This study examines how large scale assessments like the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), developed for students proficient in academic English, may not produce reliable and valid outcomes for academically vulnerable students, namely English Language Learners (ELLs). This mixed-methods study was conducted to uncover differences between the old and new mathematics sections of the SAT, to see if differences in mathematical performance correlate to language abilities by looking at students’ approach, and to explore teacher perceptions, attitudes, and pedagogical practice in the instruction of English learners. The study took place in a New Jersey school district. Seventy-eight students of varying language proficiencies were administered an old and new SAT-Mathematics (SAT-M) section. After scores were statistically analyzed, fifteen students were purposefully chosen to be interviewed. For a more comprehensive view of scores, students were asked to think out loud as they completed selected test items and answer questions pertaining to their background, problem-solving methodology, misconceptions, and limitations. Similarly, nine teachers were given a survey and the exams to pinpoint difficult questions, explain why students struggle, identify what English learners’ needs are, and describe how the needs are met. Qualitative data revealed that students’ performance was a reflection of mathematical and/or language challenges, or lack of exposure to certain mathematical concepts. Additionally, test structure and time constraints had confounding effects on student performance. Even though a variety of cognitive processes were observed, they seemed more aligned to a student’s academic track rather than linguistic abilities. With ELLs usually consigned to lower track mathematics classes, the interconnectedness of class, language, and expectations remains critical. Teachers’ responses reveal their pessimism in overcoming students’ language access barrier and low sense of mathematical efficacy. Teachers’ efforts to provide a more equitable education to ELLs reveal tensions between reform curriculum and equity. Findings of this study contribute to the discussion on factors that may lead to the marginalization of ELLs on national assessments. The results have important implications for test construction and challenges the conceptualization of what “language” is and what being “college and career” ready means.

Gender differences on Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores were analyzed by racial and socioeconomic groupings. Differences in SAT-Math scores, in SAT-Verbal scores, and in the difference between SAT-Math and SAT-Verbal scores were studied using four racial groupings (African American, Asian American, Caucasian American, and Hispanic American) and two socioeconomic groupings (average-to-high income and average-low income) of students. All differences were tested at the .05 level. Socioeconomic status was determined by using federal guidelines for free and reduced school lunches.The population of the study consisted of 7625 students (3962 females and 3663 males) from two school districts. School District A provided the SAT-M and SAT-V scores of 767 African American, 111 Asian American, 5202 Caucasian American, and 101 Hispanic American students. School District B provided the SAT-M and SAT-V scores of 139 African American,'179 Asian American, and 1126 Caucasian American students.Males, as a group, were found to be significantly higher than females in SAT-M scores and in the difference between SAT-M and SAT-V scores. Asian Americans and Caucasian Americans were found to score significantly higher than both African Americans and Hispanic Americans in SAT-M and SAT-V scores. Asian Americans were found to score significantly higher than all other racial groups in the difference between SAT-M and SAT-V scores. Hispanic Americans were found to score significantly lower than Asian Americans and Caucasian Americans and significantly higher than African Americans in SAT-M and SAT-V scores. African Americans were found to. score significantly lower than all other racial groups in SAT-M and SAT-V scores. A significant two-way interaction was found for gender and race in SAT-M scores, in SAT-V scores, and in the difference between SAT-M and. SAT-V scores. Gender differences in SAT scores varied significantly between each racial grouping.Average-to-high socioeconomic groups were found to have significantly higher scores than average-to-low socioeconomic groups in both SAT-M and SAT-V scores. These differences occurred regardless of gender and race. Significant linear differences were also found to occur in the difference between SAT-M and SAT-V scores over a seven year period. / Department of Educational Leadership

The National Council for Accrediting of Teacher Education (NCATE) revised its standards in 1986. Included in this revision was a new entrance criterion for teacher education units: a 2.5 grade point average (GPA). Research indicated that GPA was not a good measure of aptitude or achievement when it was used to compare students. The large error variance involved in using GPA as a measure of aptitude could eliminate many capable teacher candidates. The researcher determined to create a system which would identify students who would not be likely to achieve the 2.5 GPA and which would also suggest methods for motivated students to increase their chances of achieving the 2.5 GPA. A sample was identified: industry and technology students at Millersville University who were sophomores from the fall of 1981 to the fall of 1986. This sample was randomly divided into two groups for the purpose of cross-validation. Multiple regression was used for both the overall group and the two subgroups to create equations which predicted sophomore GPA, using the following independent variables: SAT scores, high school rank, age, sex, race and human social capital. Students who were over 23 years old when they entered the program were eliminated from the study because SAT scores or high school ranks were not available for most of them. Predictors with a significance level of 0.05 had the following squared correlations to sophomore GPA: 1) high school rank: 0.2098, 2) SAT-math: 0.1960, 3) SAT-verbal: 0.1385, 4) special entrance: 0.0566, 5) admission age: 0.0298. Predictors which remained significant when loaded into a multiple prediction equation are listed in order of predictive power with their incremental squared correlation coefficients: 1) high school class rank: 0.2098, 2) SAT-math: 0.0969, 3)admission age: 0.0421, 4) SAT- verbal: 0.0188. The total squared multiple correlation coefficient for the prediction equation was 0.3676. The equation correctly predicted 71.4% of the admission decisions (based on a 2.5 sophomore GPA). Double cross-validation resulted in an average acceptance prediction accuracy of 72.2%. The prediction equation reduced the error of prediction and was recommended for use. / Ph. D.

This dissertation includes three essays that examine the potential of policies, interventions, and curricula in improving transitions to four-year colleges and universities in the U.S. The first essay provides a novel investigation of New York City’s adoption of SAT School Day (SSD), which provides universal access to college entrance exams for high school juniors. I examine the causal impact of the policy on SAT taking and four-year college enrollment patterns for the first three post-policy cohorts. Using a two-way fixed effects differences-in-differences (DID) model, I find that the SSD policy increases SAT-taking rates by 20% but has little impact on four-year enrollment. These findings suggest that increased college entrance test participation alone is not sufficient to increase enrollment to four-year colleges. The second essay provides a systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 studies on the causal impact of late pre-college advising interventions, which I refer to as LPCAIs. LPCAIs aim to connect juniors and seniors with pre-college advisors to guide them through the complex college application process. The studies use experimental and quasi-experimental designs to identify the causal effect of LPCAIs on postsecondary enrollment outcomes for historically underrepresented students. I find that the offer of an LPCAI, on average, increases postsecondary enrollment and improves institutional choices. However, the in-person advising format accounts for nearly all of the positive impact derived from LPCAIs. Several implications of these findings are discussed, particularly in the context of COVID-19. The third chapter presents a correlational study that uses transcript data from a statewide community college system to estimate how well GPA, credit accumulation, and course taking at community college predict upward transfer and baccalaureate completion. While GPAs and credit accumulation rates in all academic branches are strong, positive predictors of transfer, GPAs in humanities are significantly more predictive of transfer compared to GPAs in non-humanities branches. GPAs and successful credit accumulation rates in humanities courses are also associated with greater likelihoods of baccalaureate completion, conditional on transfer. However, humanities courses are equally valid predictors of baccalaureate completion as courses in other academic branches. In contrast to strong academic performance, taking more courses in humanities, although associated with greater likelihoods of vertical transfer, is associated with lower likelihoods of baccalaureate completion. Taken together, these essays contribute to our understanding of approaches to improve transitions to four-year colleges and universities. They also highlight the importance of academic preparation and advising within transitional pathways.

The purposes of this study were (1) to determine the scores on the quantitative portion of the SAT for 110 students and these students' math teachers' ratings on the TTAS, (2) to determine the nature of the relationship of the students' SAT scores to their teachers' TTAS ratings, and (3) to determine the nature of the relationship of the students' SAT scores to their sex. It was hypothesized that (1) there would be no significant relationship between a student's math score as measured by the quantitative portion of the SAT and the effectiveness of the student's math teacher as measured by the TTAS, and (2) there would be no significant relationship between a student's math score as measured by the quantitative portion of the SAT and the student's sex. The 110 subjects (60 males and 50 females) In this study took the quantitative portion of the SAT during the 1986-87 school year. This sample was drawn from a large suburban high school in the North Texas area. The effectiveness of the math teachers who taught the 110 students was measured by the Texas Teachers Appraisal System (TTAS). The statistical analyses indicated that (1) there was no significant relationship between a higher SAT score and a math teacher's higher TTAS rating and (2) there was no significant relationship between male and female SAT scores. Recommendations for future research include: (1) does the TTAS actually measure teacher effectiveness, (2) do appraisers in Texas follow state mandated training procedures, (3) does the quantitative portion of the SAT contain sexually biased items, (4) does the SAT actually predict student ability, (5) do teachers respond in like manner to male and female students, (6) does the high school curriculum tend to favor one sex more than the other.

This thesis analyzes the origins, growth, and legitimization of the standardized test preparation ("test-prep") industry from the late 1940s to the end of the 1980s. In particular, this thesis focuses on the development of Stanley H. Kaplan Education Centers, Ltd. ("Kaplan") and The Princeton Review ("TPR"), and how these companies were most conducive in making the test-prep industry and standardized test-preparation itself socially acceptable. The standardized test most frequently discussed in this thesis is the Scholastic Aptitude Test ("SAT"), especially after its development came under the control of Educational Testing Service ("ETS"), but due attention is also given to the American College Testing Program ("ACT"). This thesis argues that certain test-prep companies gained legitimacy by successfully manipulating the interstices of American business and education, and brokered legitimacy through the rhetorical devices in their advertising. However, the legitimacy for the industry at-large was gained by default as neither the American government nor the American public could conclusively demonstrate that the industry conducted wholesale fraud. The thesis also argues that standardized test manufacturers were forced to engage in a cat-and-mouse game of pseudo-antagonism and adaptation with the test-prep industry once truth-in-testing laws prescribed transparent operations in standardized testing. These developments affect the current state of American standardized testing, its fluctuating but ubiquitous presence in the college admissions process, and the perpetuation of the test-prep industry decades after its origins.