A wide variety of potential indicators of graduate student performance are reviewed. Based on a scrutiny of relevant research literature and ex perience with recent and current research projects, the various indicators are considered in two ways. First, they are analyzed within the framework of the traditional "criterion problem," that is, with re spect to their adequacy as criteria in predicting graduate school performance. In this case, empha sis is given to problems with the criteria that make it difficult to draw valid inferences about the re lationship between selection measures and perfor mance measures. Second, the various indicators are considered as an important process of the graduate program. In this case, attention is given to their adequacy as procedures for the evaluation of stu dent performance, e.g., their clarity, fairness, and usefulness as feedback to students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baird, L.L.Development of an inventory of documented accomplishments: Report of phase I and proposal for phase II (GRE No. 77-3. Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Service, December, 1976.
2.
Baird, L.L.Final report on phase II of the project to develop an inventory of documented accomplishments (Unpublished draft for the Graduate Record Examination Board . Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, August 1978.
3.
Baird, L.L., & Richards, J.M. , Jr. The effects of selecting college students by various kinds of high school achievements (ACT Research Report No. 23. Iowa City, IA: American College Testing Program, 1968.
4.
Barritt, L.S.The consistency of first semester college grade-point average. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1966, 3, 261-262.
5.
Berelson, B.Graduate education in the United States. New York : McGraw-Hill, 1960.
6.
Boldt, R.F.Factor analysis of business school grades (Research Bulletin RB-70-49 . Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1970.
7.
Bowers, J.E.A test of variation in grading standards. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1967,27,429-430.
8.
Bretsch, H.A study of doctoral recipients, 1938-1958 (Graduate Study No. 6. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1965. (mimeo)
9.
Brogden, H.E., & Taylor, E.K.The theory and classification of criterion bias. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1950, 10, 158-186.
10.
Bryant, N.D.A factor analysis of the report of officer effectiveness. Lackland Air Force Base, TX: Air Force Personnel and Training Research Center, 1956.
11.
Caldwell, E., & Hartnett, R.T.Sex bias in college grading. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1967, 4, 129-133.
12.
Carlson, A.B., Evans, F.R., & Kuykendall, N.J.The feasibility of common criterion validity studies of the GRE (Research Memorandum 73-16. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1973.
13.
Carlson, A.B., Reilly, R.R., Mahoney, M.H., & Casserly, P.L.The development and pilot testing of criterion rating scales. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1976.
14.
Carmichael, O.C.Graduate education: A critique and a program. New York : Harper, 1961.
15.
Clark, E.L.Reliability of grade-point averages. The Journal of Educational Research, 1964, 57, 428-430.
16.
Clark, M.J., Hartnett, R.T., & Baird, L.L.Assessing dimensions of quality in doctoral education: A technical report of a national study in three fields. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1976.
17.
Cronbach, L.J.Essentials of psychological testing (3rd ed.). New York: Harper & Row , 1970.
18.
Davis, J.A.What college teachers value in students. College Board Review , 1965, 56, 15-18.
19.
Doermann, H.Baccalaureate origins and performance of students in the Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. Unpublished report, 1968.
Frederiksen, N.There ought to be a law. Address presented at the ETS Invitational Conference on Testing Problems, October 1977.
22.
Frederiksen, N., & Ward, W.C.Measures for the study of creativity in scientific problem-solving . Applied Psychological Measurement, 1978 , 2, 1-24.
23.
French, J.W.The description of aptitude and achievement tests in terms of rotated factors . Psychometric Monographs, 1951 (No. 5).
24.
Glaser, R., & Klaus, D.J.Proficiency measurement: Assessing human performance. In R. M. Gagné (Ed.), Psychological principles in system development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1962.
25.
Goldman, R.D., & Slaughter, R.E.Why college grade-point average is difficult to predict. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1976, 68, 9-14.
26.
Hackman, J.R., Wiggins, N., & Bass, A.R.Prediction of long term success in doctoral work in psychology. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1970, 20, 365-374.
27.
Halleck, S.L.Emotional problems of the graduate student. In J. Katz & R. T. Hartnett (Eds.), Scholars in the making. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1976.
28.
Heine, R.W.Comparative performance of doctoral students admitted on the basis of traditional and non-traditional criteria. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, 1976.
29.
Heiss, A.Challenges to graduate schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970.
30.
Hilton, T.L., Kendall, L.M., & Sprecher, T.B.Performance criteria in graduate business study. Parts I and II: Development of rating scales, background data, and pilot study (Research Bulletin 70-3. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1970.
31.
Hirschberg, N., & Itkin, S.Graduate student success in psychology. American Psychologist , 1978, 33, 1083-1093.
32.
Holland, J.L., & Nichols, R.C.Prediction of academic and extracurricular achievement in college . Journal of Educational Psychology, 1964 , 55, 55-65.
33.
Humphreys, L.G.The fleeting nature of the prediction of college academic success . Journal of Educational Psychology, 1968 , 59, 375-380.
34.
Juola, A.E.Freshman level ability tests versus cumulative grades in the prediction of successive terms performance in college. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association , Chicago, February 1964.
35.
Juola, A.E.Illustrative problems in college level grading. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1968, 47, 29-33.
36.
Katz, J., & Hartnett, R.Scholars in the making. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1976.
37.
Kelley, E.L., & Fiske, D.W.The prediction of performance in clinical psychology. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1951.
38.
Mayhew, L.R., & Ford, P.J.Reform in graduate and professional education. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass, 1974 .
39.
McClelland, D.C.Testing for competence rather than for "intelligence." American Psychologist, 1973, 28, 1-14.
40.
McGuire, C.H., & Babbott, D.Simulation technique in the measurement of problem-solving skills . Journal of Educational Measurement, 1967 , 4, 1-11.
Meeth, L.R., & Wattenbarger, J.L.Dissertation quality at Walden University . Mimeographed paper, Walden University, 1974.
43.
National Academy of Sciences.Doctorate recipients from United States universities, 1958-1966. Washington, D. C., 1967.
44.
Nichols, R.C., & Holland, J.L.Prediction of the first-year college performance of high aptitude students . Psychological Monographs, 1963, 77 (7, Whole No. 570).
45.
Porter, A.L., & Wolfle, D.Utility of the doctoral dissertation. American Psychologist , 1975, 30, 1054-1061.
Reilly, R.R.Factors in graduate student performance (Research Bulletin 74-2. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service , 1974. (b)
48.
Richards, J.M., Jr. , Holland, J.L., & Lutz, S.W.Prediction of student accomplishment in college. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1967, 58, 343-355.
49.
Rimoldi, H.J.Rationale and application of the test of diagnostic skills. Journal of Medical Education, 1963, 38, 364-373.
50.
Rosenhaupt, H.Graduate students' experience at Columbia University, 1940-1956. New York: Columbia University Press, 1958.
51.
Sanford, M.Making it in graduate school. Berkeley: Montaigne, 1976.
52.
Singer, J.E.The use of manipulative strategies: Machiavellianism and attractiveness . Sociometry, 1964,27, 128-150.
53.
Smith, G.M.Usefulness of peer ratings of personality in educational research . Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1967, 27, 967-984.
54.
Tucker, A., Gottlieb, D., & Pease, J.Factors related to attrition among doctoral students (Cooperative Research Project No. 1146. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education, 1964.
55.
Tupes, E.C.Personality traits related to effectiveness of junior and senior air force officers. Lackland Air Force Base, TX: Air Force Personnel Training and Research Center, 1957. (a)
56.
Tupes, E.C.Relationships between behavior trait ratings by peers and later officer performance of USAF officer candidate school graduates. Lackland Air Force Base, TX: Air Force Personnel Training and Research Center, 1957. (b)
57.
Ward, W.C., & Frederiksen, N.A study of the predictive validity of the tests of scientific thinking (Research Bulletin, 77-6. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1977.
58.
Wiggins, N., & Blackburn, M.Prediction of first-year graduate success in psychology: Peer ratings . Journal of Educational Research, 1969, 63, 81-85.
59.
Willingham, W.W.Predicting success in graduate education. Science , 1974,183, 273-278.
60.
Wilson, K.M.Of time and the doctorate. Atlanta, Ga.: Southern Regional Education Board, 1965.
61.
Wilson, K.M.Internal progress report of the Graduate Record Examinations Board Cooperative Validity Studies Project. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1978.
62.
Wing, C.W., & Wallach, M.A.College admissions and the psychology of talent. New York : Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1971.
