1969
DOI: 10.1002/j.2164-4918.1969.tb05174.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Disadvantaged and the Aptitude Barrier

Abstract: The theory and practice of aptitude testing are critically discussed within the context of current efforts to improve the status of the poor. Aptitude testing is contrasted with achievement testing with special attention directed toward underlying assumptions, validation procedures, and the interpretation of test scores. Aptitude tests are found to have profoundly bad effects for disadvantaged applicants. The tests bar them from employment and destroy their aspirations in the process. Recommendation is made fo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

1970
1970
1999
1999

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Preliminary analysis was also done with the subjects meeting one, two, or three of the factors in the specific aptitude battery but it did not differ particularly from the final computation. The findings are consistent with the great majority of studies and research that has been done involving testing and the disadvantaged (Culhane, 1965, Somerfield and Fotzinger, 1969, and Mathis, 1969. They are not consistent if one assumes the disadvantaged or culturally different person to be the same as the norming sample but this, by definition, is not so.…”
Section: )supporting
confidence: 57%
“…Preliminary analysis was also done with the subjects meeting one, two, or three of the factors in the specific aptitude battery but it did not differ particularly from the final computation. The findings are consistent with the great majority of studies and research that has been done involving testing and the disadvantaged (Culhane, 1965, Somerfield and Fotzinger, 1969, and Mathis, 1969. They are not consistent if one assumes the disadvantaged or culturally different person to be the same as the norming sample but this, by definition, is not so.…”
Section: )supporting
confidence: 57%
“…The extinction coefficient values for p-carotene and lycopene can be compared with the value obtained by Mathis [35] for lutein, a molecule similar to p-carotene. The value of emax was 4.0 X lo5 I/mole cm at 5 18 nm.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, inferences about aptitude should be clarified in light of behaviors used to define them. Mathis (1969) has described how aptitude tests can be real barriers for the disadvantaged if they are interpreted as abstract causes of behavior. In communicating test information, counselors need to teach clients to clarify the differences between observations and inferences when using constructs.…”
Section: Improving Client Thinking About Theirmentioning
confidence: 99%