rch's matching perfectly i

ore profound sense of this word, tra

se of music is different. For however untranslatablemusic may be into words, music can be and o

itself and lets its pure visibility be sheltered fromthe intrusion of language. Disentitling is a way of saying theuntranslatability of the painting, of translating its untranslatability whileleaving the painting nonetheless untranslated, indeed untranslatable.One will want to ask: What is its untranslatability?—and yet, thequestion is possible only if, in asking about the what, the questionoutdistances itself and releases the painting from the hold of anythinglike a what. Only in this way, by turning language back to itself so asto free from it that of which one will have spoken, can one say whatthe untranslatability of painting is: that the visible

Even—perhaps most of all—in the case ofpoetry, translation is a matter of exchange; it operates within aneconomy geared to the difference between the two languages, aneconomy that is not fixed but is open to the initiatives of anadventurous translator, one willing to venture a certain expenditurewith confidence of what will be returned.

one is to persist in the deconstruction of the classical determinationwhile also redetermining translation as regulated transformation, asengaged by lawful play of imagination

Glaring inconsis-tencies are evident between and among provinces, with respect to thetypes of permitted interventions and details provided, such as the typeand amount of support provided by scribes, readers and/or interactivetechnology (see reference list for provincial and territorial Departmentof Education websites).

These include: (a) pro-viding alternate settings to minimize external environmental stimuli;(b) permitting time extensions and/or scheduling flexibility to allow forshort but frequent breaks in order to maintain on-task behaviors; (c)alternate presentation formats that acknowledge that some students mayhave difficulty with interpretation and/or retention of textual materialand directions; and (d) response modifications, as many students tendto have substantially stronger expressive verbal abilities than written alacrity.

Accommodations are definedas “supports and services that enable students with special needs todemonstrate their competencies in the skills being measured by thetest

that special provisions may be needed to support the vari-ous needs of individual students during the writing of standardized as-sessments.

However, the underlyingquestions remain: how do you judge the standard of the work producedby students with such diverse interests, needs and abilities with a tra-ditional “paper and pencil” test? What is a fair assessment?

purpose, supporting details,organization and matters of correctness. Previously, student essays wereassessed on thought and detail, organization, matters of correctness andmatters of choice; the same four criteria by which English 12 students’literary prose essays were (and continue to be) assessed

Addition-ally, these students were required to complete a skeleton outline of theirideas

The variety of test-takers in a particular group gener-ates data that is used to establish normative classification for a group.That data can serve as a guide for what that test finds as a normativeresponse for a test item

As well, texts were strategically selected so as to maxi-mize student engagement with the readings; that is to say, particularattention was given to choosing texts that reflected the interests andlife experiences of typical grade 12 students.

Itshould be noted here that while students were required to read morepieces of written text on this exam, the text length was significantlyshorter than in previous years.

“non-academic” exam

the ‘core’ values almost always come out ‘right’ and mar-ginal children almost always come out ‘wrong’” (

Thesestrengths are not going to be valued in large scale standardized tests, yet the results of test scores can play an important role in the selection processfor post-secondary education and employment in the workplace

Christensen (2000) wrote of how her students blamed themselves fortheir low test scores on standardized tests: “As far as they [her students]were concerned, there was no need to go to college because this test confirmed their stupidity

“I was tired; I was frustrated ... this exam justproved to me how stupid I really am. Maybe that was their point, Miss,to show ECM kids that they don’t really belong in a grade 12 classroom;that they don’t deserve to graduate like the smart kids.”

By doing so, they had forfeited50% of their final examination mark in English Communications 12.

We agree that the reliance on this type of student assessment hasthe potential to perpetuate social inequities in schools.

reducing the individual to the status of mere objects andmeans, rather than confirming and exalting them as ends in themselves”

skills believed to be of value in society

worse than children from rich and middle-class families on tests andexaminations, were more likely to be held back in grade, to drop out ofschool earlier, and were much less likely to enter college or university

Assessments are no longer valuing the uniqueness and individualstrengths of all students

there was a general sense of stunned disbelief atthe length and complexity of these new external assessments. A threeand a half hour time frame; three examination booklets per student;fifty-six selected and constructed-response questions; a literary proseessay and a piece of transactional writing; and a value of thirty percentof the year’s final mark in grade 12 English

would probably experience enormous anxiety whenconfronted by these two demand-writing components

These students found the vocabulary difficultto understand and the length of these pieces of text to be prohibitive

people are doing the best they can, but they simply do not understand themechanisms that stack the cards against so many children

Whoare the test writers and what cultures do they represent?’ as these tests typically measure middle or upper class experiences (Christensen, 2000).Connell (1999/1994) has written about this “informal segregation withinformally unsegregated institutions”

test constructors write from their ownculture

A second concern is that the learning outcomes for English 12 andEnglish Communications 12 are practically identical, but the scope,emphases, levels of complexity, required degrees of support and in-structional adaptations, as well as learning resources for each streamare significantly different

benchmark

norm referenced assessments

Thirteen learning outcome statements, culled from two strands ofthe English 10-12 curriculum document (i.e., Reading and Viewing, andWriting and Other Ways of Representing), were used as the foundationfor the development of the English 12 and English Communications12 examinations

ent. We view this as problematic be-cause it does not acknowledge other ways of knowing, apart from theuse of traditional “paper and pencil” assessments.

outcomesthat cannot be readily assessed in a structured group forum, such asthose contained within the Speaking and Listening strand, were notincluded in this external assessment

intended to reflect specific curriculum outcomes prescribed in the AtlanticCanada curriculum documents for senior high English Language Arts(Nova Scotia Department of Education, 1997), and were to account for30% of the students’ overall grade for the course.

was mandatory for alleligible grade 12 English Language Arts students, including schools whereexemptions had formerly been made available to students as rewardsfor exceptional scholastic achievement and/or excellent attendance

students’ scores arecompared to a standard criteria or expected outcome

student readinessto move on to a different level of instruction

student mastery of instructional objectives or curriculumoutcomes, rather than to compare one student with another or to rankstudents.

Criterion-referenced tests (CRTs

These can be gradedby computer, or by individuals who do not need to understand the materialin depth, as long as they have a list of the correct answers

Standardization of testing refers to the “structuring [of] test materials,administration procedures, scoring methods, and procedures for interpret-ing results

how educational systems can support, assess,and respond to the learning needs of all students in meaningful ways.

contribute to the awareness thatevery student counts

This article examinessome of the current thinking surrounding the use and implications ofstandardized assessments, particularly as they pertain to students with

homogeneoustests were developed in Europe in the late 1800s

provide a reasonable proposalfor more viable alternatives tothe view that standardized teststhe are the best way to evaluatestudent knowledge and schoolsuccess and to provide account-ability between schools and theirvarious stakeholders.”

it’snot what you know that mattersany longer, b;ut rather what youcan do with what you know. n

Change isn’t coming—it’shere. We are seeing an increas-ing number of a new breed ofmodern educational leaderswho have stopped the tail wag-ging the dog, and are rejectingthe tyranny of testing

Mastery Consortium

morbidly obese

I think itcomes down to three simplepropositions: a lack of trust,a communications vacuum,and the battle of lobbyists vs.learners.

how about a completerethink of the education needsof our students for the modernworld?

that the real value of high-stakestesting relates to their child’sability to get into a college oruniversity? Won’t we be un-dermining that opportunity forstudents if we take away stan-dardized tests?

Not onlyis there little or no evidence thatstandardized testing “works,”but there is considerable evi-dence to show it not only failsto meet its goals but in doing sodoes harm to students, teach-ers, and education systems.

When the highly ref-erenced work of Hattie is calledinto question, it shows how eas-ily we can be blinded by dataand statistics.

it’s all part ofa battle to use these tests toprivatize public schools, in theU.S. in particular.

very little of whichhas any real relationship tostudent learning, while teachingto the test is so common it’s acliché.

most damagingfor low-income and minoritystudents.

By statistical definition,it ignores the “edges,” whichinclude all of those studentswho have cultural, geographic,physical, or intellectual dis-advantage.

the leading tests were neverintended to measure teachingor learning, and as Alfie Kohnhas noted, as much as 90% ofthe variations in test scoresamong schools or states havenothing to do with the qualityof instruction.

We can start with the wealthof evidence to show that testingkills curiosity and motivation,and limits imagination and cre-ativity

Contrary to the core statisticalassumption that standardizedtests are built on, we can bothlearn, and both benefit

Why do we persist withranking everything, naming andshaming schools by publishingtest results like they’re sportingscores in league tables?

we have the most intru-sive, divisive, deceitful policyinitiative imaginable—whichhas little if any research to sup-port its use.

he lack of reasonable evi-dence of any significant long-term benefit, or to support theintroduction of the standard-ized testing we have today.

I think it doesthe term justice.

it’s thetyranny of testing.

Policymakers are quite aware of these testbiases and yet schools still use scores todetermine a child’s intellect, the classesthey are allowed to take, and now in moreand more schools, whether a child will bepromoted to the next grade or not. If wekeep using test scores as the sole deter-miner for student’s success we will haveno children left to graduate, they wouldall have been kept behind.

The reasonthese student’s didn’t pass the TAKS testhad little or nothing to do with intelligence.Their test scores gave us information abouttheir culture and background and not nec-essarily their intellect.

Until reforms are made in standard-ized testing there will always be a gap instudent test scores and bias will be present.Policymakers are quite aware of these testbiases and yet schools still use scores todetermine a child’s intellect, the classesthey are allowed to take, and now in moreand more schools, whether a child will bepromoted to the next grade or not. If wekeep using test scores as the sole deter-miner for student’s success we will haveno children left to graduate, they wouldall have been kept behind.

Did theyhave teachers like Mrs. Racey? Where theytired when they took the test? Is doing wellin school something valued by their culture?Is the material not challenging for them?

here are bi-ases inherently built in, in so many aspectsof testing

We call these tests standardized, butaccording to whose standards are we judg-ing students?

This false cognate caused himto miss the question.

We areevaluating students based on scores re-ceived on a test that has very little to dowith intellect and everything to do withthe norms and cultures represented by thetest and policy makers.

Not only are tests biased but they canalso have negative consequences. Studentshave test anxiety and may avoid going toschool during test time. Students as youngas third grade are fearful of not passingthe standardized tests. Students in the 8thgrade drop out of school for fear that theywill soon be told by someone else that theirscores weren’t good enough to get into highschool. Kids are denied diplomas in highschool for failing the exit level test even ifthey have done well throughout the yearin their classes. Teachers are singled out totake the blame for students’ failure. Whenfamilies in the community fi nd out abouta school’s low performance on tests theychoose to have their child go to anotherschool. Schools can be restructured or shutdown due to students’ poor performance ontests. All of these consequences of studentshaving to take high stakes testing aresevere and damaging.

They aretracked and only allowed to take certainclasses, and these classes are typicallytaught at the lowest level. The studentsare not challenged, they are basically beingtaught how to pass the test and nothingmore. They have low expectations placedupon them and aren’t expected to achieve.They continue to fall behind and increasethe testing gap in student performance ofminority students.

If a child is raised in ahome where school is not important, thatchild’s views on testing and the desire orlack of desire to pass the test will effect theresulting scores.

In the United States attitudes to-ward schooling along with parent’s abilityand efforts to foster student progress seemto differ significantly across certain ethnicand socioeconomic groups. In high stakestesting, schools are being held responsiblefor raising the test scores of ethnic andsocioeconomic groups that appear to holddeep-seated attitudes towards academicperformance—attitudes that schools cando very little, perhaps nothing, to alter(Thomas, 2005).

Signifi cant differences in schoolexperiences, in prior test exposure andcoaching, in motivation, in previous racialdiscrimination and the family back ground,can affect test scores ( Gifford, 1989).

have less trouble measuring some forms ofability among those with similar upbring-ings than they do with rating people fromvery different upbringings.

Perhaps if the tests were written andadministered in the student’s native lan-guage a truer assessment would be made

As it stands now, many non-Englishspeakers are failing the tests and beingheld back a grade. This is not due to theirintellect or IQ. Many students are doingpoorly on our high stakes tests due to a lackof understanding of the complex Englishlanguage. It is often difficult for a non-na-tive speaker to translate the questions intotheir own language and be able to makemeaning of them.

lan-guage profi ciency is the most importantcontributor to performance

Language proficiency plays a largepart in student performance on standard-ized test.

Forthe most part, standardized multiplechoice tests are culturally biased in favorof the culture toward which the test isdirected—the mainstream White culture(Elford, 2002).

Standardized test are biased

they wouldprovide an accurate measure of a child’sknowledge. They don’t!

In some states theyare used to determine which students stayback a grade, which high school studentsget their diploma, and which teachers getbonuses (DiMarco, 2000).

The purpose of this study was to understand the opinions of teacher candidates todetermine whether there is a more effective alternative to standardized testing. Resultsindicated that teacher candidates generally think that standardized testing and standardsare both necessary to the system but need revision to accurately measure all students.Alternatives to standardized testing should be considered by educators, administrators,and policy makers. Student proficiency is only accurately measured when students’differences and learning styles are taken into consideration, and standardized testing failsto measure these variations

One limitation that remained throughout the study was that this study was limitedto a single geographic location at a single university, and it may not represent the opinionsof teacher candidates everywhere. The sample size was small, as only four candidates wereinterviewed in total, and all were females of similar ages.

tests ‘hold accountable’ those teachers who are‘just there to get summers off and an 8-3 job’

Some researchers suggest that teachers can measure their students’ proficiencybetter than tests can (Missall, Hosp, Hosp, & Meisinger, 2019). According to Missall et al.(2019), test scores should remain, but teacher input should be a deciding factor in scores.In the present study, participants generally agreed with this idea. Participants stated thatteachers could absolutely measure student ability better than tests, but there would stillneed to be a rubric or guidelines to do so. Missall et al. found that standardized tests arebetter at determining nonproficiency, but teachers are more successful at determiningproficiency (2019)

they also must teach test-taking strategies

rewritten to equally favor all students

Many test questions require a base level of backgroundknowledge, and these questions are often designed for students with a white, middle-classcontext (Neill & Medina, 1989). In the present study, all participants agreed that they donot believe standardized test questions are currently culturally or racially biased. Thoughthey believed there has been bias in previous years, they agreed that is not a problem in thecurrent system.

Many indicated that standardized test resultssimply show who is good at test-taking and who is not

but one suggestion is that there is bias inthe general population against minorities

We can be driven only by reliable data if we are truly going to help our students. Forcingour students to sit for six hours of exams over a two-week period does not result in gooddata” (p.191). Participants in the present study alluded to this exact idea, stating that datathat comes from this type of environment cannot be relied upon

Bower (2016) found that standardized testing does not support or address studentcreativity

While participants statedthat standardized testing should be altered or abolished, they agreed that it would benearly impossible to implement an alternative.

primarily, datacollection of a large group of people at once

Participants stated that standardizedtesting does not accurately measure all students and only measures students who knowhow to test well.

some believed that teachers may be ableto assess student proficiency better than standardized testing

Teacher candidates generally concluded that it would likely notbe possible to introduce a better alternative to standardized testing

Measurement of the group, however, was also cited as aprimary weakness. Many questioned whether the educational system even needs a way tomeasure a large group of students at once. All participants agreed that some students areaccurately assessed by standardized testing, but because of the differences in learningstyles and needs, the data is not accurate for all students

Participants indicated that, overall, standardizedtesting does not accurately assess students’ learning

This participant suggested that elementary students may notunderstand the importance of standardized testing and stated that younger students haveno “forward thinking.”

They agreed that there still needs to be apredetermined system for teachers to measure their students’ growth.

All participants stated that theybelieve teachers could accurately measure student performance, but they all discussed thepotential difficulties in doing so. Nearly all participants agreed that, for teachers to do thisaccurately, there would need to be a set criteria for teachers to follow. Common wordsinclude “uniform,” “rubric,” and “standards.

Participants agreed that, while standardized testquestions may have been biased in previous years, positive changes have been made.Words commonly associated with this issue were “improvement” and “change.” Someparticipants felt that test questions had never been biased and continue to remain that way.One participant stated that standardized tests are, “... set up to benefit an Americanstudent,” and may have negative implications for English Language Learners

spendsignificant time teaching students how to analyze questions to successfully takestandardized tests.

Many participantsagreed that too much time out of the schoolyear is dedicated to testing, often taking twoweeks or more to navigate standardized testing and review in upper elementary grades

I feel like it’s almost setting them up for failure.”

nd I don't feel like standardized testing really supports that.

One participant stated that standardized testing is, “one size fits all,” and asked thequestion, “Does every single student in the state need to be assessed in the same way?”Others mentioned that, because standardized testing measures so many students at once, itis not reliable for all learners

Several participants mentioned that standardizedtesting is beneficial solely because it is a method of measuring a large group of people atonce. While this was listed as a strength by participants, it was also cited as a weakness.

Many participants cited this asthe primary strength of standardized testing, commenting that data collection is morebeneficial for teachers than for students or the educational system as a whole.

This particular group of candidates is currently completing student teaching or internshipplacements at elementary schools in Northeast Tennessee and have varying degrees ofexperience.

The participants in this study, however, were all female.

Standardized testing is the primary method of assessing all students in theeducational system today. While it is principally used to collect student data, it is also usedto track teacher effectiveness. There has been extensive research on standardized testingand its contributions to the educational system, but there has been little attention towhether educators feel that the scores are useful or necessary.The purpose of this study was to determine the opinions of teacher candidates onthe effectiveness and reliability of standardized testing.

Appendix A and Appendix B.

participants whovoluntarily respond will be interviewed

For example,research shows that standardized tests are designed for white, middle-class students whoare strong academically. Results may not be as accurate for students who have alternativecultural backgrounds, students who are not strong test-takers, or students with differentlearning needs

Standardized testing simply does not assess all students, is often biased toward minoritypopulations, is highly political, and has the potential to abolish creativity in the classroom

it can be improved.

It helps educators and policy makers recognize the problemswith not only testing, but standards and education as a whole.

One teacher in favor ofCommon Core believes that, “...tests ‘hold accountable’ those teachers who are ‘just there toget summers off and an 8-3 job’”

Croft et al. argue that some students, despite their intelligence, are simply not goodtest-takers

arguing that education is much tooinfluenced by power and money

policies must be influenced by teachers rather than politics

researchers found that teachers more accurately assessstudent proficiency than standardized tests

Teachers listed many benefits, arguing that standards provide alesson plan roadmap for the schoolyear, and data collected from testing is useful for bothstudents and teachers (Buck et al., 2010). Perhaps most intriguing is that almost allteachers interviewed agreed that testing does not, in any way, limit creativity in theclassroom (Buck et al., 2010)

teaching to the test

but they also must dedicate time to teaching test-takingstrategies

relevant to them in theirindividual futures, they are now required to teach to the test

greatly limits teachers in what they are able to do in the classroom

Testing is necessary in the educational system as a tool to recognize thesebiases and work to correct them. Finding the balance between completely abolishingtesting and relying on it blindly may be the key to successfully transforming the system

Despite thelarge Hispanic population in Texas, the test fails to offer native language or bilingual testvariations

This inherently facilitatesdiscrimination toward any number of students in certain settings

the tests should be administeredthe same way they are now (2016). The tests and questions themselves, however, shouldbe rewritten (Albers et al., 2016). Neill and Medina, on the other hand, believe that theentire process should be altered (1989).

This issue is more prevalent than ever, partially becauseminority populations may soon not be minorities anymore. Adjustments must be made forstandardized testing to continue to measure all students from all backgrounds

culturally inappropriate test questions

This occurs for severalreasons, but primarily, there is a bias in the general population against minorities

Statistically, minority students perform more poorly on standardized tests thanwhite students (Ford & Helms, 2012). There has especially been a decline in scores sincethe implementation of Common Core State Standards

Despite this, it is believed by many that it is necessary to the educational system

In short, school should not only be a place of business.

Rather than school being aconglomeration of various different experiences, it became data-driven and single-faceted

Common Core State Standards

Ultimately, putting students into a single category blatantly ignores all other abilities theymay have (Bracey, 1990).

Theprimary concern with this type of testing is that although the test itself is standardized, thestudents, environments, and teachers are not (Neill & Medina, 1989).

sometimes fails, however, to test or foster student creativity

here is anoverarching question of whether or not it is an accurate tool of measuring students. Alsodiscussed are the ways minority students are affected by standardized testing, as well asthe influence politics have on the education system as a whole.

Many researchers agree that there are adjustmentsthat could be made to improve the accuracy of test data

a university student who is currently completing a studentteaching (undergraduate) or internship (graduate) placement

Limitations

hese scores are heavily relied upon by educators, administrations,and school systems in various parts of the country. There is, however, little research tosuggest that educators support the validity of these scores.

has not yet been explored is the opinions of educators.

The variation in learning styles may not lenditself to standardized testing. Other students have severe test anxiety that affects theiroverall educational experiences

Though the tests themselves are standardized,students, teachers, classrooms, and environments are not (

There hasbeen a particular decline in test scores of minority students (Ford & Helms, 2012).

Since Common Core began nationally

Keywords: standardized testing, standards, effectiveness, data, education, teachercandidates

Overall, the results of these studies support two major findings. First, the SAT is an adequate measure of general intelligence, and second, it is a useful tool in predicting cognitive functioning when other estimates of intelligence are unavailable, too time-consuming, or too costly. One implication of these results is that it might be more useful if the SAT were reported as a score on a general factor, plus separate math and verbal subscale scores. 1 Using the regression equations presented here, SAT scores can be converted to estimates of IQ. These estimates are especially useful in studies of college students when a rough measure of g is needed. Although it would be perfectly acceptable to use SAT scores without conversion, conversion to an IQ score provides a basis for comparing studies.Another application of the SAT-IQ conversion is as an estimate of premorbid intelligence, as often SAT scores are the only objective measure of premorbid intellectual functioning available, and the resulting estimate of IQ is much more accurate than standard estimates based on demographic variables. We have provided two equations that can be used to estimate IQ from SAT scores, depending on whether the scores are from before or after the 1994 recentering. The evidence presented here strongly suggests that estimates of general intellectual functioning obtained from SAT scores are accurate and acceptable, and that the SAT-IQ conversion is to be encouraged, whether for clinical application or in a research setting.

After this overhaul of the SAT is completed in 2005, another examination of the relationship between SAT scores and general cognitive ability will be required to determine if the SAT will still be an adequate measure of general intelligence. We expect that it will.

Further support for the Gf-SAT correlation is evident in an article by Raz, Willerman, Ingmundson, and Hanlon (1983), who reported a correlation of .81 between SAT total score and another nonverbal measure of Gf, the Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test; however, the extreme-groups design of the study may have resulted in an artificially high correlation.

he ASVAB first factor, although often used as a surrogate for g, can be thought of as primarily measuring what individuals have learned, or crystallized intelligence (Gc; Roberts et al., 2000). In contrast, the Raven's APM is typically characterized as a test of reasoning ability, or fluid intelligence (Gf).

Although Equation 2 is better suited than Equation 1 for predicting high-end IQ, it is still a valuable tool.

Ultimately, Equation 2 is more appropriate for use with recentered scores. However, Equation 2 is likely to be most useful in predicting IQ at the high end of the distribution, and therefore must be used with caution.

Can one assume that the revised, recentered SAT predicts g in the same manner that the previous version (used in the NLSY79 data set) did?

Not surprisingly, there was substantial shrinkage in the cross-validation. This shrinkage could indicate one of three things: First, the equation developed using the NLSY79 data set may not be valid, in any sample, for predicting IQ with the new recentered SAT scores. Second, the characteristics of the Study 2 sample (i.e., much higher mean and restricted range of the SAT scores compared with the Study 1 sample) may have resulted in decreased effectiveness of the Study 1 equation in predicting IQ, but the Study 1 equation might be applicable to other, less restricted samples. Third, the estimate of g used in Study 1 may be substantively different from the measure of g in Study 2.

f one equation can apply to both data sets, then there should be very little shrinkage in correlations when regression equations are applied across the studies.

These correlations indicate that results obtained using Equation 2 are stable.

We therefore corrected the Study 2 simple correlation between SAT and Raven's IQ (r=.483) for restriction of range, simply to obtain an estimate of the correlation in a less restricted sample of college students.

The mean SAT score of the sample in Study 1 was 854, whereas the mean SAT score of the sample in Study 2 was 1372.

The correlation between the remaining 103 SAT and APM scores, although significant, was lower than the correlation obtained in Study 1

Preliminary box plots revealed an outlier in the data set, which was excluded from further analysis.

Z scores were computed from the percentiles, then transformed to an IQ scale with the same equation used in Study 1.

1993 smoothed detailed U.S. norms

Of this total, 65 males and 39 females were included in the analysis; the remaining 12 students did not have valid SAT scores on record at the university.

the SAT is a better indicator of g, as defined by the first factor of the ASVAB, than are some of the more traditional intelligence tests

It is evident from these results that there is a striking relation between SAT scores and measures of general cognitive ability

The correlation between IQ predicted from the first-half regression equation and IQ extracted from the ASVAB in the second half of the data was .856 (p<.01). The correlation between IQ predicted from the regression equation developed on the second half of the sample and IQ extracted from the ASVAB in the first half of the data was .860 (p<.01).

a jackknife procedure

The standard error of prediction (SEp) was 5.94.

we developed the following equation to predict IQ from SAT scores:

SAT correlated significantly (p<.05) with all six of the traditional intelligence tests examined

but the added variance was so small that we decided to not include it in the regression equation

ASVAB first-factor scores were transformed to an IQ scale using the following equation: IQ=(z∗15)+100.

64% of the variance in the ASVAB was due to a general factor

A principal-axis factor analysis

with an overrepresentation of certain minority groups

National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 (NLSY79) data set

. Although there has been a recent push by the University of California system to discontinue using SAT scores as an admission criterion,