l e v e l

sig n ific a n t co rrelatio n

and t h e GPA c r i t e r i a s u g g e s t e d

t h a t s t u d e n t s who w e r e y o u n g o r i n t h e d o c t o r a l

program te n d e d t o

a c h i e v e h i g h e r GPAs t h a n t h o s e who w er e o l d e r o r 1n t h e m a s t e r ' s pr o ­
gram.
When t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d p r e d i c t o r s w e r e u s e d a s m o d e r a t o r s ,
t h e y proved t o be e f f e c t i v e in e n h a n c in g t h e o v e r a l l
racy of t h e I n t e l l e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s .

The d i f f e r e n t i a l

p r e d ic tio n accu­
v a l id it y analy­

s i s o f t h e v a r i o u s g r o u p s p r o v i d e d s e v e r a l i n s t a n c e s 1n which a c e r t a i n
I n t e l l e c t i v e p re d ic to r yield ed a higher c o r r e l a ti o n with th e c r i t e r i o n
m e asu re s o f a p a r t i c u l a r group th a n w ith t h o s e of t h e t o t a l
subjects or
8.

study

t h e o t h e r s ub gr ou ps.
Using t h e s t e p w i s e m u l t i pi e - r e g r e s s i o n t e c h n i q u e

I n c r e a s e 1n o v e r a l l p r e d i c t i o n a c c u r a c y .

l e d t o an

The m u l t i p l e c o n t r i b u t i o n

154

t h a t r e s u l t e d from co m b in in g t h e I n t e l l e c t i v e and n o n i n t e l l e c t i v e p r e ­
d i c t o r s l e d t o an o b s e r v a b l e i n c r e a s e 1n o v e r a l l
9.

The o v e r a l l

p re d ic tio n accuracy.

r e s u l t o f t h e t o t a l - s a m p l e and su bg rou p s t e p ­

w i s e m u l t l p l e - r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s i n d i c a t e d t h a t GPA 1 - t e r m ,

MSU-AETS,

and c o l l e g e t y p e w e r e t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r s o f t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n m e a s ­
ures.

H o w e v e r , i n a n u m b e r o f I n s t a n c e s , IPAA, i n a d d i t i o n t o GPA 1-

t e r m , MSU-AETS, and c o l l e g e t y p e , was one o f t h e b e s t p r e d i c t o r s o f t h e
GPA c r i t e r i o n m e a su r e s.
C h in e se ,

T h i s was p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e f o r f e m a l e , Korean,

and J a p a n e s e s t u d e n t s ,
10.

and f o r t h o s e in t h e b u s i n e s s c o l l e g e .

M a l e s a nd f e m a l e s d i d n o t d i f f e r w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r

p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e p r e d i c t o r s o r t h e c r i t e r i a ,

e x c e p t f o r t h e E n g l is h

listening

accumulate a s i g n i f i ­

s u b t e s t and CGPA.

Fema les t e n d e d t o

c a n t l y h i g h e r mean on b ot h v a r i a b l e s t h a n d id ma les.
11.

S in g le g ra d u a te s tu d e n t s tended t o achieve s i g n i f i c a n t l y

h i g h e r means w i t h

r e s p e c t t o t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e p r e d i c t o r s and

c r i t e r i a t h a n d id m a r r i e d s t u d e n t s .
12.

O v e r a l l , s t u d e n t s 1n t h e d o c t o r a l program had h i g h e r means

t h a n t h o s e in t h e m a s t e r ' s program w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e on
t h e E n g l i s h t e s t and t h e GPA c r i t e r i o n me as u re s.
13.

F o r e ig n s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d s c o r e s o f 80 o r above on t h e

MSU-AETS t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r GPAs an d c r e d i t
l o a d s t h a n t h o s e who a c h i e v e d s c o r e s o f 80 o r below on t h e same t e s t .
14.

F o re ig n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s whose a c a d e m i c r e c o r d s I n d i c a t e d

t h e i r a ca d em i c p r o g r e s s was normal t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y

155

h i g h e r m e a n s on t h e p r e d i c t o r a n d c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s t h a n d i d t h o s e
whose a c a d e m i c r e c o r d s i n d i c a t e d t h e i r a ca d em ic p r o g r e s s was n o t normal.
15.

Young g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s had s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r me ans

w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e d a t a on t h e p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n

m e a s u r e s th a n

d id o l d e r g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s .
16.

F o re ig n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t p a r t s o f t h e

world d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w ith r e s p e c t t o t h e i r average performance
on t h e c r i t e r i o n m e a s u r e s .
countries,

Europe,

th a t order,

O v e r a l 1* s t u d e n t s f r o m E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g

and t h e Far E a s t ( p a r t i c u l a r l y China and J a p a n ) ,

tended to acc u m u late s i g n i f i c a n t l y

in

h i g h e r GPAs and t o

c o m p l e t e more c r e d i t s t h a n s t u d e n t s from t h e M id d le E a s t and South
America.
17.

F o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s who c a m e t o MSU w i t h a d e q u a t e

E n g l i s h s c o r e s (TOFEL > 550 o r MSU-AETS > 80) and s t u d e n t s f o r whom t h e
E n g l i s h s c o r e s w e r e waived ( p a r t i c u l a r l y s t u d e n t s from E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g
c o u n t r i e s ) t e n d e d t o a c c u m u l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r GPAs and t o com­
p l e t e more c r e d i t s t h a n t h o s e s t u d e n t s who came w i t h low E n g l i s h p r o f i ­
c i e n c y and s t u d i e d a t t h e E n g l i s h Language C e n t e r .
O verall,
those findings

t h e s t u d y f i n d i n g s and t h e c o n c l u s i o n s d r a w n f r o m

p r o v i d e i n t e r e s t i n g and u s e f u l

I n f o r m a t i o n t h a t a d m is ­

s i o n d e c i s i o n m a k e r s a t MSU may u s e t o I m p r o v e t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t
a d m i s s i o n program.

The f i n d i n g s r e g a r d i n g t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e IPAA and

E n g l i s h s c o r e s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y MSU-AETS and GPA 1 - t e r m ) r e v e a l e d a number
of im p lic a tio n s f o r personnel

who deal

stu d en ts.

study

Furtherm ore,

the

with th e admission of foreign

findings

revealed

a number of

156

I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h o s e who a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h m a x i m i z i n g t h e a c c u r a c y
w ith w hich f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' aca d em ic s u c c e s s in Am erican g r a d u a t e
s c h o o l s 1s p r e d i c t e d .

Recommendat-1 qjis
In v ie w of t h e s t u d y f i n d i n g s and t h e c o n c l u s i o n s drawn from
th o se fin d in g s^

several

r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s w e r e made p o s s i b l e .

r e c o m m e n d a t io n s a r e c o n s i d e r e d u n d er t h e f o l l o w i n g h e a d i n g s :

These
(1) s u g ­

g e s t e d t w o - s t a g e s e l e c t i o n model and (2) re co m m e n d a t io n s f o r f u r t h e r
research.

Sug g e s t e d Two-Stage. S e l e c t i o n Model
The l a c k o f u n i f o r m d a t a on w h i c h d e c i s i o n m a k e r s c a n b a s e
t h e i r judgm ents of f o re ig n s t u d e n t s ' a d m i s s i b i l i t y

into a p a rtic u la r

p r o g r a m h a s made t h e d e c i s i o n m a k e r ' s t a s k v e r y d i f f i c u l t .

However,

t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e p r e s e n t s tu d y r e v e a l e d a number of i m p l i c a t i o n s
t h a t may a i d d e c i s i o n ma kers 1n making a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t s r e g a r d i n g t h e
M>

p ro b a b ility of foreign s t u d e n t s ' academ ic s u c c e s s in p a r t i c u l a r p ro ­
grams.

Based on t h e s e i m p l i c a t i o n s , t h e r e s e a r c h e r a t t e m p t e d t o modify

t h e c u r r e n t s e l e c t i o n mode ls used by v a r i o u s g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s i n t o t h e
f o l l o w i n g t w o - s t a g e s e l e c t i o n model.
F irst-stag e selection.

At t h i s

stage,

t h e judgment of a f o r ­

eig n s t u d e n t 's a d m i s s i b i l i t y ( p r o b a b i l i t y o f academ ic s u c c e s s in a
p a r t i c u l a r program) must be bas ed on c r i t e r i a
p r e v i o u s ac a de m ic g r a d e ) ,

such a s IPAA ( c o n v e r t e d

E n g l i s h s c o r e s (MSU-AETS and t h e TOFEL),

age,

157

degree le v e l,

and n a t i o n a l i t y .

To make an a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t ,

the

d e c i s i o n maker may use t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t e r i a :
1.

I f t h e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t ' s IPAA 1s a d e q u a t e (> 2. 0) a n d h i s

E n g l i s h s c o r e s m ee t t h e u n i v e r s i t y s t a n d a r d (MSU-AETS > 80 o r TOFEL >
550),

he s h o u l d be g i v e n a c o n d i t i o n a l

h i s ac a d em ic program,

a d m i s s i o n and a l l o w e d t o s t a r t

according t o th e c o n d itio n s explained

in C r i t e ­

r i o n 4.
2.

I f t h e s t u d e n t ' s IPAA i s a d e q u a t e ( > 2 . 0 ) an d h i s MSU-AETS

s c o r e i s betwe en 60 and 79, he s h o u l d be g iv e n a c o n d i t i o n a l

admission

and r e f e r r e d t o t h e E n g l i s h L a n g u a g e C e n t e r f o r an e x t e n s i v e E n g l i s h
program.

When h e a c h i e v e s a s c o r e o f > 80 on t h e MSU-AETS, h e t h e n

s h o u l d be p e r m i t t e d t o s t a r t h i s a c a d e m i c p r o g r a m , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e
c o n d i t i o n s e x p l a i n e d 1n C r i t e r i o n
3.

4.

I f t h e s t u d e n t f a i l s t o a c h i e v e a s c o r e o f > 80 on t h e MSU-

AETS, he s h o u ld be i n t e r v i e w e d by t h e a d m i s s i o n c o m m i t t e e o f h i s c o l ­
lege or department,

and one of tw o a c t i o n s s h o u l d be t a k e n on t h e b a s i s

o f t h e i r re c o m m e n d a t io n s :

(1) he s h o u ld be a l l o w e d t o s t a r t h i s a c a ­

d e m i c p r o g r a m , o r (2) h e s h o u l d be d r o p p e d f r o m t h e u n i v e r s i t y .

This

s u g g e s t i o n i s a p p l i c a b l e o n ly t o t h o s e s t u d e n t s who have good p r e v i o u s
a ca de m ic a c h i e v e m e n t and whose r e c o r d s c o n f i r m t h e i r s e r i o u s work w h i l e
s t u d y i n g a t t h e E n g l i s h Language C e n t e r .

Some s t u d e n t s who have good

p r e v i o u s a c a d e m i c r e c o r d s and good a c a d e m i c p o t e n t i a l

may f a i l t o

a c h i e v e a s c o r e o f 80 on t h e MSU-AETS b e c a u s e o f t h e i r u n f a m i l i a r i t y
with o b j e c t i v e - t e s t - t a k i n g s t r a t e g i e s (A seeri,

1980).

158

4.

A fte r a s tu d e n t m eets th e s ta n d a rd s w ith r e s p e c t t o h is

IPAA an d E n g l i s h

te st

academ ic program .

scores,

he sh ou ld

S in c e some f o r e i g n

be a l l o w e d

to

start

his

s t u d e n t s may s t a r t w i t h l e s s

demanding c o u r s e s o r c a r r y f e w e r c r e d i t s t o m ee t t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s
c o n d itio n a l admission,

of

i t i s recommended t h a t a l l f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s in a

p a r t i c u l a r c o l l e g e o r d e p a r t m e n t s t a r t w i t h t h e same c o u r s e s .

Each

c o l l e g e o r d e p a r t m e n t s h o u l d s p e c i f y two c o u r s e s in t h e m a s t e r ' s p r o­
g ra m a nd f o u r c o u r s e s f o r d o c t o r a l s t u d e n t s .

The c h o i c e o f c o u r s e s

mu st t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e v a r i o u s a ca d em ic e x p e r i e n c e s ( t a k i n g o b j e c ­
t i v e and e s s a y t e s t s ,
as

w r iti n g papers,

he p r o g r e s s e s t h r o u g h

courses w ill

the

etc.) th e stu d en t w ill encounter

program.

The s t u d e n t ' s

GPA i n

such

p r o v i d e d e c i s i o n ma ker s w i t h h i g h l y un if or m d a t a t h a t can

be u s e d t o make a c c u r a t e j u d g m e n t s a b o u t t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e s t u ­
d e n t ' s a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s i n a p a r t i c u l a r program.
Second-stage s e l e c t i o n .

A fte r th e s tu d e n t com pletes th e pre­

d e f i n e d c o u r s e s and b e f o r e he e n r o l l s f o r f u r t h e r c o u r s e s ,

t h e ad m is ­

s i o n d e c i s i o n c o m m i t t e e mu st e v a l u a t e t h e q u a l i t y o f h i s p e r f o r m a n c e .
I f t h e s t u d e n t m a n a g e d t o a c c u m u l a t e a GPA o f > 3 . 0 i n a l l
c o u r s e s , h e s h o u l d be g i v e n r e g u l a r a d m i s s i o n .

required

But i f t h e s t u d e n t 's

GPA i s u n s a t i s f a c t o r y , h e m u s t be d r o p p e d f r o m t h e s c h o o l .
c o n t i n u a t i o n may l e a d t o s e r i o u s f i n a n c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l

F urther
losses.

The u n i v e r s i t y may c o n t i n u e t o us e t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d model f o r
four years.

By t h e end o f t h e f o u r t h y e a r and a f t e r a l a r g e number of

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s have been s c r e e n e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d
procedures,

a c o m p r e h e n s i v e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e e n t i r e program s h o u ld be

159

u n d e r ta k e n .

To f a c l l i t a t e t h e work t h a t may be needed t o c o n d u c t such

an e v a l u a t i o n t h e f o l l o w i n g re co m m e n d a t io n s a r e p r e s e n t e d .

Recommendations f o r F u r t h e r Resea rc h
To c o n d u c t an o b j e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e u t i l i t y o f t h e f o r e ­
go in g model, t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o c e d u r e s may be used:
1.

D esign a c h a r t s i m i l a r t o t h e one used t o c o l l e c t d a t a in

t h e p r e s e n t s tu d y .
for conditional

A f t e r a s t u d e n t m e e ts t h e u n i v e r s i t y

admission,

requirem ents

t h e c h a r t may be p l a c e d in h i s f i l e a t t h e

O f f i c e o f F o r e i g n S t u d e n t s and S c h o l a r s .

The needed i n f o r m a t i o n can be

e n t e r e d g r a d u a l l y , s o t h a t by t h e end o f t h e f o u r t h y e a r t h e i n f o r m a ­
t i o n needed f o r e v a l u a t i o n w i l l
2.

The e v a l u a t i o n

be a v a i l a b l e .

s h o u l d be c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g

predictors:
a.

C o n v e r t e d p r e v i o u s a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t (IPAA).

concerning t h i s
tries

predictor

Data

s h o u ld be m a i n t a i n e d f o r a s many coun­

as p o ssib le.
b.

MSU E n g l i s h t e s t s c o r e s ( a v e r a g e and s u b t e s t s ) .

To

o b t a i n c o m p l e t e i n f o r m a t i o n , a l l f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s from n o n - E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c o u n t r i e s s h o u l d be r e q u i r e d t o t a k e t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t .
c.

F i r s t - t e r m GPA o f s t u d e n t s a t t h e m a s t e r ' s l e v e l .

d.

CGPA o f t h e f i r s t t w o t e r m s f o r s t u d e n t s a t t h e d o c ­

toral le v el.
e.
program.

GRE s c o r e s o f s t u d e n t s s e e k i n g a d m i s s i o n t o t h e Ph.D.
The v a r i o u s g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s s h o u l d r e q u i r e a l l a p p l i ­

c a n t s t o s u b m i t t h e i r GRE s c o r e s .

Having such i n f o r m a t i o n f o r

16 0

l a r g e numbers o f s t u d e n t s from v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s and c o l l e g e s would
e n a b l e r e s e a r c h e r s t o e x am in e t h e i r v a l i d i t y a s r e l a t e d t o c r i t e r i a
o f ac a d e m i c s u c c e s s .

F u r t h e r , t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f GRE s c o r e s would

allow re s e a r c h e r s t o

ex am in e t h e

distribution

o f t h e s e s c o r e s as

t h e y c o r r e s p o n d t o s t u d e n t s ' GPA in v a r i o u s g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s .

Such

an e x a m i n a t i o n w o u l d p r o v i d e v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t how t o
I n t e r p r e t t h e s e s c o r e s and how t o u s e t h e m when j u d g i n g f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s ' a ca de m ic p o t e n t i a l
3.

The c r i t e r i a of academic s u c c e s s must i n c l u d e :
a.

of

1n a p a r t i c u l a r program.

the

GPAs and t h e ac a d e m i c c r e d i t l o a d c o m p l e t e d by t h e end
f i r s t term ,

th e f i r s t year,

and t h e en d o f t h e m a s t e r ' s

program.
b.
t h e second
c.

GPAs and a c a d e m i c c r e d i t l o a d c o m p l e t e d by t h e e nd o f
t e r m , t h e s ec on d y e a r ,

and t h e end o f t h e Ph.D.

The ac a d e m i c a d v i s o r ' s r a t i n g o f t h e d o c t o r a l

ac a d em i c compe tenc e.

program.
stu d en t's

The r a t i n g s c a l e in Appendix H may be used t o

c o l l e c t t h e d a t a r e g a r d i n g t h i s c r i t e r i o n me as u re .

I f such a s c a l e

co u l d be c o m p le te d by t h e m a j o r a c a d e m i c a d v i s o r and a n o t h e r member
of th e doctoral

com m ittee,

t h e a v e r a g e o f t h e i r r a t i n g s would

p r o v i d e a more a c c u r a t e m e a s u r e o f a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s i n t h e d o c t o r a l
p r o g r a m t h a n w o u l d t h e GPA a t d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n t h e d o c t o r a l
program.
4.
data,

When e s t i m a t i n g t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e p r e a d m i s s i o n

i t m u s t be c o m p u t e d f o r t h e t o t a l

s a m p le and f o r a l l

possible

i d e n t i f i a b l e s u b g r o u p s ( m a i n l y c o l l e g e , c o u n t r y , and age c a t e g o r i e s ) .

161

Such p r o c e d u r e s would p r o v i d e v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n on how t h e v a r i o u s
p r e d i c t o r s c o u l d be u s e d t o e s t i m a t e t h e p r o b a b i l i t y

of a s p e c if i c

group o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s s u c c e e d i n g in a p a r t i c u l a r program.
5.
ardized

If possible,

interview

w it h

p r o f e s s i o n a l p e r s o n n e l s h o u ld c o n d u c t a s t a n d ­
foreign

b efore they earn t h e i r degrees.

s t u d e n t s who t e r m i n a t e t h e i r pro gr ams
Such an i n t e r v i e w

f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a ca d em i c s u c c e s s ,

such as m o t i v a t i o n ,

ment t o t h e American c u l t u r e and e d u c a t i o n a l
demic a t t i t u d e s ,
6.

a ca d em i c s e l f - c o n c e p t ,

s h o u l d f o c u s on

system,

clarity

adjust­
of aca­

and so on.

In a d d i t i o n t o e x a m i n i n g p r e d i c t o r v a l i d i t y , t h e e v a l u a t i o n

s h o u l d be c o n c e r n e d w i t h e x a m in in g t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e d a t a on t h e
p r e d i c t o r in r e l a t i o n t o

data d is tr i b u tio n

on t h e c r i t e r i o n

m e a su r e s.

Such an e x a m i n a t i o n w o u l d p r o v i d e i n s i g h t i n t o how t h e d a t a c o u l d be
i n t e r p r e t e d and used t o s e l e c t f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s f o r v a r i o u s g r a d u a t e
programs.
7.

F i n a l l y , t h e e v a l u a t i o n s h o u l d be c o n c e rn e d w i t h e s t i m a t i n g

the r e l i a b i l i t y
b ility

o f t h e MSU-English s u b t e s t s .

Knowledge o f t h e r e l i a ­

w o u l d p r o v i d e v a l u a b l e I n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e b e n e f i t t o be

g a in e d from u s in g t h e t h e v a r io u s s u b t e s t s as c r i t e r i a

f o r judging

f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s ' r e a d i n e s s t o s t a r t t h e i r a ca d em i c prog ram s.

APPENDI CES

162

s

APPENDIX A

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PREDICTORS AND CRITERIA
FOR THE VARIOUS DEMOGRAPHIC SUBGROUPS

Academic
Status

R0AC-A

R0AC-F

. i f

186

.04
136

.24b
136

.10
191

.16
191

.25
32

.006
191

.13
24

-.03
23

.3 0°

. 16°
371

.24°
371

. 20 °
265

• 19C
265

.29C
394

. 12C
394

.3 4 c
245

.2 2 °

111

.32c
372

395

«26c
48

.15
47

Vocabulary

.25°
372

. 28 c
372

.13b
371

.23°
371

. 15C
265

.lla
265

.26c
394

.07
394

.3 6c
245

. 19°
395

.18
48

.02
47

Read i ng

.3 0°
318

.36°
318

. l8c
317

• 36c
317

.21 C
221

.2 7 C
221

.30c
336

. 19°
336

.1 1 °

213

. 19°
338

.2 9a
41

.19
41

Listening

.26c
373

.3 1c
373

.l4 b
372

.29c
372

.2 0°
266

.21°
266

.20°
394

.llb
394

.07
246

.2 0 c
395

.21
48

.2 4a
47

Wr i t ing

. 20°
376

.27°
376

.01
375

.26c
375

. 1 5b
269

.21C
269

.18C
399

.1 3 C
399

. i f

248

. I4b
400

-.06
49

Average

. 35°
111

.39c
372

.17°
371

• 37c
371

.2 5C
265

.25c
265

.31°
394

15°
394

.30c
245

.24c
394

1n t e r v i ew

.27b
107

.25b
107

.08
107

.2 1a
107

.20a
82

.12
82

.27b
113

.07
113

Ii Pflfl
rH H

.08
237

.07
237

.0**
237

.09
H I

.06
172

-.07
172

. 13a
251

.02
251

DA
A
r AA

.13
88

.11
88

.12
88

.09
88

.0 b
6b

-.07
64

.04
92

1 • uu

• 71c
690

.**1°

687

.52c
687

.b 0 c
b ie

1- t e r m

S i g n i f i c a n t at . 05.

.01.

.25°
476

.4 lc
690

# of

CGPA

GPA
2-Year

S i g n i f i c a n t at

~o

O 0L.)
=tfc O

.

-.03
92
.12b
690

S i g n i f i c a n t at

-.05
47
0*0

.94°
92
.08
237
. 001.

-.12
48

.24a
48

.17
47

-.01
114

.32
8

.36
7

.07
247

-.17
31

-.25
31

-.13
91

1
O
00

urA

<+-

-.23
13

.05
685

.34°
92

•

Grammar

t/)

4-J

Cred i t s

.03
186

# of
Cred i t s

. 30 °
188

GPA
1-Year

.22c
188

Tnrn
IUrtL

Cred i t s

IPAA

f o r male g r o u p .

§ of

1 . — C o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

13

.27b
90

R0AC-A

R0AC-F

.11
80

• 30
10

.05
10

. 31°
95

.22°
152

.03
5

.05
5

.25°
150

• 29c
95

.20C
151

.53
5

.52
5

• 17a
127

.08
127

.09
83

• 19a
128

.51
*

.*5
*

.28b
81

.05
152

.l* a
152

-.05
95

.23C
153

.19
5

.65
5

.27b
80

. I8a
80

.27°
151

. I6a
151

.32c
95

.20b
152

.*3
5

-.3*
5

• 33c
1*0

.26b
82

.3 5 c
82

.23b
152

.23b
153

. 22a
95

.28
13*

o*2
5

.51
5

.25a
50

.3 9a
23

.15
23

.16
56

- o 12
25

.07
57

...

•• •

-.09
89

.36b
52

.17
52

.35c
95

.2 3a
95

1 .00

.11

.96
*

.96
*

•••

•••

.09
18

.17
18

.I9a
138

.19 a
138

J9a
80

.29b
80

.21°
151

.25°
151

.13
1*0

.31
137

.35°
137

.1*
80

.*1C
80

.25°
150

.23b
120

.12
120

.26b
118

.25b
118

.17
33

.23a
73

Li s t e n i ng

. 21 b
1*2

.12
1*2

.l*a
139

.27C
139

.17
81

Wr i t i ng

.12
141

.12
1*1

. 22b
138

.27°
138

Average

.26c
1*3

.13
1*3

.29°
1*0

Interview

.26a
50

.20
50

.39a
50

IPAA

. 17a

-.08
90

PAA

.31a
3*

it o f

Grammar

.23b
141

-.0 1
1*1

Vocabulary

.26c
140

Read i ng

90

GPA 1-term

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t at . 0 5 . .

.03
90

t of

.08
81

-.02
79

.06
79

CGPA

t of

.02
81

.27b
79

TOFEL

t of

.19
*7

GPA
1-Year

.12
*7

Cred i t s

.11
79

GPA
1-Term

GPA
2-Year

Cred i t s

-.19
1*

Cred i t s

Academi c
Status

f o r female group.

IPAA

2 . — C o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

Cred i t s

Table

-.05
56

.26
3*

.*3b
3*

.21
3*

• 5*b
25

• 37a
25

.51°
35

.3 *a
35

.9*°
35

-.05
35

.* 3°
27*

.32c
27*

. *3°
271

.*1c
159

• 25C
159

. 39°
27*

.l* b
27*

.1 7 a
90

273

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

S i g n i f i c a n t at

. 001.

.10a

Table

3 .--Correlation

b e tw e e n p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n
</)

rr
fc
U
Q)

<
in .
U
1■
O

—

“U
O
=tfc o

TOFEL

.1 3 a
209

.24c
209

Grammar

.3 7°
347

.29°
347

Vocabulary

. 28 c
346

03
U)
<
5A
LL_
|I
o
—

i+ O

in
—
“O
(L)

=tt= O

fo r s i n g l e group.
O

in
<

03
<D
>-

O

<N

• 4 — "O
O
0)
0

in
CZ ifi
0 ) Z3
" D +■*
03 03
1 1
■1
u
+-#

•CL.

M— "O
O
0)

O

=*fc i_J

<
—

<C to

11
1
/ \
w
<

1
<
O
QC

0

. l 8b
208

.04
142

.22
1k 2

.06
214

.18
214

.06

.01

36

213

. 20 °
345

. 28 c
345

.23°
234

. 20 C
234

.33c
364

.09
364

. 26 °
217

.18°
367

.31a
31

.24
30

.27°
346

. 18°
344

.27°
344

.1 3a
234

.17°
363

,2 4 c
363

.05
363

.24c
217

.1 5°
366

-.003
30

.29°

.11
182

.15b
305

.14
31
,, b
.46
27

-.02
208

-.11
28

-.03
27

• 32c

.3 4°

288

288

.18°
287

• 33c
287

•20b
193

.2 3°
193

301

. 12 a
301

Listening

.2 7°
349

.25°
349

.17C
347

.27c
347

. l4a
236

. 19°
236

. 16 C
365

.04
365

-.01
218

Wri t ing

.19°
351

. 22 °
351

.lla
349

.23°
349

.17°

. 19°

238

238

. 19°
369

.09a
369

220

. 12 b
372

Average

.3 7°
349

.3 5 c
349

.22°
347

.37c
347

.23°

.25c

236

236

.31°
366

366

.20°
217

.20°
369

.30a
31

.20
30

Interview

.29c
104

,2 0 a
104

.30°
104

.26b
104

,2 2 a
72

.11
72

.15
112

-.02
112

-.27a
45

.03
113

.34

7

.28
6

IPAA

.09
213

-.005
213

.01
212

.03
212

.11
149

-.04
149

.l4 a
223

.03
223

...

.04
221

-.26
19

-.33
19

PAA

.13
88

. I8a
88

.11
88

.08
88

.09
67

-.09
67

.15
90

.15
90

.94
90

-.005
89

-.006

-.21

1.00

• 64c
700

.36°
696

,4 8c
696

.4oc
461

.4lc
700

. 13C
700

.09
213

.0 8
696

Read i ng

GPA 1- term

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

.23c
461

.10a

.14
368

• 30c

S i g n i f i c a n t at

. 001.

.35a
27

.25
31

.20

-.12
32

-.17
31

9
.36°
75

30

9
.30c
73

R0AC-A

R0AC-F

.09
58

.8 3a
6

.8 3a
6

.20a
111

.20b
181

.2 3 C
181

. 48°
123

.26c
180

.12
22

-.1 1
22

.193
111

. 16a
111

.27C
181

.20b
181

.50c
123

.25C
180

.27
22

.06
22

. 35 °
148

.2 13
101

.33°
101

.2 6 C
162

.27°
162

.4oc
114

,22b
161

-.03
18

-.19
18

.09
165

. 30°
164

.33°
111

.26b
111

J9b
181

.20b
181

,l8a
123

.26C
180

.10
22

.29
22

.20b
166

.05
165

• 33c
164

.22b
111

.21 b
111

,22C
181

.22°
181

.30c
123

.20b
180

.12
22

.04
22

. 23°
166

.20b
166

J7a
165

.34 c
16*4

.33°
111

.29C
111

.2 7°
181

.2 6 C
181

.43°
123

.30C
180

.11
22

.03
22

Interview

.17
53

.25a
53

.04
53

.12
52

.35a
33

.21
33

.31b
59

.10
59

.3 3a
27

-.01
58

.42
4

.42
4

IPAA

.11
114

.15

.09
114

.1**
114

.14
75

-,0 h

.2 h b

114

75

123

.10
123

.14
121

-.06
16

-.08
16

PAA

.23
3**

.12
34

.29a
3h

.20
34

.19
22

.2 h
22

.Oh

.9 6 c
37

-.26
37

-.38
5

-.26
5

.5 9°
264

.h]c

,5 h c

M

263

262

174

.2 8 c
17**

.39°
264

.11
114

.03
262

.21
35

.20
35

GPA
1-Year

# of
Cred i t s

GPA
2-Year

.28a
57

.21
41

• 35a

Grammar

. 13a
166

.04
166

.11
165

.10
164

.12
111

Vocabulary

.20b
166

. .12
166

.20b
165

.26c
164

Reading

.21b
150

.15a
150

.23b
1^9

Listening

.20b
166

.22b
166

Wr i t i ng

.15a
166

Average

1

ft o f

ft o f

.10
57

Cred i t s

GPA
1-Term

.36b
58

Cred i t s

.48
10

.2 5a
58

ft o f

.02
58

TOFEL

CGPA
.10
58

Cred i t s

Academi c
Status

4 . — C o r r e l a t i on b e tw e e n p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i o n f o r m a r r i e d g r o u p .

IPAA

Table

GPA 1-term

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

h]

C

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

37

-.18
37
.08
264

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t at

.001.

Table

5 . — C o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i o n

fo r M a s t e r 's group.
U

c—
fc
L_
Us
<
HSI
Li_
11
CD —

V)
P

■P
ii
O

^
<D
o

ro
d)
<
>r\
LL t1
C3 t - i

-.04
190

M— "D
o
<u
o

i/j

fc

c
m
a> 3
■n i i
OJ OJ
fU1 u
<
CO

P
fD
us
><
■»
11
(-LC 3 CM

c

ii_
M— ■ i
o
<u
=*fc C.J

**r

a.
t

*j_
-U
n
^
o
a>

w
o

-.02
1Sk

<
Cl

o

15a
194

.04
34

.05
193

k23

. 16C
429

.3 9 C
268

. 24°
430

.21°
259

.2 8°
428

J3b
428

.39C
268

.20°
429

• 19b
227

.3 2C
227

• 31c
369

,2 2C
369

.29°
237

.21c
371

.30°
396

.22C
260

.26c
260

.21c
429

. 16C
429

.06
269

.24c
430

. 13b
398

• 31c
398

.2 0 C
262

.2 k C

262

.24c
433

.17c
433

• 37c
270

. 18C
434

.30c
399

.20°
398

.38°
398

.26°
260

• 30c
260

.3 2 c
430

.21C
430

.33°
430

.2 7°
^31

.32°
123

.28c
123

.26°
123

. 30°
123

,2 2 a
78

.!9a
78

. 22b
134

.05
134

-.06

IPAA

.09
253

.02
253

.03
252

.07
252

.10
169

-.02
169

.20C
272

.06
272

• • *

.07
268

PAA

.14
87

.14
87

.09
87

.11
87

.01

.06

6k

6k

-.05
92

.93
92

-.22
91

.62c
718

.32c
71 ^

.5 5c
714

.3 k c
k33

.36°

.09
253

.07
712

.o k

16a

-.003
120

190

.23C
190

G ram m a r

.28C
393

.18°
393

.14b
.395

395

.21C
259

. 20°
259

Vocabulary

.26c
397

.22°
397

.20c
394

.29°
394

15b
259

Read i ng

.3 1°
344

.27°
344

.18°
3k 2

.3 6 c
342

Li s t e n i n g

. 28 c
399

.25C
399

.l4 b
396

Wri t i n g

.22c
4oi

.25c
401

Average

.34c
399

Interview

TOFEL

GPA 1 -term
d

1.00

S ig n if ic a n t a t .05.

b

.

190
. 2 2 °

•

S ig n if i c a n t a t .01.

.27C
120

k33

.30c

.07
92
.37°
718
c

.

.10b
718

56

• .05
135

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .0 0 1.

Academi c
Status

R0AC-A

R0AC-F

.47
12

-.007
79

.12
33

.04
32

.06
116

.05
116

.13
72

.07
117

.2 5a
52

.13
51

.06
86

-.03
116

-.07
116

.17
72

.07
117

.20
52

.04
51

. 22a
67

.12
67

.02
94

-.07
94

-.004
59

.03
95

.30 a
44

.19
44

.19
115

.14
87

.03
87

-.06

117

-.14
117

.07
72

.01
118

.21
52

.23a
51

.08

115

.09
87

.14
87

-.07
117

-.01
117

-.03
73

.01
118

-.05
53

.29°
115

.20a
87

. l8a
87

.253
76

•

Grammar

.30c
115

.31°
115

.29°
114

.28c
114

.17
86

.22 a
86

Vocabulary

.21b
115

.22b
115

. I6a
114

.15
114

.12
86

Read i ng

.14
94

.25b
94

.28b
93

.31c
93

Li s t e n ing

.12
116

. 21 b
116

. I6a
115

00
o
0•
1

-.06
115

.22b
116

• 30°
116

-.004
34

-.003
34

.08
34

-.03
34

IPAA

.15
74

.09
74

.08

74

PAA

.19
35

.18
35
.69°
247

Average
Interview

GPA 1-term

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

.23b
115

•

23a
79

CO

.03
116

.12
63

o
0•
1

116

Writing

23a
63

tt o f

.11
76

CGPA

c35°
78

t of

GPA
1-Year

.3 8°
78

GPA
2-Year

Cred i t s

TOFEL

tt o f

ft o f

Cred i t s

.05
79

Cred i t s

IPAA

f o r Ph.D. g r o u p .

Cred i t s

6 . — C o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

-.08

117

117

.12
72

.08
118

-.12
52

.25a
52

.17
51

.3 4 a
27

-.05
27

.16
35

-.19
35

-.10
16

-.17
36

.14
11

.14
23

.03
74

.18
55

-.13
55

.08
74

-.007
74

1.00

.10
74

-.14
35

-.17
35

.27
35

.10
35

.30
25

-.14
25

.22
35

.16
35

.96
35

.13
35

-.10
14

-.23
14

.53°
245

.43°
245

.50c
196

.5 0°
247

.21c
247

.15
74

.09
247

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

,13a
196

S i g n i f i c a n t at

. 001.

,32c
108

.27b
108

GPA
2-Year

Cred i t s

CGPA

Cred i t s

IPAA

-.12
56

.38
56

-.002
87

• 30b
87

-.13
15

. 22a
106

.21a
106

.10
105

. 213
105

.18
68

.02
68

. 46°
138

.42C
138

Vocabulary

.03
106

.203

.24b
105

.3 4 c
105

,2 2a
68

.2 3 a
68

.43°
138

•4oc

106

Read i ng

. 37°
■85

.35c
85

.16
85

.33°
85

.30b
56

-.07
56

L i s t e n i ng

.11
106

.07
106

.03
105

.13
105

.2 5a
68

W r it in g

.08
107

.1 9 a
107

.09
106

.26b
106

.

17a
105

Grammar

. 21a

.24b

106

106

Interview

.03
43

.14
k3

.22
43

IPAA

.09
60

.13
60

.06
60

PAA

.07
22

-.24
22

.02
22

Average

GPA 1-term

1 .00

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

. 56 °
221

.4 6 c
220

R0AC-F

Cred i t s

• 24a
83

ft o f

tf o f

-.07
83

§ of

GPA
1-Year

.23a
83

GPA
1-Term
.08
83

T0FEL

R0AC-A

f o r s t u d e n t s b e tw e e n 20 a n d 24 y e a r s o l d .

Academ i c
Status

7 . — C o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n p r e d i c t o r s a n d c r i t e r i o n

# of
Cred i t s

Table

.15
86

-.26
11

.12
10

.51c
78

.46c
140

-.32
8

.26
7

138

.53c
78

.39°
140

.24
8

.37
7

• 52c
110

.34c
110

.44°
65

.36°
113

.28
6

-.21
6

.04
68

.2 7°
137

.30°
137

.27b
78

.43°
139

-.22
8

.09
69

.12
69

.37°
140

.35°
140

.52°
79

.4oc
142

.56
8

.38
7

• 33c
105

.33b
68

.05
68

.45c

.39°

138

138

.4 8°
78

.47°
140

.17
8

.38
7

.12
43

.36 a
28

-.20
28

.40c
55

-.06
4

-.14
3

.009
60

-.01
40

-.1 1
40

.38°
79

.44°
79

-.18
15

-.1 1
15
i -a
.15

.25
27

.24
27

.47°
221

. 13a
221

- .02
22
.40°
220

.40°
148

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

148

-.09
55

-.18
20

.04
56
.37°
78

• s •

.92°
27
-.09
60

S i g n i f i c a n t at

-.05
27
-.01
219

.001.

.83b
7

• • •

• • •

•

• •

• •

.02
19

•

-.14
19

T1Ur
n r cLL
i

G ram m a r

V o c a b u la r y

.1 4

120

120

14

.08

• 15 a
146

.08

- .1 4

218

.08

.21 b

147

147

.1 3 a
2 1 7

.1 7 b
2 1 7

.06

.08

.20°

21 7

2 1 4

21 4

.0 9
147

.0 9
147

21 7

.0 3
21 7

15 a
184

.2 5 °
184

.0 7

• 17a

126

126

.0 7
187

.0 7
149

.0 5
2 1 9

.01

149

2 1 9

- . 0 5
147

.22b

.10

.02

.1 3 a
187
.10

.2 7 a

2 1 9
.

12 a

.

- . 0 4
2 1 6

.18
216

.08

.20°

21 4

2 1 4

.10

• 2 7 C

2 1 6

216

-.001

.1 5

.16

. I8 a
147

.11

.10

187

127

. 16 a
188

- . 1 7
20

- . 3 7
18

.06

.10

220

20

. 1 3 a
149

. 21 b

. 1 4 a
2 1 9

.0 7
2 1 9

.1 3
146

. 1 3 a
220

.3 0 a
45

.0 4

.0 9

.0 7
35

.0 7
6 9

.9 4 a
4

- . 0 7
148

-.006

- . 0 0 5
66

-.08

. 08 a
4 7 7

.2 2
41

149

.06

148

.0 5
148

.11
102

-.02

149

.213

.21a

.12

67

67

.1 6
67

.08

67

.5 0 °
4 1 9

.3 1 °
4 1 5

.4 5 °
4 1 5

.4 0 c
2 8 2

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

218

21 7

.006

1.00

.0 7

146

21 7

.1 5
45

. I 8 a
149

.20

20

147

68

68

12 a

2 1 7

-.18

.3 0 c
146

68

68

.

50

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 .

68

68

. 1 6 a
149

.0 0 3
149

.0 3
50

.1 8

.1 8
67

.9 5
67

.26°
282

.4 1 °
4 1 9

. 14 C
4 1 9

. I8 a
149

102

67

•

•

•

-.006

21 8

S i g n i f i c a n t at .001.

- . 0 5

R 0A C -F

R 0A C -A

A c a d e m ic
S t a t u s

IPAA

it s

Cred

§ o f

CGPA

Cred

§ o f

GPA
2 -Y e a r

it s

122

.16

.1 8

1 -te r m

21

2 1 4

. 13 a
2 1 9

i

.0 9

122

.10

.2 5 C
2 1 9

G nP f At

- . 0 4

.02

2 1 4

A v e r a g e

p

.12
122

.01

2 1 7

r AAA

84

2 1 7

. I 8 b
2 1 7

D A

.11 .

.26C

Wr i t ing

I r AA

.1 4
84

2 1 7

. 1 3 a
2 1 9

i n / N A

it s

.0 3

122

Li s t e n i n g

.

Cred

.2 9 °

122

187

1n t e r v i e w

GPA
1 -Y e a r

Cred

# o f

• 2 3 b

.21 b

R e a d in g

it s

8 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n f o r s t u d e n t s between 25 and 29 y e a r s o l d .

GPA
1-T e r m

Tabl e

- . 4 6 a
14
-.28
20

- . 2 5
20

- . 3 8
18

.3 3
20
-.10

20

20

-.26

-.22

20

20

.9 5 a
4

16

10

.0 5
16

- . 1 7
10

. 28 a
41

R 0A C -A

R 0A C -F
•6 9 c
17

.1 6
92

.0*4
133

.0 3
133

• **3C
79

- . 0 5
132

.6 5 b
17

.*48a
17

. 3 1 b
76

.3 8 °
7 6

. 15 a
113

. 19 a
113

.3 0
70

.0 9
112

,6 6 b
1*4

.6 2 b
1*4

.*♦9°
13**

.2 3 a
92

. 2 9 b
32

.1 7 a
13**

. 19 a
13**

.0 9
7 9

.0 6
133

. **5a
17

.5 3 a
17

.2 9 °
136

.1 5
9**

.1 5
9**

.0 7
136

. I6 a
136

.1 8
80

- . 0 3
135

.1 9 a
13**

.5 1 c
13**

.2 7 b
92

.3 1 °
92

. 17 a
13**

.1 9 a
13*+

.3 0 b
7 9

.001
133

•6 9 C
17

.6 8 c
17

.2 5
3**

.0 6
3**

.2 3
3**

.3**
23

- . 1 5
23

.2 8 a

.0 7
3**

• • •

3**

.1 7
11

• • •

3**

.0 7
80

.1 3

.0 8

.1 9 a
80

.1 2
56

- . 0 9
56

.1*4
80

-.0**
8 0

1 ,0 0

.0 7
79

- . 0 9
10

- . 1 5
10

-.00**
23

.2 0
23

.**2a
23

.1 3
17

- .3 8
17

.0 5
25

- . 6 7 b
23

.9 5 °
23

-.28
23

-.1*4
31

- . 2 5
31

1 .0 0

.7**c
221

.3 3 c
2 2 0

.1 0
221

.0 7
8 0

.1 0
2 2 0

.2 8
31

.1 8
31

.001
50

. 3 5 b
50

.1 2
36

.3 7 a
36

- . 0 0 3
51

G ram m ar

.3 3 °
13**

. 3**°
13**

. 2 , b
13**

.**oc
13**

.2 3 a
92

.2 5 b
92

V o c a b u la r y

.3 2 C
133

• 3 2 c
133

.0 8
133

.3 2 c
133

.11
92

R ead ing

.2 7 b
113

.3**C
113

. 2 5 b
113

.**6C
113

L i s t e n i n g

.3 2 c
13**

.**0°
13**

.2 5 °
13**

W ri t in g

. I6 a
136

.3 0 °
136

A v e r a g e

• 3 6 c
13**

.t***c
13**

I n t e r v ie w

.3 6 a
3**

IPAA

GPA

1 -te r m
3

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

- . 0 2
136

80

.0 5 .

80

b

- . 0 2
23

.3 6 c
1 kl

.5 7 c
2 2 0

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

.0 1 .

.2 3 b
1*42

.3**°
221
0

Cred

Cred

.3 7
5 0

IPAA

. 7**c
17

.3 1 a
50

t o f

- . 0 7
133

CGPA

.2 9 b
79

ft o f

• 19 a
13**

GPA
2 -Y e a r

. I6 a
13**

Cred

.3 7
7

ft o f

.7 6 a
7

GPA
1 -Y e a r

-.00*4
51

Cred

.2 5
8

ft o f

.1 2
51

T0FEL

PAA

A cadem i c
S t a t u s

i ts

i ts

i t s

i t s

9 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n f o r s t u d e n t s between 30 and 3*+ y e a r s o l d .

GPA
1-T erm

Tabl e

- .0 1

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

.0 0 1 .

- .0 3
17

- . 0 5
17

-.0**
13

- . 2 7
13

T0FEL

-.08

o

- . 0 3
13

- . 0 6

13

7

.0 6
7

.0 2
13

.21
13

- . 0 5
56

- . 1 9
56

• *41 b
37
.1 5
37

-.00*4
56

.008

- . 0 8
53

.0 7
56

.2 3 a
56

.1 2
56

.01
56

.2 2
38

. 2*4
38

V o c a b u la r y

• 3 6 b
56

M c

.3 9 C
56

.2 0
56

.1 7
38

.3 0 a
38

.0 0 8
56

- . 1 9
56

R ead ing

.2 7 a
53

.**0°
53

.1 9
53

.3 0 a
53

.21
3 6

.5 6 c
36

.0 0 2
53

.1 2

Li s t e n i n g

.3 2 b
56

.3 9 °
56

. 3 5 b
56

.2 3 a
56

.2 6
38

- . 3 3 a
38

W ri t ing

.3 2 b
57

M °

. 3 2 b
57

.3 6 b
57

.3**a
3 9

A v e r a g e

.3 3 b
56

M C
56

.3 ^ b
56

.2 7 a
56

I n t e r v ie w

.6 8 b
12

.6 6 b
12

. 7 6 b
12

. 6 l a
12

IPAA

.0 8
38

-.08
38

- . 0 5
38

- . 1 0
38

.1 7
26

- . 3 0
10

.31
10

.0*4
10

- . 3 0
10

- .0 2
7

1 .0 0

. 8 l c
10*4

.5 1 °
1 0*4

PAA
GPA

1 -te r m
a

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

.0 5 .

57

b

IPAA

CGPA

4 - “O
O <U

G ram m ar

56

A cadem i c
S t a t u s

1/)

A~>

# o f
Cred i t s

GPA
2 - Y e a r s

# o f
Cred i t s

GPA
1 -Y e a r

# o f
Cred i t s

GPA
1-T e r m

Tabl e 10*— C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n f o r s t u d e n t s age 35 and abo v e .

- . 1 5
13
.0 3
56

53

3*4

.1 5
56

- . 0 3
56

-.2*4

.3 9 a
39

.0 9
57

- . 0 7
57

. 1 *4
38

.0*4

.2 9 a
38

.**5b
38

.0 5
56

- . 0 7
56

.1 3
37

.0*4
56

.5 5
9

. 8 3 b
9

.0 7
12

.*4*4
12

- . 3 7
6

.08

.0 2
38

- . 0 9
38

o • •

- . 0 6
37

- . 1 9
10

- . 2 7
10

.9 7 c
10

- . 3 3
10

.5b c

- . 1 *4
26

.*»5C
63

1 0*4

S i g n i f i c a n t

• • •

a t

.0 1 .

- . 0 2
"7

/

• *»2C
63

.**6°
10*4
c

.1 2
10*4

S i g n i f i c a n t

.1 5
56

37

57

12

- . 0 8
38
a t

.0 0 1 .

.0 0 3
103

.12

.07

.02

.06

-.0 8

.06

.0 3

158

1 58

157

157

93

93

167

167

.*t2c

.3 6 c

.27°

.6 0

.1 8

.18

.11

.02

.0 0 9

129

168

169

168

161

60

93

166

166

.13

.0 8

.0 5

70

12 6

128

.3 7 c

.7 IC

• 30c

129

130

13 0

105

. I7a

.63°

• 31c

169

160

168

.6 6 c
16 9

1 .00
Average

.03

.07

.2 3 a

157

156

156

93

.1 0

. 5 V*

.0 5

.03

.05

.11

. I6a

.2 6 a

63

15

130

121

121

120

120

70

.01

-,0 A

.15

.0 6

-.0 6

.0 8

-.0 3

61

22

170

.0 0 8

.11

63

23

176

-.0 1

. 13a

.09

' .33

.12

161

60

22

17

1.0 0

-.1 5

-.2 A

56

2A

.3 3°

ft

,2 2 a

.2 0 a

.06

.I3 a

97

97

172

172

.09

■2 1 a

.0 0 8

.05

-.0 2

159

95

95

169

169

-.0 3

.11

.03

• >9b

162

162

161

161

.07

.06

160

159

159

. 16 a

.1 0

.12

.07

,2 2 a

135

1 35

1 35

86

.0 0 1 .

-.0 6

95

159

135

S ig n ific an t at

.002

95

1 60

16 0

-.0 0 5

168

160

1 66

1

S i g n i f i c a n t at .0 1 .

162

.0 7

15 7

r*"<
O

in te rv ie w

o
CM
rv\

1.00

22

o
o
v_n

.3 6 c

-.0 8

168

.3 9 3 -.0 0 2

of Cred i t s
C o m p leted

GPA.
2-Y ear

.07

169

CGPA

of Cred I t s
C o m p leted

.10

22

ft of
Cred i t s
C o m p leted

if

.13

60

GPA
1-Y ear

of Cred i t s
C om pleted

.18

166

ft

GPA
1- T e r m

.09

93

CL

A c a de m i c
S tatu s

. ii it0

95

Read i n g

IPAA

wh o

In te rv ie w

stu d e n ts

A verage

the

W ritin g

for

.3 lc

c

Wr i t i n g

S i g n i f i c a n t at .0 5 .

criterio n

96

M

130

1.00
L iste n in g

tho

.2 3 a

.28°

1.0 0
R eading

and

s

168

1.0 0
V ocabulary

a n d TOFEL)

L isten in g

1 .00
Grammar

V ocabulary

Grammar

I I . — C o r r e l a t i o n betw een th e p r e d i c t o r s ( E n g lis h s u b t e s t s , a v e r a g e ,
p a sse d th e E n g lis h t e s t and s t a r t e d t h e i r ac ad e m ic p ro g ra m s.

TOFEL

T able

-.0 3
86

168

. 15a - . 0 2
166

166

1 2.— C o r r e l a t i o n betw een th e p r e d i c t o r s
M ichigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .

(E n g lish

su b te sts

and t h e a v e r a g e )

for

s t u d e n t s who s t u d i e d

at

the E n g lish

Language C e n te r a t

V ocabulary

Reading

L isten in g

Wr i t i n g

. 37c

.2 6

.1 2

.35a

.15

.0*4

.17

280

378

102

36

36

36

36

.5 6 c

.80c

382

382

.63°

.3 7 c

.5 8 c

,8 0 c

339

382

382

382

M c

.5 7 c

•83C

339

339

339

1.00

.iioa
25

.38a
25

.5 2 a
19

.3 7 c

.71°

,« b

382

382

25

1.00

.7ltc

1.00

.5 Ab
25

.5 3 b
25

1.00

In te rv ie w

If

.23°

.1 5 b

• 19c

. 26°

.08

.1 6 b

.2 6 c

.

.3 8 c _ .25

.1*1

.25

.05

- .0 2

.09

3 55

355

352

352

252

252

378

378

2 80

378

102

36

36

36

36

.23c

.18°

.19c

■3 0 c

.M 3

.27°

.2 8 °

.23°

.25°

.2 2 C

.02

.33a

.20

.11

.15

317

3 17

3 17

317

22k

226

335

253

336

32

32

32

32

.06

.22

.30

36

36

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .0 1 .

355

13b

.2 2 c

. I8C

.1 5 b

.2 7 c

. 18C

.2 6 c

.17c

. !6C

355

355

352

352

25 2

25 2

378

378

• 13b

. 08 a

.07

. I8C

355

3 55

352

352

.08
251

28

92

,2 1 c

.06

• 3la

■3 8 b

378

102

36

36

-.0 7

.007 - . 0 0 7

.1 5 b

•23C

• 15c

.33°

. 17C

• 23b - .0 6

252

378

378

280

378

102

36

36

36

36

.2 9 c

, 2 1c

.2 IC

.35C

.1 9 C

.30c

.3 0 c

.22°

• 32c

.3 0 c

.13

.3 6 a

.26

.12

.22

355

3 55

352

352

252

252

378

378

280

378

102

36

36

36

36

.3 9 a

.32

.lt5a

• 5 3 b , .0 2

.5 la

.16

.23

.13

-.1 7

.18

25

25

16

25

10

22

S i g n i f i c a n t at .0 5 .

IPAA

. 18 C
378

It o f
Cred i t s

•29C
378

CGPA

.2kc
252

tt o f
Cr ed i t s

,.7 b
252

GPA
2-Year

.2 IC
352

of
Cred i t s

. I6C
352

GPA
1- Y e a r

. 12C

355

GPA
1- T e r m

1
j TRC-F

.<llC
382

382

Average

In te rv ie w

Average

Wr i t i n g

L isten in g

.6 IC
339

1.00

,26c
355

U- TD
O 47
% O

i

IReading

.68°
382

1.00

<
<£
a.

TRC-A

1 . 00

IQ |Q
a. 0 .
e —
n u
t-j v
E
< <
O O
at

Academic
S ta tu s

Grammar

V ocabulary

Gramm ar

TJ
Cl
L. C

R0AA C o m p a re d
to F o r e i g n

Table

22

22

22

S i g n i f i c a n t at .0 0 1 .

19

19

APPENDIX

B

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PREDICTORS AND CRITERIA
FOR STUDENTS FROM DIFFERENT COUNTRIES

176

m

Li s t e n i ng

b

2 5

.2 7
26

.2 3
20

.11
27

.1 9
14

- . 1 5
22

.2 3
22

.1 2
17

.2 5
23

.1 5
15

.21
15

- . 1 2
26

- . 0 9
2 6

.0 9
20

. 3 3 a
2 5

. 4 2 a
2 5

- . 0 2
21

.01
21

. 3 3 a
25

.0 7
25

.28

.3 6
15

.3 0
15

- . 1 9
14

2 5

26

Cred

# o f

CGPA

i ts

i ts

A c a d e m ic
S t a t u s

.2 0
21

21

.2 6
26

.1 2

15

.2 7
15

•
ro o j
^ 00
0)

.08

R ead ing

IPAA

2 5

. 3 9 a
27

Cred

. 3 5 a
25

from B r a z i l .

.2 7
2 0

.01

25

. 3 6 a
25

# o f

Js7b

for students

.2 0
2 6

GPA
2 - Y e a r

.2 2

# o f
Cred i t s

.1 7
25

GPA
1 -Y e a r

.1 3
25

G ram m ar
V o c a b u la r y

between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

# o f
Cred i t s

1 „— C o r r e l a t i o n

GPA
1-T e r m

Table

W r i t i n g

.2 7
2 5

.0 4
25

.2 0
2 5

. 4 4 a
2 5

.2 2
15

. 4 7 a
15

.2 0
26

. 4 9 b
2 6

.1 7
20

.1 9
27

A v e r a g e

. 3 6 a
25

.2 6
25

.1 8
25

.3 4
25

.11
15

.3 0
15

.01
2 6

.21
2 6

.21
2 0

. 3 4 a
2 7

IPAA

.3 5
19

.21

.3 6
19

„ 3 8 a
19

.4 6
11

.0 7
11

. 3 7 a
2 0

.3 3
2 0

e • •

• • •

. 2 7 a
36

. 5 1 °
36

. 4 7 a
23

.2 7
23

.2 4
36

o 3 7 a
36

.3 5
19

.1 6
36

GPA

1 - t e r m

S i g n i f i c a n t

1 .0 0

a t

19
. 7 5 °
36

.0 5 .»

b S ign i f i c a n t

a t

.01,i

Q

S ig n i f ic a n t

a t

.0 0 1.

IPAA
.1 9
14

. 2 7 a
58

- . 4 5

. 2 8 b

8 9

- . 1 4
84

- . 2 5
12

- . 3 8
12

- . 0 3
89

- .2 1
84

.0 4
89

.1 0
12

- . 1 7
12

- . 2 7 b
75

.0 6
80

- . 6 5 b
10

- . 0 9
8 4

. 2 4 b
8 4

- . 5 6
12

- . 2 0
12

.0 0 7
89

- . 0 9
12

- . 0 9
12

- . 6 8 b
12

- , 6 4 a
12

O © 0

p o o

.11
84

- . 0 8

Vocabulary

- . 1 4
84

- .0 1
84

- . 0 7
84

.0 4
8 4

- . 0 7
6 0

-.08
60

- .0 0 1
8 9

. 2 1 a
7 5

- . 1 3

. 2 5 a
7 5

- . 1 4
52

.2 2
52

- . 0 2

- . 26 b
84

.08
84

- . 2 5 a
6 0

.1 5
6 0

- . 1 6
89

.0 8
89

.01
8 4

.1 0
60

.1 6
6 0

.1 6
8 9

- .0 1
8 9

Read i ng

.0 7
7 5

75

60

. 2 9 a
41

.2 5 s
58

. 2 5 a
6 0

.1 4

. 2 8 a

8 9

80

.0 9

80

8 9

L i s t e n i n g

- . 1 0
84

.0 7
84

W r i t i n g

- . 0 3
84

- . 0 4
84

.0 9
84

A v e r a g e

- . 0 6
84

.1 0
84

- . 1 7
8 4

. l 8 a
84

- . 1 8
60

. 2 3 a
6 0

- . 0 2
89

.0 9
8 9

- . 2 4
84

. 2 0 a
8 9

Interview

- . 2 0
2 6

.0 6
26

- . 1 6

.1 8
62

- . 0 3
17

.1 6
17

- . 0 5
2 8

.1 7

- . 0 8

.1 8

26

IPAA

.1 4
8 2

.0 4
82

. 3 1 b
82

.0 9
8 2

PAA

.0 5
75

.0 0 9

.1 8
75

7 5

O
O

3

o

GPA 1-term

Significant at

.6lc
146

.05.

. 6 0 c
146

b

- . 0 2
75
.3 5 °
146

. 2 4 a
58

.

16
58

28

. 2 3 a
8 6

. 2 0 a
8 6

.1 0
52

.0 2
52

.0 9
79

.0 2
79

. 5 2 c

.1 4

105

105

.5 1 °
146

.1 2
146

Significant at

.01.

c

.001
84

28

0 o o

• o •

• o o

.1 4
8 2

Significant at

6
,

- .6 1

6

10

28

• »

•

R 0A C -A

- . 0 2
8 4

. 3 1 a
41

CGPA

.0 2
84

. 2 8 a
56

GPA
2 - Y e a r

- . 1 0
84

Cred

Grammar

# of

.1 7
5 6

-Q
-sr^
o
1

.0 8
56

R 0A C -F

# of
Cred i t s
.1 9
58

.1 7
56

TOFEL

A c a d e m ic
S t a t u s

from t h e R e p u b l i c o f C hi na.

GPA
1 -Y e a r

# of
.
Cred i t s

for students

# of
Cred it s

i ts

2 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-T e r m

Table

- .0 1
146

.001.

.4 3
10
.1 7
9
. 4 5 a
18

e o o

o o o

. 5 8 b
18

from G r e ec e .

.1 5
10

. 7 3 c
12

- . 0 8
12

- .0 1
12

- . 0 6
12

. 5 8 a
12

.2 9
12

. 6 2 a
10

.1 5
10

. 5 7 a
12

.0 6
12

.1 7
11

.0 5
1 1

. 7 8 b
11

.41
11

. 7 4 b
9

- . 0 3
9

, 8 4 c
11

- .2 1
11

- . 0 7
12

- . 1 5
12

.2 8
12

. 7 2 b
12

.1 5
10

.3 8
10

.3 6
12

.21
12

W r i t i n g

.4 6
12

.3 2
12

.3 6
12

.6 2 a
12

.3 0
10

.0 5
10

.3 9
12

" . 2 9
12

A v e r a g e

.1 7
12

.0 6
12

. 7 5 b
12

. 6 5 3
12

. 6 7 a
10

.1 8
10

. 8 o c
12

- . 0 2
12

1 .0 0

.3 8
13

.3 3
13

.4 0
11

.3 8
13

- . 5 3
13

V o c a b u la r y
R ead i ng

L i s t e n i n g

ro

—

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

•

1 - t e r m

O
CO

GPA

S i g n i f i c a n t at . 0 1 .

- . 4 5
11

Cred

# o f

.8 8 °
10

GPA
2 - Y e a r

.4 2
12

# o f
Cred i t s

. 8 l c
12

GPA
1- Y e a r

12

G ram m ar

# o f
Cred i t s
.28

GPA
1-T e r m
.3 5
12

oo

i t s

for students

CGPA

3 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

# o f
Cred i t s

Table

S i g n i f i c a n t at . 0 0 1 .

from Kuwait.

CGPA

§ of

.3 6
18

.I *
18

- . 0 7
18

.3 9
lit

.0 6
lit

•4 3 a
27

.11
27

. 3 6 a
23

V o c a b u la r y

. 4 4 a
18

. 4 8 a
18

.0 9
18

.1 5
.18

.21
lit

.2 5
lit

. 4 9 b
27

.1 7
27

. 3 8 a
23

R ead ing

.2 8
17

.*»3a
17

- . 2 0
17

.3 9
17

- . 1 5
13

.2 9
13

.3 0
24

. 3 8 a
2 4

.3 0
21

L i s t e n i n g

.21
18

.3 2
18

.31
18

- . 0 7
18

. 3 3 a
27

.0 8
2 7

.2 6
2 3

W ri t ing

.2 8
18

.3 2
18

- . 1 4
18

.2 6
18

.0 6
lit

.4 0
14

.31
27

.2 9
27

.2 6

A v e r a g e

. 4 o a
18

M a

.2 0
18

.1 6
14

.2 4
14

. 3 9 a
27

.2 3
27

. 3 4 a
23

IPAA

.1 4
15

.2 9
15

.3 0
15

- . 0 6
12

.0 0 2
12

, 4 8 b
23

.0 4

.2 8
25

GPA

1 - t e r m

1 .0 0

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

18

. 7 5 c
2 5

.0 0 9
18
- . 0 7
15
.1 6
2 5

Cred

# o f

.3 8 a
25

. 4 6 a
lit

.2 9
19

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

- . 1 2
14

19

‘

.1 7
23
- . 1 5
25

IPAA

# o f
Cred i t s

.3 8
18

Cred

GPA
2 - Y e a r

G ram m ar

i t s

GPA
I - Y e a r

i ts

for students

# o f
Cred i t s

4 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-T e r m

Table

2 7

• * •

.1 4
15

S i g n i f i c a n t at .001.

- . 1 7
16

- . 2 2
15

.0 4
15

- .4 1

R ead i ng

- . 1 9
15

- . 0 9
15

- . 0 8
1A

- . 1 4
14

Li s t e n i ng

- . 0 2
16

.21
16

- . 1 4
15

W r i t i n g

.3 3
16

- . 0 6
16

.0 6
15

A v e r a g e

.1 0
17

.0 8
17
. 2 5 a
53

1 .0 0
.2 2
28

TOFEL

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

. 0 5 .

.3 3
28

A c a d e m ic
S t a t u s

- . 1 3
16

1 - t e r m

# o f
Cred i t s

V o c a b u l a r y

GPA

CGPA

-.06

from In d i a .

# o f
Cred i t s

# o f
Cred i t s
.2 7
15

for students

.3 4
9

.3 0
16

.1 9
16

.6 4 a
9

- . 0 3
16

.0 6
16

- . 0 6
8

.0 4
8

- . 3 0
15

- . 3 2
15

-.28
16

.1 9
15

- . 1 9
9

.2 7
9

.0 2
16

- . 1 9
16

.0 3
17

- . 0 4
15

- . 0 2
9

.3 6
9

.2 3
16

.1 4
16

- .1 1
17

,0 0 7
16

.0 6
16

- . 1 7
10

.3 5
10

.0 5
17

- . 0 3
17

- .0 1
18

.7 2 °
56

.2 0
52

- . 1 2
27

. 4 4 b
27

S i g n i f i c a n t

GPA
2 - Y e a r

GPA
1- Y e a r
.3 8
15

# of

.2 2
16

GPA
1-T e r m
.3 3
16

G ram m ar

i t s

5 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

Cred

Table

9

9

. 5 4 c
36

- . 0 9
36

- . 2 8
18

a t

.0 1 ,

. 4 7 a
18

»

. 4 6 a
17
- . 2 2
17

.8 1 °
53

. 2 7 a
53

1 .0 0

.0 8
2 9

. 4 9 b
29

.1 3
2 9

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

.0 0 1 .

R ead i ng

. 5 5 a
16

• 5 5 a
16

.4 0
16

. 5 5 a
16

Li s t e n i n g

.1 3
18

.1 7
18

.1 8
18

W r i t i n g

. 5 4 b
18

. 5 6 b
18

.3 0
18

A v e r a g e

. 4 l a
18

. 4 2 a
18

- . 0 9
14

IPAA
GPA

1 - t e r m

1 .0 0

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

- . 0 7
14
. 9 0 c
22

A cadem i c
S t a t u s

- . 0 6
10

IPAA

. 4 0 a
18

i t s

.1 3
18

Cred

.3 6
18

if o f

.1 4
18

CGPA

V o c a b u l a r y

.0 5
18

i ts

if o f

-.2 1

if o f

.2 8
18

Cred

.3 3
18

Cred

GPA
2 - Y e a r

C redi ts

GPA
1- Y e a r

.31
10

G ram m ar

'

f o r s t u d e n t s from In d o n e s ia .

. 7 6 b
10

if o f

i t s

6 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1 -T e r m

Table

- . 1 7
18

- . 3 7

.0 9
14

- . 2 7
18

. 5 5 a
10

.1 5
18

.31

.0 9
14

.0 6
18

.5 7
9

.2 8
9

. 4 3 a
16

.3 4
16

.1 5
13

.3 0
16

.08
10

.0 0 2
10

.1 8
18

.21
18

- . 0 8
14

.1 3
18

. 6ci4 6
18

, 6 8 a
10

.1 5
10

, 4 6 a
18

.1 6

.2 6
14

.0 7
18

.2 9
18

.2 8
18

• 5 6 a
10

.3 5
10

.3 4
18

.2 7

.2 6
14

.1 5
18

. 4 8 a
14

.2 7
14

.4 7
8

.3 0
8

.3 9
14

.1 4
14

• • •

• • •

.1 7
22

. 5 5 b
22

.1 6
12

- . 1 6
12

.2 8
22

.11
22

- . 0 9
14

- . 1 5
22

- . 1 2
18

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

18
18

18
18

S i g n i f i c a n t at

.001.

.3Aa

G ram m ar

37

.i*oa

- . 0 9
37

.5 3 °
35

.2 6

- . 0 6

35

2 5

25

.6 7 °
35

.*40b

• 3 3 a
2 5

.*7b

.1 8

.21*

39

.2 3
39

.3 8
17

. 5 3 a
17

.1 7
25

.2 6
2 5

. 3 6 a
25

.5 5 °
36

.2 2

.i*la
2 6

.01
1*0

.0 5
1*0

.01
1*0

.2 2
25

. 5 9 °
25

.0 5
1*0

.2 0
1*0

.1 6
1*0

.2 0
26

.1*9
26

.0 9
1*0

.1 5
1*0

.1 9
1*0

-.11*
2 0

- . 0 3
2 0

- . 0 3
2 0

.0 9
67

1 .0 0

.0 9
13

- . 3 3
13

. 5 7 C
2 5

- . 0 7
25

. 5 5 °

L i s t e n i n g

. 6 8 c
38

.1 5
38

. 5 9 °

W r i t i n g

.21
37

.11
37

. 3 9 b
35

.b)b

A v e r a g e

. 5 1 C
38

.0 6
38

. 3 6 c

.b3C

I n t e r v i e w

. 5 7 b
18

. 3 9 a
18

. 7 8 c
18

M a
18

.11
11*

, 6 0 a
11*

. 2 3 a
6 7

. 5 2 C

.6 3 °
65

. 3 9 b
51

. 2 8 a
51

GPA

1 .0 0

1 - t e r m

.2 2
12

TOFEL

.1 6
12

65
- . 5 2 a
12

A c a d e m ic
S t a t u s

. 5 6 b
25

R e a d in g

36

C redi ts

.1 6

.0 6

36

a o f

.2 5
39

. 3 5 a
37

2b

from I r a n .

.0 5
39

V o c a b u l a r y

37

CGPA

# of

Credi ts

for students

GPA
2 - Y e a r

# o f
Cred i t s

GPA
I - Y e a r

if o f
Cred i t s

7 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-T e r m

Table

35

2b

35

26

3 6

.1 2
12

- . 0 9
10

-.1*9
10

. 3 5 b
67
-.1*0
13

39
39

Q

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

. 0 5 .

b S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

.01,

i

S i g n i f i c a n t

a t

.0 0 1 .

.4 2

.3 7
12

- . 0 0 5
12

.4 7
12

.01
15

.2 7
15

.2 3
14

. 6 8 b
13

- . 1 7
12

.3 4
16

. 4 3 a
16

.1 7
15

.7 3 °
16

.2 3
11

- . 0 7
11

.1 6
15

.3 7
15

-.08
14

.7 7
15

- . 2 4
14

- . 4 5
12

- . 2 6
12

- . 0 4

• • •

• • •

.2 5
12

.1 4
12

- .2 1
10

.41
10

.1 4
12

.2 5
12

• • •

• • •

.4 6 a
15

.8 4 °
15

•6 3 b
13

.28
15

.0 6
15

- . 3 2
13

R ead ing

.2 5
11

Li s t e n ing

GPA
1- Y e a r

.3 6
13

- . 0 8
11

.2 2
11

- . 2 7
13

- . 1 4

.0 6
11

- . 2 0
1 1

.2 6
11

.3 0
11

.4 5
11

- . 1 3

.3 7
9

. 5 6 a
12

.0 6
13

.1 6
13

, 4 8 a
13

.0 3
13

.5 1 a
11

.0 5
11

W r i t i n g

.1 7
14

.0 8
14

.3 8
14

.1 3
14

.2 9
12

A v e r a g e

- . 1 0
13

- . 0 7
13

.1 8
13

.0 4
13

IPAA

- .1 1
14

.0 3
14

.11
14

.1 6
12

.3 3
12
•8 5 C
15

PAA
GPA

1 - t e r m

1 .0 0

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

A c a d e m ic
S t a t u s

ft o f
Cred i t s

- . 3 5
14

V o c a b u l a r y

.2 6
13

13

13

9

.4 2
13

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .01.'

- . 1 5
15

15

15

- . 0 0 2
15

IPAA

CGPA

i ts

.0 4

.1 4

Cred

.9 0
15

.0 9
13

§ o f

- . 2 9
14

.2 0
13

GPA
2 - Y e a r

.5 7
15

G ram m ar

Cred

# o f
Cred i t s

, 60 b
15

§ of

i ts

8 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n f o r s t u d e n t s from Iraq.

GPA
1-T e r m

Tabl e

- .1 1
14

S i g n i f i c a n t at .001,

15

• • •

.

Table

9 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

for students

from Mexico.
u

i/>
t
1_
(1)
< tn
Li_ |1
CD —

•4— *"0
O 0)
o

i
m
tu
< >A
U. 1
CD —

I/)

l/l

to
■4— “O
O <D

tn
VI
3
11
05
11
-H
(/>

—
4— "O
o a)
•
=*fc o

CD CM

o

--T*
CL
fn
w
C->

- . 0 9
2 6

. 6 2 °
26

.0 7
25

. 5 2 b
25

.2 9
29

.2 2
29

.3 6
15

.2 7
2 9

<

flJ
(1)
>-

C
a>
■11
03
f1
U
C

1
1— L
11
H
>
O <D

<
ft

11

=*t= o

G ram m ar

. 3 7 a
26

, 4 8 b
26

V o c a b u la r y

. 4 l a
2 6

.4 6
26

.1 4
26

. 3 9 a
2 6

.2 5
24

.1 6
2 4

.3 0
29

.1 9
2 9

.0 5
15

.0 3
2 9

R ead ing

. 4 9 b
25

. 5 4 b
25

.1 7
25

.4 8
25

.2 0

.2 9
23

• 3 7 a
28

. 3 6 a
28

.2 5
14

.1 9
28

L i s t e n i n g

. 4 8 b
2 8

.5 5 °
26

- . 0 0 7
26

.6 9 °
26

. 3 8 a
24

. 5 0 a
24

. 5 1 b
2 9

• 3 2 a
29

.3 2
15 -

Wr i t ing

.0 5
26

.1 6
2 6

.01
2 6

.51
2 6

.2 3
24

. 4 l a
24

.1 7
29

. 3 3 a
2 9

.06

.1 0

15

29

A v e r a g e

. 3 8 a
26

. 4 3 a
26

.0 7
2 6

. 5 3 b
26

. 3 8 a
24

. 3 5 a
24

. 4 9 b
29

.2 9
2 9

.2 4

.0 6

15

2 9

IPAA

.0 5
15

- . 1 3
15

.11
15

.2 2
15

.31
13

- . 0 0 4
15

• • •

• • •

PAA

.3 5
8

.4 9
8

- . 2 6
8

- . 0 7
8

• • •

• • •

.0 5
15

.0 4
52

GPA

1 - t e r m

3

1 .0 0

Significant at

.05.

■^ b

.8 8 °
52

. 4 l c
52

b

• • •

.5 6 °
52

23

- . 0 5
13

- . 1 4
7

- . 6 9 a
7

.1 7
26

. 3 5 a
26

Significant at

.01.

.3 9
15
- . 1 4
8
. 3 6 b
52

c

.0 8
52

Significant at

- . 0 2
29

.001.

23

.l*6a
23

Read i ng

.53a
17

.57b
17

.38
17

Li s t e n i n g

.29
23

.18
23

Wr i t ing

.60b
23

Average

.**9b
23

IPAA
PAA
GPA 1-term

3

Academi c
Status

.h f

• 35a
25

IPAA

• 53b
23 .

.06
17

.15
25

.01
25

.19
21*

Cred i t s

Vocabulary

.21*
17 '

§ of

-.03
23

CGPA

.19
23

f o r s t u d e n t s from J o r d a n .

# of
Credi t s

.52b
23

GPA
2-Year

# of
Cred i t s

.i*8b
23

# of

Grammar

GPA
1-Term

GPA
1-Year

1 0 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

Cred i t s

Table

.l*7a
17

-.01*
17

.27
25

-.1 1
25

.16
25

.03
21*

-.09
17

.16
13

-.01*
13

.09
19

-.15
19

.21
19

-.06
18

.30
23

.08
23

.21*
17

-.09
17

.3ha

-.02
25

.16
25

.08
21*

. 62 °
23

.35 a
23

.33
23

.35
17

-.13
17

.i*5a
25

.08

25

.13
25

.27
21*

• *>5a
23

.3 8 a
23

.03
23

.35
17

-.08

.3 3 a
25

-.06
25

.17
25

.10
21*

-.07
23

.12
23

• 17
23

.10
23

.20
17

-.55b
17

• • •

• • •

.0**
20

-.01*
20

.30
20

.17
20

.28
11*

• • •

• • •

.02
27

.22
27

-.09
20

1 .00

Significant at

.05.

. 87°
27

b

.25
23

Significant at

.01.

17

25

-.02
25

-.10
25

-.1*5
11*

.08
21

-.03
21

-.i*2a
20

.02
27

-.02

c

27. .

-.07
23

Significant at

.001.

• • •

,

IPAA

Academic
Status

-.23
12

.09
12

.09
32

.23
32

. i*6b
29

.18
31

.11
25

.35
11

-.22
11

.42a
26

.15
26

.51b
25

.13
26

.005
30

.06
30

.2k

12

.06
12

.01
32

.21
32

.16
29

.11
31

.11*
13

.3Ga
33

.i*oa
33

.11*
30

.25
32

,2k

.18
32

.30a
32

.5 5 c
29

.27

.27
30

.06
30

.23
30

Read i ng

.07
25

.11
25

-.02
25

Cred i t s

.22
30

Vocabulary

ft of

.15
31

CGPA

• 33a
29

.008
30

Cred i t s

ft of

.09
32

-.03
30

Cred i t s

.05
32

.13
30

ft o f

.23
12

GPA
1-Year

Cred i t s

.35
12

30

Grammar

f o r s t u d e n t s from J ap a n.

GPA
2-Year

.2k

ft o f

11 .— C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

30

-.10
30

Wri t ing

.09
31

.01
31

.25
31

.06

31

.30
13

Average

.17
30

.05
30

.07
30

.15
30

.51a
12

.38a
29

.2k

M

.27
29

.39
13

-.05
13

.56c
30

.3 2 a
30

•••

, 31
•••

.59b
39

.28
17

.1*0
17

.i*5b
39

o29a
39

.38 a
29

.26
37

Listening

IPAA
GPA 1-term

-.Ik

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

29
• 67C
39

29
V

39

a

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

12

S i g n i f i c a n t at .001.

Academ i c
Status

.1*6°
1*2

.3 6 b
1*2

-3i4b
60

-.02
52

.01*
59

.2 j a
50

.35b
50

• 31a
50

• 50c
50

.1*8°
37

.1*9C
37

.21
53

.1*2°
52

-.17
1*5

.15
52

M

57

. 53°
57

-.003
57

.56c
57

.1*6°
1*3

.l*2b
1*3

.25a
61

.29a
61

-.12
53

-.02
60

Wri t ing

.03
56

.01
56

.10
56

.17
56

.i*9C
1*2

.16
1*2

.23 a
60

.28a
60

.16

Average

.i*6c
56

.50c
56

.2 6 a
56

.68°
56

.6 5°
1*2

.3 6 c
1*2

- 3« b
60

. 1*5C
60

-.07
52

.08
59

-.23a
51

-.36b
51

.11
51

-.2l»a
51

.08
1*0

-.3i*a
1*0

.22
53

•••

•••

1.00

.70c
76

.62°
76

.39b
55

.50°
55

.i*3c
76

.06
76

-.23a
51

-.002
75

-.28

.**5a
ll*

.5*»a
ll*

-.60a
11

.1*0
11*

•••

•••

Read i ng
Li s t e n i n g

IPAA
GPA 1 -term
TOFEL

c

]k

d

Significant at

.05.

.3 3c
76
-.21*
11*
b

Significant at

.01.

.32
11

-.38
ll*
c

CredIts

.1*8°
56

ft o f

.51 C
56

. 39°
56

CGPA

.2 9a
56

Vocabulary

Cred i t s

-.01*
59

ft o f

-.31
52

56

GPA
2-Year

.16
60

.2ka

Cred i t s

,22a
62

.32b
56

ft o f

.25a
1*2

Grammar

GPA
1-Year

.2 9 3
1*2

Cred i t s

.38b
56

ft o f

.21
56

GPA
1-Term

IPAA

f o r s t u d e n t s from South Korea.

•
O' N3
O OO
cu

T a b l e 1 2 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

-.01
53

.009
59

52

Significant at

.001.

.12
38

.07
19

.14
19

.005
38

-.02
38

~.2k

.ok

38

38

-.35
19

-.24
19

Read i ng

.06
29

-.00k

.01
29

.02
29

.28
15

Listening

.29a
38

,2k

.13
38

.01
38

.k f

W r it in g

.20
38

.Ok

-.36a
38

.ok

38

Average

.17
38

.08

-,00k

IPAA

.31a
36

.34a
36

1.00
.32
10

TOFEL

3

Significant at

.05.

.13
38

.03
36

-.12
38

-.16
38

-.ok

38

.05
36

-.03
38

-23
15

-.09
29

-.14
29

.08
28

-.23
29

19

.14
19

.09
38

-.14
38

.08
36

-.13
38

38

-.20
19

.04
19

-.43b
38

-.28a
33

.40
38

-.45
38

.08
38

.31
19

.18
19

.009
38

-.12
38

.15
36

-.16
38

36

.30a
36

.002
19

. 83°
43

.29a

.6 lc

k3

k3

.38a
22

.43a
22

.35b
43

.22
43

.31a
36

.39
10

.5 8 a
10

.05
10

.9 2 a
5

.58
5

.46
10

.36
10

.01
8

29
38

38

38
-.06

b

Significant at

.01.

§ of

.2 7 a
38

# of

IPAA

GPA 1- term

# of
Cred i t s

Vocabulary

CGPA

.05
38

from T h a i l a n d .

Academic
Status

.09
38

Grammar

Cred i t s

GPA
2-Year

.04
38

GPA
1-Term

# of
Cred i t s

for students

GPA
1-Year

1 3 . — C o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

Cred i t s

Table

-.06
19

-.13
36

c

-.06
36

• • •

Significant at

• • •

-.10
43

.001.

.08
10

GPA
2-Year

-.01
23

.01
23

.05
22

.16
12

M

.ok

,3k

12

23

Vocabulary

.26
23

-.01
23

.05
23

.31
22

.21
12

.11*
12

Read i ng

.15
22

.27
22

.23
22

.27
21

.29
11

M a
23

.11
23

.003
23

.38 a
22

.19

.16

.11

2k

2k

2k

.3ka

.17
23

Li s t e n i n g
Writing
Average

23

M

IPAA

12

GPA 1-term

3

1.00

Significant at

.05.

“O

O

0)
L_

O

# of

# of
Cred i t s

.32
23

U -

CGPA

GPA
1-Ye ar

Grammar

Cred i t s

§ of

in
4-J

Academic
Status

from V e ne z u e l a .

IPAA

for students

Cred i t s

l A. — C o r r e l a t i o n between p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

23

.5 2a
11

.17
23

.37a
23

.37a
23

.16
11

.37 a
23

.55a
11

.26
22

.26
22

-.68
10

.37a
22

.16
12

.k]

.10
23

.37a
23

.13
11

.30
23

.11*
23

.10
13

.01
13

.18
12

.17

.12
23

.30
22

.19
12

.k]

-.13
11

.28
23

-.15
12

-.13
12

-.2k

11

-.3^
7

.16
31

-.20
31

. 55°
30

-.01
18

b

Significant at

.01.

12

16

.56b

2k

2k

.21
23

M a

12
-.50
7

.25
12

.15
12

.27
31

.*9b
31

.**6a
18

.

G

23

•

•

•

M

Significant at

2k

•

•

•

.2k

12

.001.

31

AP P E N D I X C

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PREDICTORS AND CRITERIA
FOR STUDENTS FROM DIFFERENT COLLEGES

191

R0AC-A

R0AC-F

.36b
60

-.03
102

.13

-.12

lb

lb

• 38 c
86

.bbc

.2 6 a
59

. 33°
88

. 19a
88

.bbc
5b

-.02
88

.25
13

.07
13

.b lc

.36°
70

.13
70

.29b
102

.0^
102

.35b
60

.03
102

-.16
1**

-.20

100

.17a
100

.3 8°
100

.31b
70

.3bb

.09
102

.17
102

.33b
60

-.007
102

.16

-.38

70

lb

lb

.23a
100

.5 7 c
100

.5bc
70

.36c
70

.3 5c
102

.2 2 a
102

. b 7c

.01
102

.05
1**

-.18
1^

.18
22

.008

-.001

23

.69a
8

-.01
23

•••

lb

.02
23

•••

lb

.10
3**

.3 2 a

.b7b

3b

26

.55b
26

.13
35

.07
35

.16
7

-.11
35

.69
6

.17
6

.11
60

.08
59

.33b
59

.^2b
39

.07
39

.33b
60

• 3^b
60

1.00

-.06
59

-.81b
9

-.68b
9

.81C
51

.6lc
15

.55 a
15

.55a
10

.50
10

.38
15

.03
15

.98
15

-.37
15

•••

•••

.6 0 c
166

.2 2C
165

.57°
165

M

120

. 39°
120

.3 6°
166

,22b
166

.29 a
60

.10
165

.26
30

.29
30

.2 1 a
101

.09
100

.b lc

Read i ng

• 25b
87

.23a
87

.30b
86

Li s t e n i n g

• 31c
101

.213
101

.11
100

Writing

. I8a
101

.26b
101

Average

.^oc
101

. 33°
101

1n t e r v i e w

.35
22

.03
22

TOFEL

.39b

.i*8b

3b

3b

IPAA

.29a
60

PAA

.7 8 c
15

GPA 1 -term

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

-.02
22

100

59

^Significant at

c

.01.

.2ba

-,0b

IPAA

.10
102

.22b
101

c

CGPA
.12
102

Vocabulary

100

§ of

.2 7 a
70

# of

.32b
70

1-Year

.0**
102

gpa

.30b
60

# of

,22a
102

.0b

70

.32°
102

.16

70

.07
100

c

Academi c
Status

M

. 18a
101

M

# of
Cred i t s

GPA
2-Year

. H6C

101

Grammar

Cred i t s

Cred i t s

Cred i t s

1 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n f o r s t u d e n t s in a g r i c u l t u r e and
natural resources.

GPA
1-Term

Table

60

cSignificant at

.001.

lb

1A

lb

.06

.08

.2 0

.01

.28

35

.34a
27

.38a
27

.28

.36a
27

.54b

27

.26

35

.2 9a
35

.24
35

.27
35

,48b
24

.09
35

.17
35

.22
35

.26
35

.21

Average

.16

.17
35

.28

35

Interview

.21

Listening
Wri t i n g

TOFEL

35
17
-.32
24
.04
19

IPAA
GPA 1-term

1 .0 0

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

24

.02

39
-.003
39

.21

-.13

39

21

.16
39

.06
21

Academic
Status

.51b
24

24

IPAA

-.12
35

- . 0 6

in a r t s and l e t t e r s .

Cred i t s

.14
25

ft o f

-.10
35

35

Read i ng

35

U

for students

CGPA

-.11
35

Cred i t s

-.07
35

=tfc o

<4- TJ
O 0)

ft o f

-.14
35

4-1

GPA
2-Year

Vocabulary

GPA
1-Year

Grammar

ft o f
Cred i t s

2 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

.2 6

39
,34a
39

.5 5°
30

.3 6 a
30

- . 1 2

.10
24

.13
39

.28

-.37a

.03
24

.15
39

.13
39

.20

24

.18
35

.65°
24

.04
24

.19
39

.22
39

-.20

.18
17

.16
17

.35

.07
11

.07

.006
18

-.59
5

• • •

-.07
23

-.35
23

-.20

-.22
12

.07
25

-.38
25

• • •

.02

Ik

.09
19

.29
19

.01
19

.32
13

.49a
13

.08

.30

21

21

.64°
77

.6 1 °

.46c
76

.57°
49

.18

.52c
77

-.12
17
-.42a

76

18

11

12

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

18

49

18

19

39

-.008
77

21

21

21

.40a
30
. 48°
39
.3 2 a
39
. 47°
39

25
1

.00

.30
21

.04
19

S i g n i f i c a n t at .001.

.27b
77

# of
Cred i t s

CGPA

.13
31

.67C
30

.3 3a
30

.71C
25

.3 3 a
25

.10
33

.27
33

.21
25

.11
33

Vocabulary

.3 9 a
31

.38a
31

.59°
31

.5kc

.k]b

.3ka

31

25

25

.23
33

.29
33

.19
25

-.00*»
33

Reading

.39a
30

.52c
30

.66°
30

.59°
30

.kka

M a
2k

• 33a
32

.*t0a
32

.27

25

2k

.15
32

Listening

.13
32

.3 2 a
32

M b

.21
32

.02
26

.21
26

-,0k
3k

.16

3k

-.03
26

.]k
3k

Wr i t ing

.12
31

.1 0

-.05

31

31

.12
31

.09
25

.12
25

.07
33

.29
33

-.19
25

.16
33

Average

.33a
31

.33a
31

. 62°
31

.38a
31

.koa

.3 0 a
25

.17
33

.32a
33

.15
25

.15
33

. ok
kl

.10

.19

.11
32

.2k

.3 9 a

.23

-.96

k2

.08

.08

2k

2k

.56b
21

.18
21

.13
26

1 .00

2k

k3
.5kc

k

.19

k3

-.1 1
26

.55C
89

,3 8 c
69

.37C
69

.08

-.03
89

-.07

TOFEL
IPAA
GPA 1-term
0

1 .0 0

Significant at

.05.

.5 2 c
89

32

k2
M a
2k
.57°
89
Jj

k2

.38a

25

Significant at

.01.

32

26

M c
89
c

.31b
89

IPAA

GPA
2-Year

.3 8 a
31

if o f

Cred i t s

Grammar

Cred i t s

if o f

Academi c
Status

in b u s i n e s s .

GPA
1-Year

Cred i t s

for students

if o f

3 . — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

Significant at

2k

k3

.001.

.11
36

.19
36

.12
20

.10
20

.18
30

.3 0 a
30

.10
30

.53°
30

.53a
17

.22
36

.20
36

.15
36

.50c
36

W r it in g

-.10
37

.06
37

.ok
' 37

Average

.18
36

. .26
36

.28

21
-.28
22

TOFEL
IPAA
GPA 1-term

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05,•

CGPA

.007
36

f of

- .11
37

GPA
1-Year

-.13
20

Academic
Status

Li s t e n i n g

.09
20

i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n -.

IPAA

Read i ng

.27
36

Cred i t s

.12
36

-.17
36

f of

Vocabulary

Cred i t s

.2*4
36

ff o f

.10
36

for students

GPA
2-Year

Grammar

Cred i t s

ff o f

Cred i t s

k . — C o r r e l a t i o n between t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

-.0 1
37

-.07
22

-.23
35

.05
37

-.007
37

-.16
22

.11
35

.36
17

.03
31

-.06
31

-.15
19

-.10
30

.06
20

.36
20

.10
37

.13
37

-.55
22

.12
35

.26
37

.21
21

.11
21

.08
38

-.10
38

-.07
23

.05
36

.06
36

.5 ^
36

.23
20

.28
20

.ok

.05
37

-M a

37

22

.02
35

.29
21

.20
21

.28
21

.05
15

.39
15

.07
21

.07
21

.25

•••

-.13
22

-.17
22

-.32
22

-.50a
12

-.5**a
12

-.17
23

-.18
23

1 .00

.08

.^5b
33

.6kc

-.28
22

.12
60

.79°
62

.k3°
62

.70c
62

bSigni f i c a n t a t .01,»

33

.50c
62

o*»0c
62

k

CS ign f i c a n t a t .0011.
ii

kB

.15
48

.48b
95

.13
95

.52°
71

. 47°
94

.26b
81

.37b
48

.2 5 s
48

.4 8 c
94

.15
94

• 51c
71

.4 0°
93

.11

.40b
44

.34c
79

.3Qb
79

.37°
61

.45°
78

.36b
48

.3 4 c
94

.14
94

.2 2a
71

.46c
93

49

.29s
49

.38c
96

.22a
96

.5 1°
71

.36°
95

.49°
71

. 49°
94

Cred i t s

.36b

ft o f

.10
82

GPA
2-Year

.20a
82

Cred i t s

Cred i t s

Academi c
Status

Average

IPAA

W r it in g

ft o f
Cred i t s

Li s t e n i ng

Bk

CGPA

Reading

.08

in e d u c a t i o n .

ff o f

Vocabulary

.25b
84

for students

GPA
1-Year

Grammar

ff o f

5 * — C o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

GPA
1-Term

Table

83

.2 5s
83

.27b
70

.14
70

.12
69

.32b
69

.32c

.21 a

8k

Bk

.20a
82

.22a
82

.30b
85

.25b
85

.08

.33°
83

.4 o c

.25b

.19 s
82

.3kc
82

.3 1 s
48

.38b
48

.4 6 c
95

.22a
95

.15

.ksb
2k

.01
13

.4 8 a
13

.44a
26

.57°
26

-.25
14

.38
26

.32
21

.47s
21

.57
6

.16
21

. 4

o

c

Bk

•

23s
81

83

kk
.2ka
kB
,2ka

.32

2k

Bk
.koa
2k

TOFEL

.35
21

.3 8 s
21

.29
21

.30
21

.35
13

-.27
13

IPAA

.20
62

.17
62

.02
62

. i4
62

.16
40

.04
40

.28b
71

.01
71

IPAA

-.19
17

-.15
17

.39
17

-.03
17

.38
15

-.36
15

.16
18

-.22
18

.92°
18

-.12
17

.2 7°
163

-.08
163

.20
62

-.006

Interview

GPA 1-term
d

1.00

Significant at

.05.

.57c
163

2k

.29c
160
b

.46c
160

.29b
79

Significant at

.01.

.2 1a
79

c

1.00

Significant at

.31b
70

.001.

162

Academi c
Status

.12
*4*4

.07
72

72

.23a
72

.22
*4*4

.13
72

.35a
31

.33b
63

.32b
63

.06
39

.07
63

.*4*4b
37

.38b
37

.15
72

.36 c
72

.01
*4*4

.11
72

.**2C
68

.*47c
38

.*41 b
38

.2*4a
73

.39°
73

.0*4

bS

.2 3 a
73

.18
67

.**5C
67

.37a
37

.32a
37

. 39°
72

.*42°
72

.09
*4*4

.19a
72

.39a

-.06

2b

2b

.*4*4a
2*4

.29
17

.19
17

.22
27

.28
27

-.*41
- 11

.03
27

.17
*42

.17

-.0*4
*42

-.06
25

.13
25

-.11
*»3

.13
*43

-.58
9

.07
**3

IPAA

.23

.08

bb

-.007
*4*4

.27 a
*4*4

-.22
25

.009
25

.05
*46

.18
*46

1.00

bb

.18
*46

PAA

.17

.16
2*4

-.33
2*4

.27
2*4

-.1*4
1*4

.27
1*4

-.05
26

.2*4
26

.92c
26

.09
26

1.00

.6*4°
133

.30c
133

.23

.32c
133

GPA
1-Year

-.02
37

# of
Cred i t s

-.06
37

GPA
1-Term

.13
37

.31b
67

.21a
67

.28b
67

Vocabulary

.35b
67

.*4lC
67

.09
67

.31b
67

M c
60

.29a
60

.30b
60

.37°
60

.*40a
31

Li s t e n i n g

• 21a
67

.29b
67

.32b
67

W r it in g

.29b
68

. 37 °
68

.25a
68

Average

.*4lc
67

.bbc

Interview

.27

TOFEL

Read i ng

2b

2b

GPA 1- ter m
g

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05.

67

b2

-.09
67

.*»*4C
133

-.0 1
*42

.63c
133

.5*4C
78

bS i g n i f i c a n t a t .01, >

.35c
78

. 56°
133

Cred i t s

.21a
72

.18
67

Grammar

§ of

.39°
72

GPA
2-Year

.01
37

# of
Cred i t s

IPAA

in e n g i n e e r i ng.

CGPA

6 . — C o r r e i a t i on b e t w e e n t h e p r e d f e t o r s a n d c r i t e r i o n f o r . s t u d e n t s

# of
Cred i t s

Table

bb

Sign i f i c a n t a t .001 •

GPA
2-Year

§ of

Cred i t s

CGPA

# of
Cred i t s

.33
12

.32
12

■77b
12

.41
12

.43
10

• 72b
10

.04
14

.20
14

.15
7

.23
14

Vocabulary

.38
12

.37
12

.78b
12

.62a
12

.43
10

.80b
10

.01
14

.32
14

• 74a
7

.20
14

Reading

.6 2 a
11

.5 7a
11

.6 la
11

.63 a
11

.31
9

.58a
9

.08

11

.23
11

-.62
5

Listening

.49
12

.39
12

.72b
12

.48 .
12

.29
10

,6 8a
10

-.08
14

.28
14

-.55
7

.22
14

W r it in g

.46
12

.5 4a
12

.5 7a
12

.56 a
12

.40
10

.53
10

.24
14

.43
14

-.09
7

.28
14

Average

.5 2 a
12

.46
12

.7 8 c
12

.5 7 a
12

.42
10

.72b
10

.04
14

.39
14

-.58
7

.29
14

.83°
21

.6 4c
21

.6 3 c
21

.47 a
14

.43
14

.4 oa
21

.35
21

-.43
6

• • *

GPA 1-term

1.00

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

»

Cred i t s

§ o f

Grammar

Cred i t s

GPA
1-Year

Academic
Status

in human e c o l o g y .

# of

for students

GPA
1-Term

T a b l e 7 * — C o r r e l a t i o n bet ween t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .01 t

<
<

Q-

S i g n i f i c a n t a t .00

• • •

.

.14
82

Read i ng

.11
69

.26a
69

.0*4
69

-.0 01
82

.10
82

Wr i t i n g

.01
82

Average

.06
84

-.31
23

.19
52

-.17
84

.20
' 23

-.24
22

-.03
44

-.07
71

.06
19

-.02
19

-.06
52

-.03
84

.17
23

.24
22

.13
52

-.28b
84

.16
23

.08
22

-.33
84

.02
52

-.13
85

.00
23

-.03
22

.12
32

-.28

32

.04
17

-.28
33

-.1 1
5

.11
4

.15
40

.23
47

.05
47

.54
7

-.02
47

-.25
12

-.08
11

.01
40

-.07
40

.01
53

-.12
53

1.00

-.2 1
53

-.52a
12

-.44
12

.08

-.16
28

.15
35

-.03
35

.02
35

-.63
7

-.66
7

-.009
142

-.07
33

-.04
32

.09
83

.22a
65

-.14
65

.27
69

.10
53

-.12
82

-.002
82

-.006
82

-.10
82

.09
83

J9a
83

Interview

.18
31

TOFEL

.20
47

IPAA

.12
52
-.02
35

GPA
1-Term

.09
65

Listening

PAA
GPA 1- ter m

1.00

.01
83

-.02
83

-.24a
83

-.02
53

-.15
70

.31 b
70

-.004
65

-.14
65

-.13
83

-.30
83

-.02
82

.15
65

-.1 1
65

-.05
83

-.20a
83

-.03
83

.10
83

.15
66

-.13
66

-.08
84

.13
31

.13
31

-.16
31

.28
25

-.29
25

.3 1a
47

.09
47

.3Cf
47

.09
40

-.13
52

.07
52

-.03
52

-.20
35

.16
35

-.12
35

.56°
142

S i g n i f i c a n t at .05.

.51c
\k2

.3 4 c
142

28
.4oa
115

.05
115

S i g n i f i c a n t at .01.

.46c
142

. 15a
142

.95C
35
.12
52

S i g n i f i c a n t at .001.

R0AC-F

.04
82

R0AC-A

.10
82

Academi c
Status

.12
82

science.

IPAA

Vocabulary

in na t ur a l

-.001
52

.14
65

o f

• 19a
82

Cred i t s

.223
82

#

• 26b
82

CGPA

. 28 b
82

§ o f
Cred i t s

§ o f
Cred i t s

Grammar

GPA
2-Year

GPA
1- Year

8 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n f o r s t u d e n t s

» of
Cred i t s

Tabl e

.42 a
22

# of
Cred i t s

CGPA

# of
Cred i t s

IPAA

Academi c
Status

-.13
32

.84b
32

.24
45

.22
45

• 35a
27

.20
47

Vocabulary

-.03
^3

.07
43

-.11
43

.23
43

-.17
32

.28
32

.43C
45

.18
45

.31
27

.38b
47

Read ing

-.05
32

-.07
32

.16
32

-.0 1
32

-.12
25

.23
25

.45b
34

.23
34

.43a
20

.30a
36

.14
44

.19
44

-.16
44

.30
44

.03
33

.30a
33

.01
46

.20
46

-.0 1
43

-.03
43

.24
32

.15
44

-.25
12

-.46
12

-.23
12

-.03
33
.12
7

,46b
33
-.42
7

.3 2 a
45
• 36b
46

.02
45

kb

.15
43
.32a
44
-.18
12

-.08
32

.14

-.02
43
-.04
44

-.28
12

.36
17

-.36
17

.29
17

-.03
13

.06
13

-.18
18

-.26
26

.32
19

-.27
19
.20
54

Listening
Wri t i ng
Average
Interview

.007
17

T0FEL

-.20
26

IPAA
GPA 1-term

d

1.00

Significant at

.05.

-.26
26
• 72c
71

GPA
1-Year

.31a
43

Cred i t s

-.05
43

# of

.18
43

GPA
1-Term
.06
**3

Grammar

.3 4a
26
.3 3C
71
b

.50c
71

.39°
54

Significant at

.01.

.10
48

-.19
27
.45b
27
.26
27

,30a
48

-.32
12

.05
7

.39
13

-.04
18

.49
5

-.07
18

.4 5°
27

.06
27

1.00

.10
27

.42°
71

.01
71

-.20
26

.01
71

c

.19
46

Significant at

.23
47

.001.

200

GPA
2-Year

9 . — C o r r e l a t i o n between t h e p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i o n f o r s t u d e n t s in s o c i a l s c i e n c e .

# of
Cred i t s

Tab le

AP P E N D I X

D

RESULTS OF THE PREDICTOR AND CRITERION
MEAN COMPARISON ANALYSIS

201

Cred i t s
C o m p l e t ed
2 Years

GPA 2 - Y e a r

Cred i t s
C o m p l e t ed
1st Ye a r

ns

ns

a.F

ns

ns

ns

ns

ns

ns

ns

ns

a ,F

T -test

a,S

A,S

ns

ns

a ,S

a ,S

a ,S

ns

a ,S

ns

a ,S

ns

ns

ns

De g r e e l e v e l

T-test

ns

ns

ns

a.
Ph.D.

ns

a,
Ph.D.

a,
Ph.D.

a,
Ph.D.

ns

a,
Ph.D.

a,
M.A.

a,
Ph.D.

a,
M.A.

a,
Ph.D.

Academi c
status

T -test

ns

a ,N

a ,N

a ,N

a ,N

a ,N

a ,N

a ,N

ns

a ,N

a ,N

ns

a ,N

a ,N

Age

Anova

a,Y

a,Y

a,Y

a ,Y

a ,Y

ns

a ,Y

a ,Y

a »Y

a ,Y

a.Y

ns

ns

a ,Y

Curriculum

Anova

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

ns

Country o f
Origin

Anova

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

Marital

status

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

;

Key:

a = Gr oup mean d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y

(p < . 0 5 ) .

n s = Gr oup means d i d n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y .
F = F e ma l e.
S = S ingle.
Y = Young g r o u p .
N = S t u d e n t s w i t h n o r ma l a c a d e m i c p r o g r e s s .

202

i

t of

CGPA

GPA

ns

t of

MSU-AETS

1 - Ye a r

Wri t i ng

ns

GPA

Li sten i ng

T-test

Sex

t

Read i ng

of Cred i t s
C o m p l e t ed
1st Term

t o t h e i r means on p r e d i c t o r s

Vocabulary

1 - Ter m

i n d i c a t e s where t h e subgro ups d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w ith r e s p e c t

Grammar

1 . — Summary t a b l e t h a t
and c r i t e r i a .

TOFEL

Table

2 . — R e s u l t s o f t h e mean c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s o f m a l e v e r s u s f e m a l e , s i n a l e v e r s u s m a r r i e d , d o c t o r a l v e r s u s m a s t e r ' s s t u d e n t s ,
and s t u d e n t s w i t h nor mal a c a d e m i c p r o g r e s s v e r s u s s t u d e n t s who s e a c a d e m i c p r o g r e s s i s n o t n o r m a l .
No. o f C r e d i t s C o mp l e t e d
t h e F i r s t Term

GPA 1-Term
Var i a b l e s

Gr oups

Ma 1e

Mean

n

2.86

690

T-Value

-

Sex

M arital

Femal e

2.96

2 7 1*

Single

2.92

700

Sig .
Level

Mean

n

ft. 17

690

T-Value

H a r r i ed

2.75

26ft

Ph. D.

3.12

2ft7

De g r e e Level

3-31
Master' s

2.79

718

Not nor mal

2. f»3

ftft

Ac ade mi c S t a t u s

-2.27
Normal

S i g n i f i c a n t at

. 05-

^Significant at

.01.

S i g n i f i c a n t at

. 001

2.90

915

Mean

n

3.36

789

3-1)3

310

3.38

810

3-38

289

3.1)8

259

-1.12

.61)
6.1)9

271)

6 . 51

700
3.12

1.70

Status

Sig.
Level

CGPA

5.60

261)

6.10

21)7

c

6 . 31

718

5.80

1)1)

a
6.30

915

. 08

b

.71
3-35

-

T-Value

-1 . 98

00

Table

2.98

168

3.1)6

925

a

..

N>

O
VxJ

3.1)3

-10.69

.71

Sig.
Level

c

c

Table

3 - — Me a ns, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s , a n d F - v a i u e s o f GPA 1 - t e r m , number o f c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d f i r s t t e r m , GPA 1 - y e a r , and
CGPA f o r s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d s c o r e s o f <80 o r > 8 0 , 8 0 - 8 5 , and >85 on t h e MSU-AETS and w r i t i n g s u b t e s t s .

GPA 1- Ter m

Average

Wr i t i ng

A v e r ag e

Wr i t i ng

Score

n

<80

59

1.1*5

1.75

>80

b56

2.59

1.53

<80

32<*

2.36

1 .61

>80

193

2.62

1.56

<80

7

SD

F - Va l u e

28.00C

3.00

Ho f

C r e d i t s Co m p l e t ed
1 s t Term

n

X

SD

59

2.1*9

5.11*

1*56

5.00

3.81*

321*

i t . 36

3- 87

193

5.36

l*.30

59

2.1*9

5 - 11*

197

i*. 15

1*. 0 9

5-73

■S'*

321*

3.29

. 60

192

3.38

. 63

3-36

.1*8

<*.36

3.87

321*

3.29

. 60

151*

l* . 86

l* . 36

153

3.38

. 68

39

7-33

39

3-38

.1*3

1.38

259

<80

321*

2.36

1. 61

321*

80-85

\5b

2.1*8

1.62

39

3.16

1.16

3.62

a t p < .001

3.36

258

2.01*

CF - v a I u e s i g n i f i c a n t

1*56

5-73

259

a t p < .01.

. 98

• 98

>85

a t p < .05.

3.00

.61

197

^F-value s i g n i f ic a n t

59

3.36

1.65

a F-value s i g n i f ic a n t

SD

3.00

1.75

>85

7.3i*b

7

59

1.1*5
2.25

l*.35a

21.00°

n

197

59

80-85

22.5l*C

F-Value

GPA 1- Ye a r

20.00°

9-65C

CGPA
F- Val ue

18.00°

3-00

9.3l*C

1.50

n

7

SD

73

2.93

1.10

1*71*

3.36

.1*9

353

3.21*

.71

197

3.1*2

.38

73

2.93

1.10

207

3 . 31

. 53

267

3.1*1

.1*6

353

3.21*

.71

158

3.1*3

. 35

39

3.1*2

. 50

F-Value

31.00°

1 1 .3l*b

17.1*8°

5.66°

Table

4 . — C o m p a r i s o n o f GPA a n d c r e d i t - l o a d m ea ns o f s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d a s c o r e o f < 8 0 a nd
t h o s e who a c h i e v e d a s c o r e o f > 8 0 on t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t ( a v e r a g e a n d s u b t e s t s ) .

JZ

in
J-J
•—
"D
a)
L.
(->

E

in 0)
— u
— o
CD O
C CO
UJ

u
0)
h—
1

r> in
co <d

14-

<
CD

o

Q_

z : i—

in
4-1
~a
a>
4-1
a)
>—

L.
ru

E
O

“D
<D 0)
4-*
O
0)
*—
M-

>l

E

L.

CL <U

o

03
a>
>i
CNI

u
aj

CL 0)

<
Q_
CD

h1

in
4->
•—
X)
a>
u
o

■—

O E
O

<_> —

X

SD

X

SD

X

SD

X

1.57

3.13
3.3 6

1.05b
.47

1 6 . 00
21 . 00

1 .07c
.52

14—

<
CL.
CD

>i

“D
a>
4-J
o
«•—

o

u

CL 0a>3
E
O

<
Q_
CD
O

>
i

=tt; O CNj

SD

X

SD

X

SD

X

9 - 88 c
7.20

3.28

3.41

1 7 . 00 1 0 . 9 2 .
21 . 00 7. 42

14.66

SD

• 38b
.32

37
42

13b
12

3.05
3.36

•95e
.50

3.31
3.40

• 33
.34

37
4

13b
12

2.9 8
3.35

1 • 13C

1. l l c

Grammar

<80
>80

1.75 c
1.52

3.07
5.09

5 - 66 c

2 . 6A

Vocabulary

<80
>80

1.73
2.5^

1.75c
1.56

3.26
4.91

5.3 7c
3.86

3.01

Read i ng

<80
>80

1.52
2.52

1.77c
1.55

2.58
4.87

4.9 5c
3 .8 9

3.06

3.34

•97c
.56

20.82

7 . 8 8c
7.73

3.27
3. 40

• 38a
.32

34
41

14C
12

2.95
3.35

Listening

<80
>80

1.93
2. 56

1.76c
1.54

3.78
4 .9 5

5 . 00b
3.86

3.21
3.34

•87}
• 55

17.74 1 0 . 35c
20.87 7 . 2 8

3.31
3. 40

.38,
• 33

38
41

,i4}
12

3.11
3.35

.53

W r it in g

<80
>80

2.36
2.62

1.61
1. 5 6

4 .3 6
5.36

3.87 b
4.33

3.2 9
3.38

.60,
.63

19.47
21.87

7 . 9 9c
7-59

3.35
3.43

•34a
.34

39
42

12 a
12

3.24
3.43

•72c
.39

Average

<80
>80

l.*5
2. 59

1 -75c
1.53

2.4 9
5.05

6.143.84

3.00

•98c
.54

14.85 10.39c
21.03 7. 27

3.22

•4°c
.32

35
42

l^b

2.93
3.3 6

1 . 10 c

12

^Means
c Means
Means

3.57

3.3 6

3.36

d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y a t p < .05.
d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y a t p < .01.
d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y a t p < .001.

3.41

.50

.48
q4

.49

c

SD

X

SD

X

SD

X

SD

X

SD

CGPA

GPA 2-Year

1-Year

Cred i t s

C ompl e t e d

# of

GPA 1-Year

1-Term

Cred i t s
# of

GPA 1-Term
X

C omp l e t e d

5 • — C o m p a r i s o n o f GPA a n d c r e d i t - l o a d m ean s o f s t u d e n t s who a c h i e v e d s c o r e s o f < 8 0 , 8 0 - 8 5 ,
a n d >85 on t h e MSU E n g l i s h t e s t ( a v e r a g e a n d s u b t e s t s ) .

MSU Eng 1ish
Test Score

Table

X

SD

1.57
2.2 6
2.81

.72
.65c
.42

3.07
4. 29
5.42

5.66
3 .6 2c
3.51

3.13
3-33
3.38

1 .05
• 39b
. 50

16
20
22

9.8 8
7 .o 4c
7.20

3. 29
3.33
3.45

.38
• 37c
.30

3.05
3.31
3.40

• 95
• 55c
.48

<80
80-85
>85

1.73
1.84
2.67

.75
. 69 c
.50

3.26
3. 00c
5.25

5.37
3. 20
3.87

3 .0 0
3:19
3. 39

1. 07

Vocabulary

. 62c
• 50

17 11 .00
17 7 .0 0c
21 7 .2 9

3.31
3.32
3.41

.33
.34
.34

2.9 8
3.23
3.37

1.13
• 57c
.48

<80
80-85
>85

1.60
2.02
2.67

.77
.68c
.49

2.58
3.61
3.22

4 .9 5
3.36c
3.96

3 .0 6
3-29
3-36

• 97
.43b
.60

14
18
21

3.28

Read i ng

3.31
3.42

.39
.31a
.32

2.9 5
3.3 0
3.37

1.11
.38c
.31

Li s t e n i ng

<80
80-85
>85

1.93
2.1 2
2 .1 k

.76
.72c
.44

3.78
3.6 6
5.45

5. 00
4 .3 2c
3.5 5

3.21
3.27
3-37

.87
.76
.44

18 10.35
18 7.0 0
21 7 .0 0

3-31
3.34
3.44

.38
. 36 a
.31

3.11
3.23
3.23

• 94
.69c
.44

<80
80-85
>85

2.36
2.4 8
3.16

.51
.63a
. 16

4 .3 6
4 .8 6
7.33

3.87
4 .3 6 c
3.62

3. 29
3-39
3.38

.60

Wr i t ing

.68
.43

19
21
25

8 .0 0
7 .0 0 c
6 .0 0

3.35
3.42
3.5 2

.34
.34a
.35

3.24
3.43
3.42

.71
• 35b
.50

<80
Average

80-85

1.45
2.2 7
2.84

.75
,66c
.38

2 .4 9
4. 15
5.73

5. 14
9. 09c
3.4 8

3 .0 0
3.3 6
3.3 7

.98
.61 c
.48

15 10.00
19 7 .5 9c
23 6.6 8

3 .2 2
3.34
3.4 6

.41
.33c
• 31

2.93
3.31
3.41

1.10
• 53c
.46

>85
^Means
Means
Means

d iffe r significantly
d iffe r sig n ifican tly
d iffer significantly

a t p < .05.
a t p < .01.
a t p < .001

7 .8 8
7 .0 0 c
8.00

206

80-85
>85

<80

Grammar

6 . —Means on p r e d i c t o r s and c r i t e r i a f o r s t u d e n t s from c o u n t r i e s in which E n g l i s h is a second
la n g u a g e , t h e Far E a s t , Europe, South America, t h e Middle E a s t , and E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g
countries.

ft of Cred i t s
Comp 1e t e d
1-Year

GPA 2-Y ear

Cred i t s
Completed
2-Year

CGPA

8.00

3 .3 9

26.33

3.4 8

50. 0

3.37

2 .78

5.52

3.38

21.58

3 .**3

*♦3.0

3. 39

3 .2**

7 .5 0

3.54

24. 28

3.58

*♦2.0

3. **9

2.3 6

2 .62

5.8 0

3.42

22.21

3. 35

*♦5.0

3.3 6

1.97

2 .52

*♦.77

3.32

19.56

3. 40

*♦0.0

3.2*1

3.50

8.50

3.5 9

26.33

3.64

*♦5.0

3.63

U)

s_
—
I

ro

f0
p—
D
-Q
OJ
O

O)

c
■—

Uo
I-

E
E
fU
i_
C
3

C o u n t r i e s in which
E n g l is h i s a
second lang uage

592

9 0. 0

9*^

92

Far East

571

8 8 .5

91

Europe

669 .

8 8 .0

South America

557

Middle East

528

LL)

Engli s h - s p e a k i n g
countries

<u

o
>

“O
fO
<D
cn

•—

if)

cn

c
•—
4-i
•—

CD
CD

TO

L0)

U

>
<

87

85

89

88

85

78

85

90

91

89

83

88

82.0

88

89

86

79

84

7 8 .0

80

81

85

75

81

<
<

Q—

2.71

L_
(D
\—
1
t—
<C
a .
o

ft of

GPA 1-Year

3 .20

E

>-

c
•—
c

ft of Credi t s
Comp 1e t e d
1-Ter mi

Tabl e

APPENDIX E

STEPW ISE

M U LTIPLE

FOR

THE

R EG R ESSIO N

V A R IO U S

208

S T A T IS T IC S

SUBGROUPS

209

Table

1 . — Stepwise m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f the p r e d i c t o r s
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r m a l e s .
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r ion

Pred i c t o r

Set o f Pred i c t o r s
MR

R

B

that contributed

(B) Second S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

Pred i c t o r

MR

R

B

b

GPA 1-Term
( N=2 3 0)

MSU-AETS
Age

.32
• 35

10
12

GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N=230)

MSU-AETS

.17

0A

. 17

2.02

GPA 1- Ter m

• 3A

.11

• 31

.11

GPA 2 - Y e a r
( N- 167)

MSU-AETS

.25

06

.25

1.A3

GPA 1- Ter m
MSU-AETS

• 3A
• 37

.11
.1A

. 29
. 15

■5A
. 88

CGPA
(N=230)

MSU-AETS .

GPA 1- Ter m

■32

.10

■32

. 86

.15

• 02

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

.30 9-38
- . 1 3 - A . 70

.15

P i

1.26

. 05

2 . — Stepwise mult ip le r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f the p r e d i c t o r s
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r f e m a l e s .

Tab 1e

(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r ion

Pred i c t o r

t h a t c o n tr i buted

(B) Second S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

Set of Pred i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

b

. 22

MR

R2

IPAA
GPA 1-Term

• 36
• A5

. 13
.21

. 35
. 28

.21
. 57

GPA 1- Ter m
IPAA

• 33
,A0

.11

. 29
. 22

. 16

Pred i c t o r

B

b

GPA 1-Term
( N- 90)
*

GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N=90)
GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=52)

IPAA

• 36

13

.36

CGPA
(N=90)

IPAA

.27

• 07

.27

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

.20

P S -05

.16

.80

210

Table

3 . — Stepwise m u ltip le re g re ssio n s t a t i s t i c s of the p r e d ic to r s th at c o n trib u te d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s i n g l e s t u d e n t s .
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r i on

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

• 36
.39
.41

.13
.15
.17

B

GPA 1- Ter m
(N=206)

MSU-AETS
De gr ee l e v e l
Age

GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N=206)

*

GPA 2 - Y e a r
( N=l 44)

MSU-AETS
Degree level

.19
.25

.03
.06

.20
-.17

CGPA
(N=206)

Degree l eve l
MSU-AETS

. 14
.20

01
05

-.14
.14

*No s i g n i f i c a n t

Table

(B) Se c ond Se t o f P r e d i c t o r s

S e t o f Pred' i c t o r s

predictor.

.35
-.17
-.13

b

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

. 12
-69
- 4
GPA 1-Term

.21

. 04

.21

.86

1 . 33
- 12

GPA 1- Ter m

.30

. 09

• 30

. 60

-15
1.30

GPA 1- Ter m

. 28

.08

. 28

. 75

P 5 .05

4 . —■Stepwi s e mul t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r m a r r i e d s t u d e n t s .
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r i o n

Pred i c to r
GPA 1- Ter m
( N = l 14)

*

GPA 1 - Ye a r
( N = l 14)

*

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=7 5)
CGPA
( N » l 14)

MSU-AETS

(B) Se c ond S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

Set of Pred i c t o r s
MR

. 24

R2

06

B

. 24

b

1. 31

*

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

P < -05

Pred i c t o r

B

b

MR

R2

GPA 1- Ter m

.38

.14

. 38

.14

GPA 1- Ter m

.40

.16

. 40

. 69

GPA 1- Ter m

.38

.14

. 38

. 10

21 1

5 . — Stepwise m u ltip le re g re ss io n s t a t i s t i c s of the p r e d ic to r s th a t c o n trib u ted

Table

significantly

t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s

(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r i on

Pred i c t o r

Set of P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

in t h e d o c t o r a l

program.

(B) Se c ond S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

GPA 1- Ter m
( N- 75)

MSU-AETS

.28

.07

. 28

. 10

GPA 1 - Ye a r
<N=71)

MSU-AETS

.25

.06

. 25

3.80

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m

. 43

. 17

. 43

. 18

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=5M

J.

GPA 1- Ter m

. 48

.23

. 48

. 95

CGPA
(N=71)

&

GPA 1- Ter m
MSU-AETS

• 33
. 40

.11
. 16

.40
-.24

. 84
'1 . 85

*No s i g n i f i c a n t

P £ .05

predictor.

6 . — S t e p wi s e m u l t i p i e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s i n t h e m a s t e r ' s p r o g r a m .

Table

Cr i t e r i on

(A)

First

Pred i c t o r
GPA 1- Ter m
(N=249)

MSU-AETS

( B) Se c ond S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

Set of P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R^

B

b

.28

.08

.28

9.39

GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N=24g)
GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=165)

MSU-AETS

.23

.05

. 23

1.34

CGPA
(N=249)

MSU-AETS

.14

. 02

. 14

1.37

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

P S -05

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m

.22

. 05

. 22

. 90

GPA 1- Ter m
MSU-AETS

. 27
• 31

. 07
. 09

.21
. 16

.41
• 95

212

7 . — St e p wi s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d

Ta b l e

s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t he p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s age 20 t o 2^.
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r ion

Pred i c t o r

Set of Pred i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

(B) Se c ond S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

GPA 1- Ter m

■b3

.18

•bl
• 56

. 22
.31

• 52
-.29

5.27
-29

1

. 17

.bl

.15

B

b

GPA 1 - Ter m
( N- 58)
GPA 1 - Y e a r
(N=58)
GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=39)

MSU-AETS
Degree le v e l

. ^7
• 55

.22
.31

• 52
-.30

5-30
-30

MSU-AETS
De gr ee l e v e l

CGPA
(N=58)

MSU-AETS

• 27

.07

.27

b.55

GPA 1- Ter m

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

Table

P f

.

■b3

.19

.05

8 . - - ■St epwi s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s a g e 25 t o 2 9 .
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r i on

Pred i c t o r
GPA 1- Ter m
(N=li(6)
GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N=1A6)

MSU-AETS
IPAA
J-

Set of Pred i c t o r s

(B) Se c o nd S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

MR

R2

B

b

• 23
.29

.05
,08

.20
. 17

7.^0

IPAA

• 19

.03

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

• 19

MR

R2

B

b

.bl

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N= 100)
CGPA
(N=1A6)

Pred i c t o r

.10

GPA 1- Ter m

. 17

. 03

.17

. 62

GPA 1 - Ter m

• 33

.11

. 33

• 65

GPA 1 - Ter m

. 39

. 15

. 37

• 76

P * .05

9 •— Stepwise m u lt i p le r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s of th e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n tr i buted
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s a g e 3 0 ~ 3 b .

Table

(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r ion

Pred i c to r

Set of Pred i c t o r s

(B) Se c o nd S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m
(N=79)

MSU-AETS

• 30

09

• 30

8.70

GPA 1 - Y e a r
(N=79)

Degree lev e l

• 23

.05

.23

33

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=55)

MSU-AETS

CGPA
(N=79)

• 38

ib

.38

1.66

'■

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

p < . 05

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

GPA 1- Ter m
Degree le v e l

, 2b
• 3^

.05
.11

MSU-AETS

.38

GPA 1 - Ter m

• 31

B

.2b

b

. 23

. 87
33

.lb

. 38

1. 66

. 09

.31

.bb

213

Table

10.- -S te p w !se m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s of th e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n tr i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s m a j o r i n g i n n a t u r a l
science.
.

(A) F i r s t
Pred i c t o r

Set of P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

(B) Se c on d S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m
( N- 50)

Sex

.33

.11

-.33

-9*t

GPA 1 - Ye a r
( N- 50)

Sex

.29

.08

-.29

-32

GPA 1- Ter m

■30

. 09

.30

.12

GPA 2 - Y e a r
( N- 39)

De g r e e l e v e l

.38

. 14

-.38

-29

De g r e e l e v e l

. 38

.14

-.38

- 29

GPA 1- Ter m

. 36

.13

. 32

.11

CGPA
(N-50)

*

*No s i g n i f i c a n t

Table

P 5 .05

predictor.

1 1.- - S t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t ic o n t r i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s m a j o r i i ng in a g r i c u 1t u r e .
first
Pred i c t o r

Set of P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

( B) Se c o n d S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

Pred i c t o r

GPA 1- Ter m
( N- 60)

MSU-AETS

• 39

.15

• 39

.16

GPA 1 - Y e a r
( N-60)

Sex

.33

.11

■33

60

GPA 2 - Y e a r
( N- 39)

MSU-AETS
Aag

. 67
.72

.1*5
.52

CGPA
( N- 60)

MSU-AETS
Sex

• 56
.60

. 32
.36

MR

R2

B

11

• 33

Sex

• 33

.

.50
3-32
-.31 -2 .5 7

MSU-AETS
Aag

. 67
.72

. 45
.52

A. 28
17

MSU-AETS
Sex

. 56
.60

.32
. 36

• 55
.21

p < . 05

b

60

.50 3.32
-.31 -2 .5 7
.55
.21

4.28
17

21 J»

Ta b l e

12. - - S t e p w i s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s ma j o r i n g in e n g i n e e r i n g .
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r i on

Pred i c t o r

Set o f P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

(B) Se c ond S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

Predictor

GPA 1- Ter m
(N=42)

MSU-AETS
Sex

■AO
. 52

.16
.27

. 43
-.34

.20
-188

GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N=42)

Sex

. 47

. 22

-.47

-80

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=24)
CGPA
(N=42)

*

Sex
MSU-AETS

.39
. 52

. 15
. 27

-.46
.38

-76
5.3)

R2

B

b

J.

Sex

.47

. 22

. 47

-80

GP A' 1- Ter m

.61

. 37

.61

. 14

GPA 1- Ter m
Age
Sex

. 63
.68
.72

. 40
. 47
. 53

. 64
• 30
- .24

.20
3-34
-4 4

'

*No s i g n i f i c a n t

Table

MR

P 5 . 05

predictor.

1 3 .--Stepwise m u lt i p ie r e g r e s s io n s t a t i s t i c s of the p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n tr i buted
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s m a j o r i n g in b us i n e s s . '
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r ion

Pred i c t o r

Set o f P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

(B) Se c ond S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m
(N=23)
GPA 1 - Y e a r
(N=23)

MSU-AETS
Marital s t a t .

.70
.79

.49
. 63

. 67
. 38

10
60

MSU-AETS
Marital s t a t .
GPA 1- Ter m

. 70
■79
. 88

.49
.63
• 77

.52
• 38
. 40

8
61
. 22

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=20)

Marital s t a t .
MSU-AETS

. 62
.75

. 38
.56

. 58
.42

35
2.36

Marital s t a t .
MSU-AETS

. 62
. 75

• 38
• 56

. 58
. 42

35
2.36

CGPA
( N=2 3)

IPAA

.64

.41

.61)

. 33

IPAA
GPA 1- Ter m

.61)
. 78

.41
. 62

. 60
.45

P i

-05

.31’
.11

215

Ta b l e 1 4 - — S t e p wi s e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s o f t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s from Chi na.
(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r i on

Pred ic t o r

Set of P r e d i c t o r s
MR

( B) Se c o n d Se t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

R2

B

Pred i c t o r

.18
.28

.03
.08

-.23
. 22

-68
• 69

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m
(N=80)

M arital
IPAA

GPA 1 - Y e a r
(N=80)

IPAA
Sex

• 37
.49

. 13
.24

. 47
-.34

.46
- 29

GPA 1- Ter m
IPAA
Sex

.59
. 65
. 70

. 34
. 42
. 49

. 50
. 36
-.27

. 16
• 35
- 23

GPA 2 - Y e a r
( N- 57)

Degree l e v e l

• 33

.10

-.27

21

GPA 1- Ter m
IPAA
Sex

.54
. 59
.64

. 29
. 35
.41

. 49
. 34
-.25

.11
.27
- 17

CGPA
(N=80)

IPAA
Sex
Marital

• 34
.42
.46

.11
. 17
.22

.46
-.26
-.21

■38
-18
-16

GPA 1- Ter m
IPAA
Sex

.51
. 57
. 60

. 26
• 33
■36

.44
■32
-.19

.11
.27
- 14

stat.

stat.

P < .05
15.-- Stepwise m u lt i p le r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s of the p r e d i c t o r s t h a t cont r i buted
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s f r o m S o u t h K o r e a .

Table

(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r ion

Pred i c t o r

Set of P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

(B) Se c o n d S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s
b

GPA 1- Ter m
(N=50)

MSU-AETS
Degree lev e l
IPAA

.42
.48
.56

.18
. 23
.31

■39
17
-.32
- 13 2
- .2 9 -1 .64

GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N=50)

MSU-AETS
Sex

.26
• 38

• 31
. 14

-.29
-.27

-1.64
-51

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=39)

MSU-AETS

.60

• 36

.60

CGPA
(N=50)

MSU-AETS

• 30

.09

■30

Pred i c t o r

MR

R2

B

b

IPAA

.34

.11

. 34

. 15

4.81

MSU-AETS

.60

• 36

. 60

4 . 81

2.93

GPA 1- Ter m
IPAA

. 48
. 55

. 23
• 30

. 54
. 26

.12
. 32

P < . 05
16.--•Stepwise m u l t i p i e r e g r e s s i o n s t a t i s t i c s of t h e p r e d i c t o r s t h a t c o n t r i buted
s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f GPA f o r s t u d e n t s f r o m J a p a n .

Table

(A) F i r s t

Cr i t e r i o n

Pred i c t o r

(B) Se c on d S e t o f P r e d i c t o r s

Set of P r e d i c t o r s
MR

R2

B

b

Pred ic to r

MR

R2

B

b

GPA 1- Ter m
(N=28)

IPAA

■39

.15

. 37

1.69

GPA 1 - Ye a r
(N= 28)

IPAA

.42

. 17

. 42

1.13

GPA 1- Ter m

. 49

. 24

. 49

. 29

GPA 2 - Y e a r
(N=20)

J.

• 54

■30

. 54

1.59

IPAA
GPA 1- Ter m

.54
. 63

• 30
.40

.41
• 34

1.19
. 22

CGPA
(N=28)

IPAA

*No s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r .

p < .05

APPENDIX F

ANOVA AND POST HOC COMPARISON ANALYSIS (TUKEY)
FOR THE VARIOUS GROUPS

216

217

T a b l e 1 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f GPA 1 - t e r m
means f o r s t u d e n t s 1n d i f f e r e n t a g e c a t e g o r i e s .

Source

df

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

F-Ratio

F Prob.

Between g r o u p s
Wi thi n g r o u p s
Total

3
920
923

526883. 843 6
16165234.7657
16692118.6093

175627.9479
17570.9074

9. 99 5

.0000

G
R
P
0
0
4
Mean
249. 477 6
2 5 8. 2 30 8
296. 016 7
3 1 8. 7 74 2

G
R
P
0
0
3

Group
GRP004
GRP003
GRP002
GRP001

* *
* *

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
0
1

Age C a t e g o r i e s
1.
2.
3.
4.

2 0-2 4
2 5-2 9
30-34
35 and above

218

T a b l e 2 . — ANOVA and p o s t - h o c comp ariso n a n a l y s i s (Tukey) o f t h e means
o f c r e d i t s c o m p le te d t h e f i r s t te rm by s t u d e n t s 1n d i f f e r e n t
age c a t e g o r i e s .
S ou r ce

df

Between g r o up s
Within g r o u p s
Total

3
920
923

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q ua re s

45 2. 05 76
14449.8731
14901.9307

150.6859
15.7064

G
R
P
0
0
3
Mean
5.3484
5.4328
6.4391
7.2442

Group
GRP003
GRP004
GRP002
GRP001

*
**

G
R
P
0
0
4

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
0
1

F- Rat1o

F Pr ob .

9. 59 4

.0000

Age C a t e g o r i e s
1.
2.
3.
4.

20-24
2 5- 2 9
30-34
35 and above

219

T a b l e 3 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f CGPA m e a n s
f o r s t u d e n t s in d i f f e r e n t age c a t e g o r i e s .

So urce

df

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

Between gr oup s
Within g r o up s
T ot al

3
922
925

11235.7141
1282093.1542
1293328.8683

37 45 .2 3 80
1390.5566

G
R
P
0
0
4
Mean

Group

33 2. 6 26 9
344.2793
3 4 6. 0 35 8
346.4725

GRP004
GRP003
GRP002
GRP001

G
R
P
0
0
3

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
0
1

F-Ratio

F P ro b.

2.6 9 3

.0450

Age C a t e g o r i e s
1.
2.
3.
4.

20- 24
25-29
30 - 34
35 and above

220

T a b l e 4 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f GPA 1 - t e r m
means f o r s t u d e n t s i n d i f f e r e n t c o l l e g e s .

Source

df

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

F-Ratio

F Prob.

Between g ro u p s
Within g r o u p s
Total

10
941
951

864090.8698
16669028.0042
17533118.8739

86409.0870
17714.1637

4.878

.0000

G
R
P
0
0
9

Mean
229.3065
24 8. 72 22
25 0. 7 10 8
271 .2394
276.5238
2 8 4. 2 20 9
310.8271
3 1 5. 3 02 8
318 .2 58 4
32 3.5195
32 4 . 2 0 0 0

G
R
P
0
0
6

Group
GRP009
GRP006
GRP001
GRP011
GRP004
GRP007
GRP003
GRP005
GRP002
GRP010
GRP008

-

*
*
*
*

*
*
#
#

G
R
P
0
0
1

G
R
P
0
1
1

G
R
P
0
0
4

G
R
P
0
0
7

G
R
P
0
0
3

G
R
P
0
0
5

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
1
0

G
R
P
0
0
8

College
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Agr. & N at. R es ou r ce s
Business
Engineering
Human Ecology
N a tu r a l S c ie n c e
Vet. Med. & Human Med.
E d u c a ti o n
U nclassified
Communications
Arts & L e t te r s
Social Science

T a b l e 5 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f t h e m e a n s
o f c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d t h e f i r s t t e r m by s t u d e n t s 1n d i f f e r e n t
colleges.

S our ce

Btween g r o u p s
Within g r o u p s
Total

df

Sum o f S q u a r e s
687.6771
14672.5540
15360.2311

10
941
951

G
R
P
0
0
6
Mean
4. 16 67
5 .4 51 6
5.5211
5.62 05
5. 971 8
6.190 2
6.2381
6. 400 0
6. 8182
g.8421
8 . 32 58

Group
GRP006
GRP009
GRP011
GRP001
GRP005
GRP007
GRP004
GRP008
GRP010
GRP003
GRP002

Mean S q u a r e s

G
R
P
0
0
9

G
R
P
0
0
1

G
R
P
0
1
1

G
R
P
0
0
5

G
R
P
0
0
7

G
R
P
0
0
4

G
R
P
0
0
8

68 .7 67 7
15.5925

G
R
P
0
0
0

G
R
P
0
1
3

G
R
P
0
0
2

F-Ratio

F Pr ob .

4.410

.0000

Col l e g e
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Agr. & N at . Re s ou r ce s
Business
Engineering
Human Ecology
N a tu r a l S c i e n c e
Vet. Med. & Human Med
E d u c a ti o n
U nclassified
Communications
Arts & L e t t e r s
Social Science

222

T a b l e 6 . — ANOVA o f t h e means on CGPA o f s t u d e n t s in d i f f e r e n t
col l e g e s .
S ou rce

df

Between g ro u p s
Within g r o u p s
Total

10
1073
1083

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u ar es

F-Ratio

F Prob.

52121.6285
33 6734.3964
341975 6.0 24 9

5212.1628
3138.5223

1.661

,0852

T a b l e 7 . — ANOVA and p o s t - h o c comp ariso n a n a l y s i s (Tukey) o f GPA 1 - t e r m
means f o r s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t r e g i o n s o f t h e w o r l d .
Source

df

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

F-Ratio

F Prob.

Between gr o u p s
Within g ro u p s
To ta l

5
956
961

864610.7640
16770335.0364
17634945.8004

172922.1528
17542.1915

9.858

.0000

G
R
P
0
0
3
Mean
252.9187
262.7113
278.8743
32 0. 4 30 2
324. 033 9
35 0. 68 06

G
R
P
0
0
1

Group
GRP003
GRP001
GRP002
GRP005
GRP006
GRP004

* # *
# *
* # *

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
0
5

G
R
P
0
0
6

G
R
P
0
0
4

Region
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

South America
F ar E a s t
Middle E a s t
English-speaking
Country in which E n g l i s h i s
a second la n g u a g e
6. Europe

223

T a b l e 8 . — ANOVA and p o s t - h o c com par iso n a n a l y s i s (Tukey) o f t h e means
o f c r e d i t s c o m p le te d t h e f i r s t te rm by s t u d e n t s from
d i f f e r e n t r e g i o n s o f t h e w o r ld .
S ou r ce

df

Between g r ou ps
Within gr oup s
Total

5
956
961

Sum o f S qu ar es

1651.6613
13814.6807
15466.3420

G
R
P
0
0
3
Mean
4 .7 75 0
5 .5 22 9
5.7958
7.4915
8.1117
8 .5 41 7

G
R
P
0
0
2

Group
GRP003
GRP002
GRP001
GRP006
GRP005
GRP004

Mean S q u a re s

# * *
* * *
* * #

G G
R R
P P
0 0
0 0
16

G
R
P
0
0
5

G
R
P
0
0
4

33 0. 33 23
14.4505

F-Ratio
22.860

F Prob.
.0000

Region
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

South America
Far East
Middle E a s t
English-speaking country
Co untry in which E n g l i s h i s
a s eco nd la n g u a g e
6. Europe

22k

T a b l e 9 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f m e a n s o f
CGPA f o r s t u d e n t s f r o m d i f f e r e n t r e g i o n s o f t h e w o r l d .

S ource

df

Between g r o u p s
Within g r o up s
T ot al

5
1091
1096
G
R
P
0
0
3

Mean
324.2541
336.2895
337.2565
33 8. 6 09 2
349.0756
363. 265 8

Group
GRP003
GRP001*
GRP005
GRP002
GRP006
GRP004

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

F-Rat1o

F Pr ob.

100349.4611
3330 26 2. 817 8
343 06 12. 27 89

20 069.8922
3 05 2. 486 5

6. 57 5

.0000

G
R
P
0
0
1

G
R
P
0
0
5

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
0
6

G
R
P
0
0
4

Region
South America
Far East
Middle E a s t
En gl i s h - s p e a k i ng
Cou ntr y in which E n g l i s h i s
a s e c o n d la n g u a g e
6 . Europe

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

225

T a b l e 1 0 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f GPA 1 - t e r m
means f o r s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s .

S our ce

df

Between g r o u p s
Wi thi n g r o u p s
Total

22
862
384
G
R
0
1
1

Mean
165.0000
172.5000
172.5000
21 5. 0 69 8
234. 419 4
235.0741
240.9231
24 6. 88 16
249 .7600
269 .5 27 8
27 1. 5 96 2
278.4872
30 1. 91 67
3 0 2. 1 7 39
30 4. 61 19
312 .1 5 09
315.2083
323 . 0000
326 .6 64 4
328.6471
3 3 4. 5 66 0
351.2941
354 .6 08 7

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

F-Ratio

F Prob.

2105018.2249
14526562.5841
16631580.8090

95682.6466
16852.1608

5.678

.0000

G
R
0
0
9

G
R
0
2
3

Group
GRP011
GRP009
GRP023
GRP021
GRP022
GRP013
GRP006
GRP014
GRP015
GRP001
GRP017
GRP012
GRP016
GRP020
GRP010
GRP018
GRP019
GRP007
GRP003
GRP004
GRP008
GRP005
GRP002

« # *
* * * #
*

*
# #
#
# #
* *
* *

# *
* #
* *
* *

G
R
0
2
1

G
R
0
2
2

G
R
0
1
3

G
R
0
0
6

G
R
0
1
4

G
R
0
1
5

G
R
0
0
1

G
R
0
1
7

G
R
0
1
2

G
R
0
1
6

G
R
0
2
0

G
R
0
1
0

G
R
0
1
8

G
R
0
1
9

G
R
0
0
7

G
R
0
0
3

G
R
0
0
4

G
R
0
0
8

G
R
0
0
5

G
R
0
0
2

226

T a b l e 1 1 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f t h e m e a n s
o f c r e d i t s c o m p l e t e d t h e f i r s t t e r m by s t u d e n t s f r o m
d iffe re n t countries.

S o ur ce

df

Sum o f S q ua re s

Between g r o u p s
Within g r o u p s
Total

22
862
884

2542. 3684
11678.2078
14220.5763

G
R
0
1
1
Mean

Group

2 . 80 00
3 . 2 72 7
3.3889
3.4400
3 .6 66 7
4. 04 65
4.4615
4.6053
4 .7 22 2
5.410 3
5 .4 83 9
6.4925
6 .5 06 8
6.7115
7 .2 50 0
7.3333
7.6415
8.22 64
8.2941
8.52 94
8. 6087
8. 69 57
8 .7 77 8

GRPOll
GRP009
GRP023
GRP015
GRP013
GRP021
GRP006
GRP014
GRP001
GRP012
GRP022
GRP010
GRP003
GRP017
GRP019
GRP016
GRP008
GRP018
GRP004
GRP005
GRP020
GRP002
GRP007

*
*
*
*
*
*
#
#
*
#
*

#
#
#
#
#
#
*
*
#
#
#

G
R
0
0
9

G
R
0
2
3

G
R
0
1
5

# *

*
#
*
#
*
*
*

*
*
#
*
#
*
*
#
*
*
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
*

G
R
0
1
3

G
R
0
2
1

G
R
0
0
6

G
R
0
1
4

Mean S q ua re s

115.5622
13.5478

G
R
0
0
1

G
R
0
1
2

*

*

*

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* # *
*
*

*
*

*
*
*

G
R
0
2
2

G
R
0
1
0

G
R
0
0
3

G
R
0
1
7

G
R
0
1
9

G
R
0
1
6

G
R
0
0
8

F- Rat1o

F P ro b.

8. 5 3 0

.0000

G
R
0
1
8

G
R
0
0
4

G
R
0
0
5

G
R
0
2
0

G
R
0
0
2

G
R
0
0
7

227

T a b l e 1 2 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s
o f s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s .

S ou rce

df

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Between g r o u p s
Within g r o u p s
Total

22
936
958

197949.5137
3031450.2924
32 29399.8060
G
R
0
1
5

Mean

Group

295.1175
312 .3 52 9
318 .8 63 5
319. 766 7
320.2791
3 2 4 .2 50 0
32 8.8727
3 3 1. 8 3 87
333. 6707
335. 7895
337 .2 10 5
339 .5 00 0
33 9. 6 53 8
339.8983
341.3333
341. 7727
34 5. 3 88 9
346 .1 0 26
346. 9167
351 .9167
353.5000
365. 882 4
367. 388 9

GRP015
GRP011
GRP009
GRP013
GRP012
GRP001
GRP018
GRP022
GRP014
GRP007
GRP023
GRP010
GRP019
GRP008
GRP017
GRP012
GRP004
GRP003
GRP020
GRP016
GRP006
GRP002
GRP005

*
*
#

#
#
*
*

G
R
0
1
1

G
R
0
0
9

G
R
0
1
3

G
R
0
1
2

G
R
0
0
1

G
R
0
1
8

G
R
0
2
2

( T u k e y ) o f CGPA m e a n s

Mean S q u a r e s
8997.7052 '
32 38 .7 2 89

G
R
0
1
4

G
R
0
0
7

G
R
0
2
3

G
R
0
1
0

G
R
0
1
9

G
R
0
0
8

G
R
0
1
7

G
R
0
2
1

G
R
0
0
4

F-Ratio

F Pr o b.

2.778

.0000

G
R
0
0
3

G
R
0
2
0

G
R
0
1
6

G
R
0
0
6

G
R
0
0
2

G
R
0
0
5

228

T a b l e 1 3 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f GPA 1 - t e r m
m e a n s f o r s t u d e n t s who s t a r t e d t h e i r a c a d e m i c p r o g r a m s w i t h
d if f e r e n t English s t a t u s .

So urce

df

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

F-Ratio

Between g r o u p s
Within g ro u p s
Total

6
958
964

329 99 79 .1 7 11 ,
14423961.5709
17723940.7420

549996.5285
15056.3273

36.529

G
R
P
0
0
4

Mean
210.5345
313.3301
329.3411
333.3333
336.3545
336.8873
338. 425 9

Group
GRP004
GRP002
GRP007
GRP006
GRP005
GRP003
GRP001

*
*
*
#
#

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
0
7

G
R
P
0
0
6

G
R
P
0
0
5

G
R
P
0
0
3

G
R
P
0
0
1

F Prob.

.0000

English S ta tu s
1. TOFEL >550 and p a s s e d
2 . TOFEL <550 and p a s s e d a f t e r
a f t e r t a k i n g MSU t e s t
3 . MSU-AETS >80 and p a s s s e d
4 . MSU-AETS <80 and s t u d i e d a t
t h e E n g l i s h Language C e n t e r
5 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d ( E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c o u n t r i e s , Europe,
and c o u n t r i e s i n which
E n g l i s h i s s eco nd la n g u a g e )
6 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d ( t r a n s f e r )
7 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d (from Mid­
d l e E a s t , South America,
A f r i c a , and t h e Far E a s t )

22 9

T a b l e 1 4 . — ANOVA and p o s t - h o c com parison a n a l y s i s (Tukey) o f t h e means
o f c r e d i t s co m pl et e d t h e f i r s t t e r m by s t u d e n t s who s t a r t e d
t h e i r academic programs w ith d i f f e r e n t E n g l i s h s t a t u s .
So ur ce

df

Between gr ou ps
Within g r o u p s
Total

6
958
964

Sum o f S q ua r es
4175 .08 44
11349.5851
15524.6694
G
R
P
0
0
4

Mean

Group

3 .5 74 7
6.8155
7 . 23 26
7.7887
7.8095
8.2593
8. 5909

' GRP004
GRP002
GRP007
GRP003
GRP006
GRP001
GRP005

G
R
P
0
0
2

*
*
*
#
# *
* * *

G
R
P
0
0
7

G
R
P
0
0
3

G
R
P
0
0
6

G
R
P
0
0
1

G
R
P
0
0
5

Mean S q u a r e s
69 5. 84 74
11.8472

F-Ratio
58.735

F Pr ob.
.0000

Eng'He‘h S t a t u s
1. TOFEL >550 and p a s s e d
2 . TOFEL <550 and p a s s e d a f t e r
a f t e r t a k i n g MSU t e s t
3 . MSU-AETS >80 and p a s s s e d
4 . MSU-AETS <80 and s t u d i e d a t
t h e E n g l i s h Language C e n t e r
5 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d ( E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c o u n t r i e s # Europe#
and c o u n t r i e s i n which
E n g l i s h i s second l a n g u a g e )
6 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d ( t r a n s f e r )
7 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d (from Mid­
d l e East# South America#
A f r i c a # and t h e F a r E a s t )

230

T a b l e 1 5 . — ANOVA a n d p o s t - h o c c o m p a r i s o n a n a l y s i s ( T u k e y ) o f CGPA m e a n s
f o r s t u d e n t s who s t a r t e d t h e i r a c a d e m i c p r o g r a m s w i t h
d i f f e r e n t English s t a t u s .

S ou r ce

df

Between g r o u p s
Within g r o u p s
Total

6
1093
1099
G
R
P
0
0
4

Mean
3 2 4. 8 08 6
. 340.4793
341.8861
345 .8 84 8
346 .4 19 0
347 .6 74 4
35 5 . 1 0 0 0

Group
GRP004
GRP007
GRP003
GRP001
GRP002
GRP006
GRP005

*
*
#
#

Sum o f S q u a r e s

Mean S q u a r e s

F- Rat1o

F Pr ob .

123568.1894
3307662. 1597
3431230.3491

2059 4.6 982
3026 .22 34

6.805

.0000

G
R
P
0
0
7

G
R
P
0
0
3

G
R
P
0
0
1

G
R
P
0
0
2

G
R
P
0
0
6

G
R
P
0
0
5

English S ta tu s
1. TOFEL >550 and p a s s e d
2 . TOFEL <550 and p a s s e d a f t e r
a f t e r t a k i n g MSU t e s t
3 . MSU-AETS >80 and p a s s s e d
4 . MSU-AETS <80 and s t u d i e d a t
t h e E n g l i s h Language C e n t e r
5 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d ( E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c o u n t r i e s , Europe,
and c o u n t r i e s i n which
E n g l i s h i s s eco nd la n g u a g e )
6 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d ( t r a n s f e r )
7 . No E n g l i s h r e c o r d (from Mid­
d l e E a s t , South America,
A f r i c a , and t h e Far E a s t )

APPENDIX G

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY SUBJECTS ACCORDING TO
THE AVAILABILITY OF DATA, CURRICULUM,
AND COUNTRY

231

232

Ta b l e

1 . — D i s t r i b u t i o n of study s u b je c t s according to th e a v a i l a b i l i t y
of English p ro fic ie n c y t e s t sco res.

Variable

Group

# of
Subjects

1

TOFEL >550

165

2

TOFEL <550 6
MSU-AETS >80

105

3

MSU-AETS >80

80

it'

MSU-AETS <80 &
stu d ie d a t the
MSU Eng 1i sh
Language C e n t e r

Group

V ariable

5

No E n g l i s h
record/European
& Englishs p e a k i n g co u n ­
tries

6

No Engli sh
record ( t r a n s f e r )

7

No Engli sh
r e c o r d from c o u n ­
t r i e s in which
English is a s e c ­
ond l a n g u a g e , &
Far Ea st 6 Middle
East

560

Ta bl e

375 _

120

43
217

2 . — D is tr ib u t i o n of study s u b je c ts according to sex, m arital
s t a t u s , a g e , d e g r e e l e v e l , and t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f GPA,
CGPA, IPAA, pAA, and ROAC.
# of
Students

Variable

Ca te gor y

j

O / ‘H VS
6X

Ma 1e
Female

794
311

Mar i t a l
Status

Single
Marr i ed

815
290

Age

20-24
25-29
30-34
35-59
Mi ss ing

218
421
222
106
139

Degree
Level

Ph.D.
M a s t e r 1s

260
844

IPAA:
pAA:
ROAC:

a of
Subjects

Variable
GPA 1 -te rm
GPA 1 - y e a r
GPA 2 - y e a r
CGPA
IPAA
pAA
ROAC

Index o f p r e v i o u s academic ac hi eve m ent
Actual p r e v i o u s g r a d e s r e p o r t e d on a s c a l e o f 1-100.
R at in g o f o v e r a l l academic competence

H of
Students
965
962
635
1 ,100
342
127
110

T ab le

3 - — D i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e t o t a l s tu d y s u b j e c t s a c c o r d i n g t o c u r r i c u l u m ( c o l l e g e ) and c o u n t r y
of o rigin.
a of
Subjects

Agr. & Nat. Resources
Bus i ness
E n g i n e e r in g
Human Ecology
N at u r al S ci e n c e
V e t e r i n a r y Medicine
Educat i on
Communications
Arts & L e tte rs
Human Medicine
So ci a l S ci e n c e
Unclass i f ied
Miss ing

173
9*
1*3
23
150
10
178
68
85
9
77
79
17

Country

Argent i na
A ustralia
B razi1
Botswana
Canada
Chile
China
Colomb i a
England
France
West Germany
Greece
Hong Kong
1nd ia
1ndones i a
Tha i 1and

# of
Subjects
10
10
8
51
8
156
7
18
18
11
1*
19
60
22
bb

Country

1ran
1raq
Japan
Jo rd an
Kenya
South Korea
Kuwa i t
Ma laysia
Mexi co
Netherlands
Nigeria
Phi 1i p p i n e s
South A f r i c a
Spa i n
Sudan
Venezuela
Egypt

§ of
Subjects

76
17
bb

30
8
82
362
2b

57
60
55
26
2b

8
9
31
21

233

Col 1ege

234

Table

4 . — D i s t r i b u t i o n o f s t u d y s u b j e c t s f o r whom p r e v i o u s g r a d e s
were a v a i l a b l e .
Number o f S u b j e c t s

COUNTRY
South
Amer i c a

B razi1
Mexi c o
V enezuela

20
15
12

Near E a s t S
Far E ast

Chi na
1n d o n e s i a
Japan
S o u th Korea
Tha i l a n d

86
14
30
53
36

M iddle E ast

1r a q
Jordan
Kuwa i t
Egypt

15
25
23
13

COLLEGE
A g r i c u l t u r e and N a t u r a l
Bus i n e s s
Eng i n e e r i n g
Human E c o l o g y
N atural S cience
V e te r i n a r y M edicine
E d u c a t i on
Communication
A rts and L e t t e r s
Human M e d i c i n e

Resources

60
26
46
7
53
4
71
23
21

3

- Table

5 . — D e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f bo w t h e c o mmo n g r a d i n g s y s t e m s w e r e r e s c a l e d
grades

9-10
( 3) 8
(2) 7
(1) 6
(0)<6
(*4 )

( U)

( 3)
(2)
(1)
(0)

Best
Go o d
Fair
Poor
Very po or

(1)
(0)

Excel le n t
Good
Fa i r
We a k
Failure

(*0
(3)
(2)
(0)

Superior
Middle
Inferior
Failure

(*0
(3)
(2)

(k)

(3)
(2)
(!)
(0)

Excellent
Above a v e r a g e
Average
Below a v e r a g e
Insufficient

(k)
18-20
( 3) 1 6 - 1 7
( 2 ) 1*4-15
( 1) 1 0- 1 3
( 0) <10

(**) E x c e l l e n t
( 3 ) Go o d
(2) F a i r
(I) Poor
(0) F a i l u r e

(*4 )

( 3)
(2)
( 1)
(0)

(A)

Excellent

(M

Good
Fair
M l n i mu m
Failure

(3) 7 5 - 8 9
( 2 ) 60- 7*4
( 1) 3 3 - 5 9
(0)<33

(M
(3)
(2)
(I)
(0)

E x c e ll e n t (90-100)
Very good (8 0- 8 9)
Go o d
(70-79)
Pass
(60-69)
Failure
(<60)

(6) {
(3)
(2)
(1)

10
9
8
7
6
5
6

(0)

90-100
80-89
70-79
60-69
<60

( A) 8 - 1 0
Excellent
( 3) 7
Very
good
( 2) 6
Go o d
(I) 5-1/2
(0)<5-1/2

(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)

Perfect
Excel le n t
Very good
(3)
8
Go o d
(2)
7
Sufficient
( 1 ) ( 56 5 P a s s
Less s u f f i c i e n t
5
( 0 ) f *4.5 N o t s u f f i c i e n t
*i F a i 1

(M {'°

for

the

purpose

of

converting

the

foreign

students'

actual

previous

to a uniform sc ale .

(3
2
1

90-100

(*4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)

(**)
E-Excel l e n t
( 3)
M B - V e r y Go o d
( 2)
B-Good
( 1) R - A v e r a g e

(*4 ) 9 0 - 1 0 0 ( E x c e l l e n t )
( 3) 7 5 - 8 9 - 9 9 (Good)
(2) 60-7*4.99 ( F a i r )
(1) *0-l»9-99 (P o or )
(0)<^0
(Failure)

Excel le n t
Go o d
Fai r
Poor
Failure

Excel l e n t
Very good
Go o d
Pass
Failure

Excel l e n t
Very good
Go o d
B e tte r than f a i r
Fai r
Inadequate
Mo re i n a d e q u a t e
Most i n a d e q u a t e
Ba d
Poor

(100)
( 90)
( 80)
( 70)

80-100

w

(3)
(2)

70-79
60-69
(1) 5 0 - 5 9
(0)- •50

( 6)

(90-100)
(80-89)
(65-79)
(50-66)
( 60 - 69 )

(6)

(3)
(2)
( 1)

A

<3>C
(2>fc+
(
(0)

<
F

(*4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)

(*4 )

(3)
(2)
(I)

MB ( 9 - 1 0 )
B( 7 . 6- 8 .9)
S (6-7.5)
NA ( F a i l u r e )

(*4 ) E x c e l l e n t

( 3)
( 2)
( 1)
(0)

,.w 86-100
i q ; i 80-85
(3) 7 0 - 7 9
( 2 ) 6 5 -6 9
( 1 ) 6 0 - 6*4
(0)<60

Go o d
Fair
Pass
Failure

(6 . 0)
Excellent
( 3 . 0)
Go o d
S a t i s f a c t o r y ( 2 . 0)
( 1.0)
Passed
F a i 1u r e
(<!.0)

Distinguished
Very good
Good
Pass

E x c e l l e n t (*4.00)
Very good ( 3 .5 0 )
Go o d
(3.00)
A b o v e a v e .. ( 2 . 5 0 )
Average
(2.00)
Below a ve., 0 . 5 0 )
Poor
(1.00)
Failure
iM . 0 0 )

( 6 ) ( 10
(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)

A+
( 6 ) {A
AB+
( 3) (B
BC+
( 2 ) fC
C0+
( 1 ) (D
D-

8
7
6
<6

. . . f 10
’
9
(3)
8
(2)
7
(1)
6
(0)
5
[

( 6)
(3)
( 2)
( 0)

90-100

3.7
3.3
3.0)

80-89

2.7
2.3
2.0}
1.7
1.3
1.0}
. 07

Excellent
Very good
Go o d
Fair
Satisfactory
Failure

E x c e ll e n t (80-100)
Go o d
(70-79)
Fair
(60-69)
Failure
{<60)

Perfect
Excel le n t
Very good
Good
Sufficient
F a i 1u r e

6.3
6.0)

( 6 ) { 10
(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)

(6)(«+

<3> C
( 2 ) <c+
70-79
(0)
60-69

(With ho no r)
(Excellent)
(Very good)
( Good)
(Fair)
(Failure)

8
7
6
<6

N>
OJ
U1

Excel le n t
Very good
Go o d
B etter than
Fa i r
Inadequate

(95-100)
(90-96)
(85-89)
(80-86)
(75-79)
(70-76)
(65-69)
(60-66)
1[ < 6 0 )

(95-100)
(90-96)
(85-89)
( 80- 86)

6.50
6.00
3.50
(3H®_
3.00
2.50
(75-79)
2.00
<2)Tc- (70-76)
1.50
(65-70)
< <
(60-66)
1.00
Failure
( 0 ) F (*-' 6 0 )
K

-

APPENDIX H

CHART FOR THE DATA COLLECTION, RATING SCALE, AND
DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE RESEARCH

236

237

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ■ DEPARTMENT OF COUNSELING,

EAST LANSING • MICHIG AN •

EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY AND SPECIAL EDUCATION

May 3, 1983

Professor Benson
Office of Foreign Students
109 International Center
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan
48824
Dear Professor Benson:
One of my doctoral advisees, Mr. All Aseeri (02-99372) is undertaking research
on the prediction of foreign graduate students academic achievement at Michigan
State University.
To conduct his study he w ill need information on the names
of these students, their ages, their field of specialization, country of origin
and their martial status.
Further he w ill need information on their previous
academic achievement, their GPA achieved at M.S.U. and their English test score
achieved by the end of their English program.
In addition, Mr. Aseeri w ill
distribute a rating scale to the foreign doctoral student academic advisors.
The scale asks the advisors to rate the doctoral student's academic competence.
Data on this scale w ill be used as criterion data for examining the predictive
validity of the preadmission criteria.
W
e w ill be grateful for your help in
providing as much of this information as may be available.
Mr. Aseeri w ill be
in touch with you to follow up on this le tte r .
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,

William Mehrens
Professor

M S U ii an A /firm a tn n t A c tio n /L y u a l O p p o r tu n ity In ttitu lu m

238

MICHIGAN
l- .M .M S H
C t - M I - 'K

STATE UNIVERSITY

I A N G l ACil- C K N T K K
K )K

IN I h H S A l I O N A L

I AM

I \ \ M N < , • MM I I I * . A N

PROGRAM S

July 28, 1983

Dr. Lou Anna Simon
Assistant Provost
423 Administration Building
Michigan State University
Dear Dr. Simon:
As you know, Mr. Ali Aseeri is attempting to undertake a reasearch study which
will compare English Language Center English language proficiency te st scores
of a group c£ students with their cumulative G.P.A. in academic courses in
order to determine if there is a correlation which would establish predictive
validity for academic success based on the ELC te s t scores. As I understand it,
in order to gain access to the records of a group of students, the results of his
project must be of some value to a unit of the University, and he has asked me
if his results would be value to the English Language Center.
In fa ct his results will be of use to us for several reasons. There has been a
fair amount of discussion among admissions people throughout the United States
on the feasibility of using TOEFL scores as a substitute for SAT, ACT, and
GRE 9cores, and some study has been conducted to determine whether such a
substitution would be legitim ate. To my knowledge, the studies have been
inconclusive, but suggest that language proficiency scores are not synonymous
with academic aptitude or achievement scores. Mr. Aseeri's project would add
some information to that debate, and v.'.uld be of particular value to us because
the data base would be focused on scores and grades generated within Michigan
State and would thus speak directly to our student body.
In addition, the project would give us the opportunity to assess our assumption
that the ELC t e s t is in fa c t a language test, not a te st of academic aptitude.
Although there may be some correlation between success in learning a second
language and success in other areas of academic study, our assumption is that
language learning is not the same as learning physics or sociology. Hence,
students who learn English quickly and w ell may not be stunning academic
successes, and vice versa, students who struggle through the Center may prove
to be very able students in an academic class. Mr. Aseeri's study would be an
aid in confirming or disconfirming this assumption.
The study might help as w ell in advising our students, to the exten t that we
will be confirmed in our standard advice that success in the English Language
Center will a t the very le a st allow the full potential pf the student to come to
the fore in academic classes. If language proves a barrier, academic success
may well be compromised, in spite of natural academic ability in a given field.
It is my understanding that Mr. Aseeri expects to find differences among
nationalities in his correlations. Perhaps he will, and if he does that information
could be quite useful to the Center in several respects.

\tSl

m ur

\ t t i r« 4 . i h > i

\ i l i o n I yfa u / ( I f ' / u i r l u n i l » l n \ t i l u l i ' H

• is-.'.

239

We will be glad to cooperate with Mr. Aseeri. and your o ffice in supplying the
information he needs on the ELC t e s t scares, provided i t is your judgment that
the information can be released.
Sincerely yours,

James C. Stalker
Director
cc: Mr. Ali Aseeri

2k0

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
O m C E OF TH E DEAN OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES AND PROGRAMS

EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN • 48124

July 27, 1983

Dr. Lou Anna K. Simon
Assistant Provost
423 Administration Bldg.
Campus
Dear Dr. Simon:
I have read and reviewed with Dr. Mehrens, Dr. Benson and
Mr. Ali Aseeri the prop o s e d dissertation research Mr. Aseeri
submitted.
We believe the result of such a study w o uld be
of administrative value to this office and would therefore
encourage Central A d m i n i stration to provide the support
required to secure the data.
The Office of the Director,
Office of Foreign S t u d e nts/Scholars is not in a position
to lend assistance as suggested in the written proposal
(page 28).
Sincerely yours,

Homer Higbee
Assistant Dean

cc:

Dr. Wi l l ia m M ehrens
Dr. August Benson

241

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

EAST LANSING * MICHIG AN • 46824

MSU I n K f M tl o w i I Y f i r
1 9 8 1 -1 9 4 2

OFFICE OF THE DEAN OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES AND PROGRAMS

May 5, 1983

Dr. Henry E. Bredeck
Chairman, UCRIHS
238 Administration Bldg.
Campus
Dear Dr. Bredeck:
I recommend your concurrence in the research efforts
of Mr. A li Aseeri of Saudi Arabia.
Mr. Aseeri is pursuing
a Ph.D. in the Department of Counseling, Educational
Psychology and Special Education.
His topic i s a valid
one and can add additional insight to the study of academic
achievement of foreign students.
Thanks for your consid­
eration.
Sincerely,

Augdst G. Benson, Director
Office of International
Students and Scholars
AGB/scm

S t S V t s u«

4tfirman\+A c t m n 'E q u a l O pf*> rtuntr\- In tiiiu lin m

2k2

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
0FT1CE OF THE PROVOST

EAST LANSING ■ MICHIGAN • 488M

ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

September 16, 1983

M
EM
O
RANDUM OF RECORD

Meeting on the release of data to support the dissertation proposal of
Mr. All Aserri, held on September 16, 1983

Present: Dr. Lockhart, Dr. Higbee, Dr. Stalker, Dr. Mehrens, Mr. Aserri,
Dr. Simon

The English Language Center and the Office of International Studies and
Programs concur that the research proposed by Mr. Aserri would be valuable to
these units.
The Office of Planning and Budgets can provide the data contained in central
records to an administrative unit which will supervise this study and which
w ill assume responsibility for assuring the confidentiality and proper use of
individually Identifiable data from the central University records. The
administrative unit w ill need to assume responsibility for the collation of
these data with other data requirements for this proposal and for the provision
of these collated data sets to Mr. Aserri in a redacted format. The
administrative unit w ill also need to assume responsibility for the collection
of data from student advisors as proposed in the study.
It was agreed that Dr. Stalker, Director of the English Language Center, will
assume the administrative responsibility for this study. He will work with
Mr. Aserri, Dr. Higbee, and Dr. Mehrens to develop the necessary support
arrangements for the project so that Mr. Aserri receives only a set of
redacted data from the three sources (administrative, English Language Center,
and academic advisors) identified in his proposal. Dr. Stalker will send a
formal request to Dr. Lockhart for the data from central student records.

LAKS:Jmc
CC: Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Mr.

Bredeck
Higbee
Lockhart
Mehrens
Stalker
Aserri

2k3

English Language Center
Center for International Programs
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
January 24, 1984

Dear Academic Advisor:
Mr. Ali Aseeri, a graduate student in the Departm ent of Counseling, Educational
Psychology, and Special Education, is conducting a study for his doctoral disseratation on
the relation of academic achievem ent to the English language proficiency of foreign
graduate students.
'
The academic success of the students, one of the variables of the study, will be measured
by cumulative GPA, but Mr. Aseeri, as well as other measurement specialists, believe that
for doctoral students the cumulative GPA does not by itself provide full data on the
quality of their academic com petence. Therefore, Mr. Aseeri has designed a rating scale
to gather the judgments of the academic advisor of the doctoral students included in his
study. The outcome of such judgments will be used as an alternative criterion to the
cumulative GPA to judge the foreign doctoral students’ academic competence.
Will you please complete the enclosed evaluation form(s) for the student(s) you have
advised and return it(them) to me in the envelope provided? If our information is
incorrect, please send back th e evaluation(s) for the student(s) you did not advise. It
would be helpful if you would supply the name of the advisor if you know it.
Your evaluation of the student(s) will be confidential and will be used only for this study.
Mr. Aseeri will not receive the evaluation with the students’ names or other identifying
information attached. A fter th e English Language Center receives your response, the top
part of the questionnaire will be removed. The evaluation portion will be given to Mr.
Aseeri without identification other than a randomly assigned number which correlates
with other data Mr. Aseeri is collecting.
We appreciate your willingness to contribute to the success of this study. Aside from Mr.
Aseeri's immediate dissertation needs, the data should be of use to the English Language
Center in helping us see the relationship between English language proficiency and
academic achievement.
Sincerely yours,

Jefrnes C. Stalker, Director
English Language Center

2hk

Advisor's Rating Questionnaire
Card ih

Student's Name_________________________________________________
last
first
middle
Student's Number__________ _____________________

Card //:
Page its
As the person most fam iliar with the above student. Please rate him on the following
item s in two respects: (1) in comparison with all American students in his field at the
Ph.D. program and (2) in comparison with all other foreign students in his field in the
Ph.D. program.
Please rate the student on the following items:
1.

The student's overall academic competence (academic competence refers to the
student's overall potential as an academician who will continue to be productive in
his field).
Racing

7-8

1.

S ig je rlo r...................

1.

Above av e ra g e .........

2.

3.

A verage.....................

4.

M arginal.....................

4.

5.

In ad eq u ate.................

5.

3.

................... m iddle 40X

The student's overall academic performance.
R ating

P er Cent o f C lass

Check (✓) Each Colimn Cnee
O ther F oreign
A ll Other
Stu d en ts
Students

S u p e rio r...................

1.

2.

Above a v e ra g e .........

2.

3.

A verage.....................

3.

4.

M arg in al...................

4.

S.

In ad eq u a te.................

5.

1.

3.

The student's degree of mastery of the fundamental knowledge in his field.
R ating

11-12

Check (✓) Each Col u rn Once
A ll O ther
O th er Foreign
S tu d en ts
Students

2.

2.

9-10

Per Cent o f C lass

P er Cent o f C lass

Check (✓) Each Colurm Once
A ll Other
O th er F oreign
S tu d en ts
S tudents

1.

S u p e rio r...................

1.

2.

Above av e ra g e .........

2.

3.

A verage.....................

3.

4.

M arginal...................

4.

S.

In ad eq u ate.................

5.

2bS

The student's knowledge and ability to use the basic research techniques in his field.
Racing

1.

2.

Above av e ra g e.........

2.

3.

A verage...........

3.

4.

M arginal .......................

4.

5.

In ad eq u ate.................

5.

5

The student's ability to express himself in writing.
R ating

15-16

1.

2.

Above av e ra g e .........

2.

3.

A verage.....................

3.

4.

M arginal...................

4.

5.

In ad eq u a te ...............

5.

The student's ability to express himself verbally.
P er Cent o f C lass

Check (✓) Each C o lu rr Once
O ther F oreign
A ll O ther
S tudents
Students

S u p e rio r...................

I.

2.

Above av e ra g e.........

2.

3.

A verage.....................

3.

4.

M arginal.....................

4.

3.

In ad eq u a te.................

5.

1.

Overall judgment of the student's English language competency.
R ating

P er Cent o f C lass

Check <✓) Each Colurri Once
O ther F oreign
A ll O ther
S tu d en ts
S tu d en ts

S u p e rio r...................

I.

2.

Above av e ra g e.........

2.

3.

A verage.....................

3.

4.

M arginal...................

4.

5.

In ad eq u ate...............

5.

1.

19-20

Check <✓) Each Col u rn Once
O ther F oreign
A ll O ther
S tu d en ts
S tu d en ts

S u p e rio r...................

R ating

7.

P er Cent o f C lass

1.

6.

17-18

Check (✓) Each Colurm Once
O ther F oreign
A ll O ther
S tu d en ts
S tu d en ts

S i^ ie rio r...................

1.

13-14

P er Cent o f C lass

,246

Student name:

Card #:

Card #:

Code

Variable

7-9

TOEFL

10-11

Grammar

12-13

Vocabulary

14-15

Reading

Score

C
/5 Q

Q) O
U 4J
0

“ ■S T3.
U

t/5 C
/5 0>

■u C w
16-17

Listening

£•§

c/5 3

S.

i—
1C
/5 C
1&-19

Writing

20-21

Average

22-23

Interview

24-25

Grammar

& 0) m
UJ C
/5 U
• £ 4)
3 J-l 4-1
s: u-i j_i

w

26-27

Vocabulary

^ o 3
o □
C

4J

C
/5£
28-29

Reading

30-31

Listening

32-33

Writing

u
13
C
/5 C
/5 •«-»
0)
aj

34-35

Average

C 3
Q
J 4->
c/5

x: *g
C
/5 3
H M
tf 0)
[2 U3
O
• j*

C

10

u
U)
<U

D u u

to ^ aj
2 : u-i u
36-37

Interview

Ikl

Student faked name:

#

Student name:
Student umber:

#

]□
Variable #

Code

V 16

38

Sex

17

39

Marital status

18

40-41

Age at the time of admission

19

42-43

Curriculun

20

44

21

45-47

Country

22

48-49

Major field

23

50-52

G.P.A. - First term

24

53-54

Nunber of credits completed

25

55-57

Cunulative G.P.A. - First year

26

58-59

Nunber of credits cdepleted

27

60-62

Cunulative G.P.A. - Second year

28

63-64

29

65-67

Cunulative G.P.A.

30

68-70

Nunber of credits completed

31

71-73

Index of previous academic achievment

32

74

Academic status

33

75

P.A.A.

Variable Name

Degree level

Nunber of credits completed

Data

Comment

248

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
O FFIC E OF A D M IS S IO N S A N D SCHOLAR SHIPS

EAST L A N S IN G • M IC H IG A N • 48824

D ear International Student:
All international applicants w ithout full native fluency in English must fulfill certain
requirem ents as part of admission on either a regular or provisional basis. If adm itted
provisionally, the deficiency must be corrected within three consecutive term s.
I)
REGULAR ADMISSION: Applicants must dem onstrate proficiency on one of the
following tests: a) Test of~ English as Foreign Language (TOEFL) (Educational Testing
Service, Box 899, Princeton, New Jersey 08549, U.S.A.); an average of 550 or above with
no subscore below 52 is needed. The official report must come directly from the
Educational Testing Service to the English Language C enter, b) Michigan Test of English
Language Proficiency (Testing and C ertification Division, the English Language Institute,
the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, U.S.A.); an average score of 83
or higher with no subscore below 80 is needed. The official report must come directly
from the University of Michigan, c) English Language C enter (English Language Center,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, U.S.A.); an average score of
80-85 with no subscore below 78 is needed.
INTERVIEW: Students adm itted to the University on a regular basis will be interviewed
by the ELC upon arrival.

n)

PROVISIONAL ADMISSION: Students with acceptable academ ic credentials may
be adm itted on a provisional basis if TOEFL scores are between 450 and 550 or between
60 and 80 and 83 on the Michigan or MSU tests.
Provisional statu s will continue until minimum competency (see I above) is attained.
Provisionally adm itted students must take classes a t the English Language C enter, with
restrictions placed on the number of academ ic courses.
Any communication regarding the English Language Proficiency requirem ent should be
directed to the English Language C enter, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan
48824.
Sincerely yours,

Ellis Hammoni
Associate D irector

M SU it « • Affirm ative Action/Equal O pportunity I it it u ti o n

REFERENCES

2 A9

REFERENCES

A in s w o r t h , L. L. ( 1 9 5 7 ) . An ex p l o r a t o r y study n f ± h e academic .ach.i_e-v.ement o f Arab s t u d e n t s . U npu bli sh ed d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U niv er­
s i t y o f Texa s.
A l l e n , M. J . , & Yen, W. M. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . I n jJS du C- tlo n ±Q measurement t h e o r y .
Monterey, CA: B r o o k s / C o l e P u b l i s h i n g Co.
A l l e n , W. P. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . I n t e r n a t i o n a l s t u d e n t s ' a c h i e v e m e n t : E n g l i s h t e s t
s c o r e s r e l a t e d t o f i r s t s e m e s t e r g r a d e s . In Re s ea rc h I n
i n t e r n a t i o n a l e d u c a t i o n . New York: NAFSA and t h e I n s t i t u t e f o r
I n t e r n a t io n a l Education.
A n a s t a s i , A. ( 1 9 8 2 ) .
M acmillan.

Psychological t e s t i n g .

5 t h ed.

New York:

A s e e r i , A. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . I h e p.rek leins .eac.Q..untfiLsd .by Anai? students a i t h
o b j e c t i v e t e s t s a t Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . A p p r e n t i c e s h i p
paper.
Ayers, J . B . , & P e t e r s , R. M. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . P r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e T e s t
o f E n g l i s h a s a F o r e i g n Language f o r Aslan g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s in
e n g in e e rin g , c h e m istry , or mathematics.
E d u c a t i o n a l and
P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 3 2 , 46 1- 46 3.
B a r t l e t t , C. J . , & O 'L e a r y , B. S. ( 1 9 6 9 ) . A d i f f e r e n t i a l p r e d i c t i o n
model t o m o d e r a te t h e e f f e c t o f h e t e r o g e n e o u s gr o u p s in p e r s o n n e l
s e l e c t i o n and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .
P e r s o n n e l P s y c h o l o g y, 2 Z * 1 - 1 7 .
Bean, A. ( 1 9 7 5 ). The p r e d i c t i o n o f p er f o r m a n c e in an e d u c a t i o n a l p s y ­
ch ol o gy m a s t e r ' s d e g r e e program. E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l
Measurement, 3JL» 96 3- 967 .
Bloom, B. S . , & P e t u s , F. K. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . Jhfi u s e o f academic p r e d i c t i o n
s c a le s I q l counseling
s e l e c t i n g col l ege entrant s.
G lencoe,
IL: The F re e P r e s s .
Borg, W. R. ( 1 9 6 3 ) . GRE a p t i t u d e s c o r e s as p r e d i c t o r s o f GPA f o r
graduate s tu d e n ts in ed ucation.
E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l
Measurement, 1 2 1 > 3 7 9 - 3 8 2 .

250

251

Bowen, J . R. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . H i e AACRAO-AID p a r t i c i p a t i o n , .salfigfcl on And p l a c e ­
ment s t u d y . Wa shington, D.C .: American A s s o c i a t i o n o f C o l l e g i a t e
R e g i s t r a r s and Admission O f f i c e r s .
ED 095 929
B r oa d u s , R. N . , & Elmore, K. E. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . The c o m p a r a t i v e v a l i d i t i e s o f
u n d e r g r a d u a t e g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e and o f p a r t s c o r e on t h e
G r a d u a t e Record E xa m in at io n 1n t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f two c r i t e r i o n
m e a s u r e s 1n a g r a d u a t e l i b r a r y sch oo l program. E d u c a t i o n a l and
P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 42., 54 3 -5 4 7.
Brogden, H. E. ( 1 9 4 6 ) . On t h e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i ­
c i e n t a s a mea sur e o f p r e d i c t i v e e f f i c i e n c y .
J o u r n a l o f Educa­
t i o n a l Psychology, 2 2 , 65-76.
Brogden, H. E. ( 1 9 4 9 a ) . A new c o e f f i c i e n t : A p p l i c a t i o n t o b i s e r i a l c o r ­
r e l a t i o n and t o e s t i m a t i o n o f s e l e c t i v e e f f i c i e n c y .
PsychometXlCfl, 1 4 , 169-182.
Brogden, H. E. ( 1 9 4 9 b ) . When t e s t i n g pays o f f .
2 , 171-185.
Bross, I.

( 1 9 5 3 ) . Design f o r d e c i s i o n .

Personnel Psychology,

New York:

Macmillan.

Camp, J . , & Clawson, T. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The r e l a t i o n s h i p , between t h e G r a d u a te
Record E xa m in at io n a p t i t u d e t e s t and g r a d u a t e g ra de p o i n t a v e r a g e
i n a M a s te r o f A r t s 1n C o u n s e l i n g program.
E d u c a t i o n a l and
P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 25., 4 2 9 - 4 31 .
C a r l s o n , A. B. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . F u r t h e r r e s u l t s m Hue v a l i d i t y o f prufiba jfe
a p t i t u d e aca demica In United State? col l eges -and .universi t i e s .
SR-67-67. P r i n c e t o n , N . J . :
Educational T estin g S erv ice .
C h e e r n o f f , H . , & Mosea, L. ( 1 9 5 9 ) . El em en ta ry d e c i s i o n t h e o r y .
York: Wiley.

New

C l e b o t e r , F. J . ( 1 9 6 9 ) . F a c t o r s r e l a t e d t o t h e pe r fo r m a n c e o f f o r e i g n
graduate stu d en ts.
J o u r n a l M E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , £ 2 , 36 0 -3 6 5.
C o v e r t , R. W., & Chansky, N. M. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . The m o d e r a t o r e f f e c t o f un d er ­
g r a d u a t e g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e on t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f s u c c e s s 1n
graduate education.
E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement,
2 2 , 9 4 7 - 95 0 .
Cronbach, L. J . ( 1 9 7 1 ) . T e s t v a l i d a t i o n .
In R. L. Th or n di k e ( E d . ) ,
E d u c a t i o n a l measurement (2nd e d . ) .
Wa shington, D.C.: American
Council on E d u c a t i o n .
Cr onbach, L. J . , & G l a s e r , G. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . P s y c h o l o g i c a l t e s t s and p e r s o n n e l
d e c i s i o n s . Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s P r e s s .

252

D l n k e l , J . , K o ch en be rg er, G . , & P l a n e , D.. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . Management s c i e n c e
t e x t and a p p l i c a t i o n s . Homewood, 1 1 1 . : R ic h a r d D. I r w i n .
Dole, A. A., & Bagg ale y, A. R. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . P r e d i c t i o n o f p e r f o r m a n c e 1n a
d o c t o r a l e d u c a t i o n program by t h e G r a d u a t e Record Ex am ina ti on and
o th e r measures.
E d u c a t i o n a l .and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement,
2 2 , 4 2 1 - 42 7.
D r a p e r , N . , & Sm it h, H. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . App lied r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s .
York: Wiley.

New

E l k i n s , R. A. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . J h e p r e d i c t i o n c f freshman y e a r academic p e r f o r m ­
an ce o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s from p r e - a d m i s s i o n d a t a . U npu bli sh ed
d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , New York U n i v e r s i t y .
El t i n g , R. A. (1970). H i e p r e d i c t i o n c f f r e s h m a n y e a r a c a d e m i c pe r f orm­
an ce o f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s from p r e - a d m i s s i o n d a t a . Unp ublis hed
d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , New York U n i v e r s i t y .
Eysenck, S. H. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . F a c t and f i c t i o n in p s y c h o l o g y .
Penguin Books.
F e d e ric i, L ., & Schuerger, J.
M.A. psych olo gy program.
me nt, 2 1 , 9 45 -9 5 2.

Baltimore:

( 1 9 7 4 ) . P r e d i c t i o n o f s u c c e s s 1n a p p l i e d
E d u c a t i o n a l end P sy c h o l o g i c a l Measure­

Fishman, J. A., & P a s a n e l l a , A. K. (1960). C o l l e g e a d m i s s i o n s e l e c t i o n
s t u d i e s . Review e f E d u c a t i o n a l Rese.ar.ch> 2 2 (4 ), 29 8 -3 1 0.
F u r s t , E. J . , & R o e l f s , P. J . ( 1 9 7 9 ) . V a l i d a t i o n o f t h e G r a d u a te Record
Exa m in at io n and t h e M i l l e r A n a l o g i e s T e s t 1n a d o c t o r a l program 1n
education.
E d u c a t i o n a l e n d P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 2 2 , 147151.
G a r r e t t , L. N. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Itue f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s I d Am.erj.cen .higher ..edu.cet l o n : A s t u d y ef the p o l i c i e s end pract ic es ef .selected iiest
i n s t i t u t i o n s es t h e y r e l a t e te .English lan.gueae proficiency end
academic a d v i s e m e n t . Un p ub lis he d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The
U n iv e rsity of Georgia.
Gh 1 s e l 11, E. E., Campbel 1, J. P . , & Z e d e c k , S. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . M e a s u r e m e n t
t h e o r y f e e t h e b e h a v i o r a l s c i e n c e s . San F r a n c i s c o : W. H. Freeman
& Co.
Green, T. E . , & C a r r o l l , G. D. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . An al yz in g m u l t i v a r i a t e d a t a .
H i n s d a l e , IL: The Dryden P r e s s .
Gue, L. R . , & Holdaway, E. A. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y t e s t s a s p r e ­
d i c t o r s o f s u c c e s s 1n g r a d u a t e s t u d i e s 1n e d u c a t i o n .
Language
L e a r n i n g , 22., 8 9 - 1 0 3 .

253

Hackman, J . R . , Wiggins, N., & B as s , A. R. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . P r e d i c t i o n o f l o n g ­
te rm s u c c e s s 1n d o c t o r a l work 1n p s y c h o l o g y .
E d u c a t i o n a l and Psy­
c ho lo g ica l Measurement, 2d> 36 5 -3 7 4.
Hamburg, M. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . S t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s f o r d e c i s i o n .
H a r c o u r t , Brace & World, I n c .

New York:

Hamlin, E. C. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . An a n a l y s i s o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e
£nglis.h lan.gu.aao p.r.of.l.c.1oncy .scanas c f e n t e r i n g f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e
.students and .their academic achle v einent In an advanced d e g r e e
p r o gram. Un pu bl is he d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f Oregon.
H e b e r t , D. S . , & Holms, A. F. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . G r a d u a t e Record Exa m ina ti on a p t i ­
t u d e t e s t s c o r e s as a p r e d i c t o r o f g r a d u a t e g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e .
Educ a t i o n a l a n d P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 1 9 , 4 15 - 4 2 0 .
He nd el, D. D . , & Doyel, K. 0. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . P r e d i c t i n g s u c c e s s f o r g r a d u a t e
s t u d y in b u s i n e s s f o r E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g and n o n - E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g
s t u d e n t s . Educational and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, Ifi, 411-414.
H ill,

J. R. (1971). Use o f measurement in s e l e c t i o n and p l a c e m e n t .
R. L. T h or n di k e ( E d . ) , Educa t 1ona 1 jnsasarameAt (2nd e d . ) .
W ashington, D . C . :

In

American Council on E d u c a t i o n .

H o r s t , P. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . P s y c h o l o g i c a l measurement and p r e d i c t i o n .
CA: Wadsworth.

Belmont,

H o u n t r a s , P. T. ( 1 9 5 5 ) . F a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d w it h t h e academic a c h i e v e ­
ment M .foreign students a t ±h£ U n i v e r s i t y a f M ich ig an from 194719 49. U np ubl ish ed d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan.
H o u n t r a s , P. T. ( 1 9 5 7 ) . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between p r e - a d m i s s i o n d a t a and
achievement of fo re ig n g rad u ate s tu d e n t s .
Journal of Educational
P s y c h o l o g y , 18., 157-163.
Ho we ll, J. J. (1968). On t h e meaning o f SAT s c o r e s o b t a i n e d by f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s o f n o n - E n g l 1s h - l a n g u a g e bac k gr o un d. C o l l e g e and U n iv e r -

a ity * 225-232.
Hwang, K . , & D iz n ey , H. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . P r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of t h e T e s t o f
E n g l i s h a s a F o r e i g n Language f o r C h in e s e g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s a t an
American u n i v e r s i t y . Id uca.tloniLl a n d Psychological Measurement,
2 d , 4 75- 47 7.
J o n e s , R. A ., Kaplan, R . , & M i c h a e l , W. P. ( 1 9 6 4 ) . The p r e d i c t i v e
v a l i d i t y o f a m o d i f i e d b a t t e r y o f t e s t s 1n la n g u a g e s k i l l s f o r
f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a t an American u n i v e r s i t y .
E d u c a t i o n a l and Psy­
chological Meaurement. 21» 961-965.

25**

J o n e s , R. A., & M ic h a e l, W. D. ( 1 9 6 1 ) . The v a l i d i t y o f a b a t t e r y o f
t e s t s 1n communication s k i l l s f o r f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s a t t e n d i n g an
American u n i v e r s i t y .
E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement,
2 1 , 4 9 3 - 4 96 .
J o r d a n , A. (1922, F e b r u a r y ) . C o r r e l a t i o n o f f o u r i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s
w it h g r a d e s of s t u d e n t s and w ith each o t h e r .
Psychological B ullet i n , 93-94.
K a i s e r , J . ( 1 9 8 2 ) . The p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f GRE a p t i t u d e J t e s t .
Pap er p r e s e n t e d a t t h e Annual Meeting o f t h e Rocky Mountain
Resear ch A s s o c i a t i o n .
ED 226 021
K e n d a l l , M. G., & Buc k la n d, W. R. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . A d i c t i o n a r y o f s t a t i s t i c a l
' t e r m s . New York: H a f n e r P u b l i s h i n g Co.
K e r l i n g e r , F. N ., & P e d h a z u r , E. J . ( 1 9 7 3 ) . M u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n in
b e h a v i o r a l r e s e a r c h . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t , & Winston.
Krug, R. E. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . Some s u g g e s t e d a p p r o a c h e s f o r t e s t develo pme nt and
measurement. P e r s o n n e l P s y c h o lo g y.
Lannholm, G. V. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . Review u f s t u d i e s employing QBE s c a r e s I n J2XS=
d i e t i n g s u c c e s s in g r a d u a t e s t u d y , 1 9 5 2 - 1 9 6 7 . S p e c i a l r e p o r t .
P rin ceto n , N .J .: Educational T estin g S e rv ic e .
Lannholm, G. V. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . Summaries o f GRE v a l i d i t y st ud -te s^ 1966-._19_7.fl.
(GRE Rep. 7 2 - 1 ) P r i n c e t o n , N . J . : E d u c a t i o n a l T e s t i n g S e r v i c e .
Lav in, D. E. (1965). Itie .pxe.dic.ti.p.n .of .academia pe r fo rmance.
York: R u s s e l l Sage F o u n d a t i o n .
Le vi n, R. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . S t a t i s t i c s f o r management.
P re n tic e -H a ll, Inc.

New

Englewood C U f f s , N . J . :

L i n c o l n , E. ( 1 9 1 7 ) . The r e l a t i v e s t a n d i n g o f p u p i l s 1n high s c h o o l , in
e a r l y c o l l e g e and c o l l e g e e n t r a n c e e x a m i n a t i o n .
School and
S o c i e t y , S., 4 17 - 4 2 0 .
L i n d q u i s t , E. F. ( 1 9 6 3 ) . An e v a l u a t i o n o f t e c h n i q u e s f o r s c a l i n g high
sc ho ol g r a d e s t o improve p r e d i c t i o n o f c o l l e g e s u c c e s s .
Educa­
t i o n a l a n d P s y c h o l o g i c a l Meas urement* 2 1 , 6 2 3 - 6 4 6 .
Li nn, R. L. ( 1 9 66 ) . Grade a d j u s t m e n t s f o r p r e d i c t i o n o f aca demic p e r ­
formance: A re v ie w .
J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l Measurement, 2 L , 3 1 3 329.
Lord,

F. M., & Novlck, M. R. (1968). S t a t i s t i c a l t h e o r i e s S if
t e s t s c o r e s . Menlo P a r k , C a l i f . :
A dd iso n- We sle y.

mental

255

Maberly, N. C. ( 1 96 3) . The v a l i d i t y of t h e G r a d u a t e Record Ex am ina ti on
as used w i t h E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s .
E d u c a t i o n a l and
P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement* 2£» 785-7 88 .
Madaus, G. F . , & Walsh* J . J . ( 1 9 6 5 ) . De p ar tm en ta l d i f f e r e n t i a l s in t h e
p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e G r a d u a te Record Ex am in at io n a p t i t u d e
tests.
E d u c a t i o n a l .and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Me asurement* 4.,
1105-1110.
M a r a s c u l l o , L. A . , & Levin* J . R. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . M u l t i v a r i a t e s t a t i s t i c s in
t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s . Mo nterey, CA: B r o o k s / C o l e P u b l i s h i n g Co.
Mayhew, D. C. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . The l i t e r a t u r e o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n .
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

San

Mehrens, W. A . * & Lehmann, I . J . ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Measurement and e v a l u a t i o n in
e d u c a t i o n and p s y c h o l o g y . New York: Holt* R i n e h a r t & W in st on.
Moghrabi, K. M. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . An a n a l y s i s o f f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e t h e
d e g r e e s i s u c c e s s s r fa ilu r e s i fo.rjsd.aj) students n t Texas A A M
U n i v e r s i t y . Un pu bl ish ed d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Texas A & M Uni­
versity.
Moore, F. G. (1953). F a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g Ike academic success M ..foreign
s t u d e n t s in an American u n i v e r s i t y . Un p ub lis he d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r ­
t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M in n e s o ta .
Newman, R. L. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . GRE s c o r e s as p r e d i c t o r s o f GPA f o r p s y ch ol og y
graduate stu den ts.
E d u c a t i o n a l .and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 2fi*

433 -436.
N u n n a ll y , J .

(1978). Psychometric t h e o r y .

New York:

McGraw-Hill

Omizo, M. M., & M ic h a e l, W. R. (1979). The p r e d i c t i o n o f p e r f o r m a n c e in
c o u n s e l o r e d u c a t i o n m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e program.
E d u c a t i o n a l and .Psy■Clioleglcal Measurement, 22, 433-437.
P a o l i l o , J . P. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . The p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of s e l e c t e d a d m i s s i o n s
v a r i a b l e s r e l a t i v e t o g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e e a r n e d in a M a s te r o f
B u s i n e s s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n program. E d u c a t i o n a l and P s y c h o l o g i c a l

Measurement , 4., 1163-1167.
P a r a s k e v o p o u l o s , J . , & Dremuk, R. ( 1 9 6 9 ) . Gr ading p a t t e r n s f o r f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s : A f a c u l t y s u r v e y . Col 1ege S t u d e n t s P e r s o n n e l A b s t r a c t ,

4., 450.
P a r a s k e v o p o u l o s , J . , & K 1 r s t e i n , L. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . The p r e d i c t i o n o f academic
.performance £ f f o r e i g n students. Re s ea rc h Memorandum 68.3.
Champaign: O f f i c e o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y Dean o f Admission and
R e c o rd s , U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s .

256

P e d h a z u r , E. J . ( 1 9 8 3 ) . M u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n In b e h a v i o r a l r e s e a r c h #
e x p l a n a t i o n and p r e d i c t i o n . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t * & Winston.
P e r r e n , G. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . T e s t i n g a b i l i t y 1n E n g l i s h a s a s eco nd l a n g u a g e : 2.
Techniques.
E n g l i s h Language T e a c h i n g * 21* 2 2 - 2 9 .
Putman* I . J . ( 1 9 5 3 ) . Admission d a t a and ± h a aca demic p e r f o r m a n c e a f
f o r e i g n g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s a t Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . U npu bli sh ed
d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y .
Putman, I . J . ( 1 9 6 1 ) . The academic p e r f o r m a n c e o f f o r e i g o . s t u d e n t s .
Annals a f jtba Me.rJ.caji Academy a f Pol i t i c a l and Soc.ial S c ie n c e*
42-53.
Quann* G. J . & A s s o c i a t e s . ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Admission* aca demic r e c o r d and
r e g i s t r a r .sen d ees.; A handbook a f p o li c ie s and pxocejinres. San
Francisco* C a l i f . : Jo ssey -B a ss.
Ri g g s , J . M. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . C lo z e t e s t i n g p r o c e d u r e s i n fS.L; A pred.lc.tion a f
aca demic ,s..ucaass a f f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s and compa ris e n nd±h IQF£L
s c o r e s . Unp ub lishe d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y .
Roscoe, J . T. * & Houston, S. R. ( 1 9 6 9 ) . The p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f GRE
s c o r e s f o r a d o c t o r a l program 1n e d u c a t i o n .
E d u c a t i o n a l and Psy Psy c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, 2 2 , 5 0 7 - 5 0 9 .
Rose, C . , & T r e n t , J . W. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . Te a ch in g e n v i r o n m e n t .
In
R. M. W. T r a v e r s ( E d . ) , Second handbook an r e s e a r c h an .teaching .
C hi c ag o : Rand McNally.
S a u n d e r s , D. R. ( 1 9 5 6 ) . M o d er at o r v a r i a b l e s i n p r e d i c t i o n .
and P s v c h o l o g i c a l Measurement, I t , 2 0 9 -2 2 2 .

Educational

Schmidt,. F. L . , & H u n t e r , J . E. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . The f u t u r e o f c r i t e r i o n - r e l a t e d
v alid ity .
P e r s o n n e l P s y c h o l o gy, 3 3 , 4 1 - 6 0 .
S chm id t, F . , H u n te r , J . E . , McKenzie- R- C . , & Maldrow, T. W. ( 1 9 7 9 ) .
Impact o f v a l i d s e l e c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s on work f o r c e p r o d u c t i v i t y .
J o u r n a l a f A pp lie d P s y c h o l o g y , M » 2 6 2 - 2 7 4 .
S e g e l , D. ( 1 9 3 4 ) . P r e d i c t i o n o f s u c c e s s in c o l l e g e . B u l l e t i n No. 15.
U.S. O f f i c e of E d u c a t i o n .
Washington, D . C . : U.S. Government
P rin tin g Office.
S har on, A. T. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y , v e r b a l a p t i t u d e , and f o r e i g n
s t u d e n t s ' s u c c e s s i n American s c h o o l s .
E d u c a t i o n a l and P s ycho­
lo g i c al Meas urement* 22, 42 5 -4 3 1.

257

S l e e p e r , M. L. ( 1 9 6 1 ) . R e l a t i o n s h i p o f s c o r e s on t h e G r a d u a t e Record
Ex am in at io n t o g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e o f g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s 1n oc cu p a­
t i o n a l t h e r a p y . .Educational -and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Meas.ureme.nt, 21*
1039-1040.
Smith, Conrad L. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . S e l e c t e d p r e d i c t o r s o f a cademic a c h i e v e m e n t a f
c o l l e g e freshmen .with .lower range admission .test scores. Unpub­
l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y o f Alabama.
S o k a r l , H. (1966). P r e d i c t o r s a f c o l l e g e s u c c e s s among f or e ign s tu d e n ts
from v a r i o u s e t h n o c u l t u r a l b a c k g r o u n d s . Un pu bl is he d d o c t o r a l
d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f San F r a n c i s c o .
S t 1 1 son , D. W. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . P r o b a b i l i t y and s t a t i s t i c s i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l
r e s e a r c h and t h e o r y . San F r a n c i s c o : Holden-Day.
S t o r d a h l , K. E. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . P r e d i c t i n g g r a d e s In a m a s t e r ' s d e g r e e program.
J o u r n a l a f E d u c a t i o n a l Measurement, 4 , 119-122.
S t r i k e r , G«, 4 Huber, J . T. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . The G r a d u a t e Record Ex am in at io n and
u n d e r g r a d u a t e g r a d e s a s p r e d i c t o r s o f s u c c e s s 1n g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .
J o u r n a l a f E d u c a t i o n a l Research, ££>* 466-468.
S t u i t , D. D., & P e t e r s o n , S. C. ( 1 9 5 1 ) . The p r e d i c t i o n o f s c h o l a s t i c
success
college
i n

t h

e

. g

r a

d

u

a

t e

a

f

t h

e

. S

t a

t e

a

f

I

o w

a

c o l . L

e . g e

a

n

d

uni.vexs lty.
T a y l o r , C. W. ( 1 9 5 0 ) . Maximizing p r e d i c t i v e e f f i c i e n c y f o r a f i x e d
t o t a l t e s t i n g tim e.
P s v c h o m e t r l k a , J E , 3 9 1 - 40 6.
T a y l o r , H. C . , & R u s s e l , J . T. ( 1 9 3 9 ) . The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f v a l i d i t y
c o e f f i c i e n t t o t h e p r a c t i c a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t e s t s 1n s e l e c t i o n .
J o u r n a l o f A ppl le d P s y c h o l o g y , 2 3 , 5 6 5 - 5 7 8 .
T e l l e e n , J . G. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . 1 p r e d i c t i v e model a f t h e academic ac h i e v e m e n t
o f g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s from I n d i a . Unp ub lishe d d o c t o r a l d l s s e r t a r a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y o f M ich ig an .
T ha c ke r , A. J . , & W i l l i a m s , R. E. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e
G r a d u a t e Record E x a m in a t io n t o g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e .
Educational
a n d P s y c h o l o g i c a l M easurem ent, 21, 9 3 9 -9 44 .
Thomas, B. C.» & M a r g u e r i t e , M. M. (1968). E n g l i s h a u r a l c o m p re h e n s io n
t e s t s c o r e s a s a p r e d i c t o r o f academic s u c c e s s among f o r e i g n
students.
Educa t i onal and P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement* 2fi* 12291231.
Tucker, L. R. (1963). Formal m o d e ls l a c c e n tr a l pr e d ic t i on system .
P s y c h o m e t r i c Monograph No. 10. Richmond, V a . : Wm. Byrd P r e s s ,

258

Upshr, J . A. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e t e s t s and p r e d i c t i o n o f academic
s u c c e s s . ' In D. C. Wlgglesworth ( E d . ) , S e l e c t e d c o n f e r e n c e p a p e r s
o f ATESL (NAFSA). Loss A l t o s , C a l i f . : Language Re s ea rc h Asso­
c ia tio n Press.
Wilcox, L. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . A p l a n f o r i n s t i t u t i o n a l / n a t i o n a l f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s '
admission re s e a rc h .
C o l l e g e and U n i v e r s i t y , 4&» 6 2 3 -6 3 0 .
Wilcox, L. 0. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The p r e d i c t i o n o f academic s u c c e s s o f u n d e r g r a d ­
u a t e f o r e i g n s t u d e n t s . U npu bli sh ed d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r ­
s i t y o f M in n es o ta .
W i ll i a m s , J . D . , Harlow, S. D . , & Gab, D. (1970). A l o n g i t u d i n a l s tu d y
ex am in in g p r e d i c t i o n o f d o c t o r a l s u c c e s s , g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e a s
c r i t e r i o n or graduation vs. non-graduation as c r i t e r i o n .
Journal
M E d u c a t i o n a l Research, M* 161-164.