1963
DOI: 10.1177/001316446302300401
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Evaluation of a Technique for Scaling High School Grades To Improve Prediction of College Success

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

1964
1964
2003
2003

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In an effort to improve the prediction of college GPA (CGPA) by HSGPA, a number of earlier studies attempted to adjust both the predictor and criterion grades (Bashaw, 1965;Bloom and Peters, 1961;Lindquist, 1963;Potthoff, 1964;Tucker, 1963). This approach, called "central prediction systems," was an attempt to control for school effects.…”
Section: Constructing a Universal Scale Of High School Course Difficultymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an effort to improve the prediction of college GPA (CGPA) by HSGPA, a number of earlier studies attempted to adjust both the predictor and criterion grades (Bashaw, 1965;Bloom and Peters, 1961;Lindquist, 1963;Potthoff, 1964;Tucker, 1963). This approach, called "central prediction systems," was an attempt to control for school effects.…”
Section: Constructing a Universal Scale Of High School Course Difficultymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One possible outcome is greater predictability of freshman grades, sought in the past by such procedures as central prediction (Tucker, 1960), or adjustment of high-school grades (Lindquist, 1963).…”
Section: Other Possibilitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This work has led to the belief that substantial increases in correlation can be effected by adjusting high school and college grades. Some later studies conducted by testing organizations (e.g., Lindquist, 1963;Watkins & Levine, 1969) (1963) and of Lunnebor-g and Lunneborg (1966,1967) with the more obvious differences in the overall difficulty levels at the various universities. Differences in le!1gths of prediction intervals reflect largely the amount of prior information on each of these universities.…”
Section: An Overview Of New Developments In Testing Servicesmentioning
confidence: 99%