Grade point average (GPA) often correlates highly with variables of interest to educational researchers and thus offers the potential to greatly increase the statistical power of their research studies. Yet this variable is often underused in marketing education research studies. The reliability and validity of the GPA are closely examined here in a research study context. These findings are combined with other published results to offer specific recommendations and examples related to how education researchers can improve their studies with the appropriate use of GPA.
Bacon, Donald R. 2002. Issues in the use of pretests. Paper presented at the Colorado Regional Higher Educational Assessment Conference, October 31, Westminster, CO.
2.
Bacon, Donald R.2003. Assessing learning outcomes: A comparison of multiplechoice and short-answer questions in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Education25:31-36.
3.
Bacon, Donald R.2004. The contributions of reliability and pretests to effective assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation9 (3). http://www.PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=3 (accessed April 3, 2004).
4.
Bacon, Donald R., and Jennifer Novotny. 2002. Exploring achievement striving as a moderator of the grading leniency effect. Journal of Marketing Education24 (1): 4-14.
5.
Bacon, Donald R., Kim A. Stewart, and Sue Stewart-Belle. 1998. Exploring predictors of student team project performance. Journal of Marketing Education20:63-71.
6.
Barr, Terri Feldman, Andrea L. Dixon, and Jule B. Gassenheimer. 2005. Exploring the “Lone Wolf” phenomenon in student teams. Journal of Marketing Education27(1): 81-90.
7.
Barritt, Loren S.1966. Note: The consistency of first-semester college grade point average. Journal of Educational Measurement3 (3): 261-262.
8.
Bloom, Benjamin S.1976. Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
Borde, Stephen E.1998. Predictors of student academic performance in the introductory marketing course. Journal of Education for Business73 (5): 302-306.
10.
Bridgeman, Brent, and Charles Lewis. 1994. The relationship of essay and multiple-choice scores with grades in college courses. Journal of Educational Measurement31 (1): 37-50.
11.
Camey, John P., and Janice K. Williams. 2004. Selling principles: Influencing Principles of Marketing students' perceptions of and attitudes toward marketing as a discipline. Journal of Marketing Education26 (2): 154-160.
12.
Cassady, Jerrell C.2001. Self-reported GPA and SAT: A methodological note. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation7 (12). http://www.ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=7&n=12 (accessed July 13, 2002).
13.
Chapman, Kenneth J., Richard Davis, Daniel Toy, and Lauren Wright. 2004. Academic integrity in the business school environment: I'll get by with a little help from my friends. Journal of Marketing Education26(3): 236-249.
14.
Chonko, Lawrence B.2004. If itwalks like a duck...: Concerns about quackery in marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education26(1): 4-16.
15.
Clark, Edward L.1964. Reliability of grade-point averages. Journal of Educational Research57(8): 428-430.
16.
Cohen, Jacob. 1977. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Rev. ed.New York: Academic Press.
17.
Cronbach, Lee J., and Lita Furby. 1970. Howwe should measure “change”— Or should we?Psychological Bulletin74 (1): 68-80.
18.
Hite, Robert E., Faye S. McIntyre, and Daniel F. Lynch. 2001. The impact of student characteristics on cooperative testing in the marketing classroom. Marketing Education Review11(1): 27-34.
19.
Hoyt, Cyril. 1941. Test reliability estimated by analysis of variance. Psychometrika6 (3): 153-160.
20.
Jaramillo, Fernando, and Paul E. Spector. 2004. The effect of action orientation on the academic performance of undergraduate marketing majors. Journal of Marketing Education26 (3): 250-260.
21.
Karakaya, Fahri, Thomas L. Ainscough, and John Chopoorian. 2001. The effects of class size and learning style on student performance in a multimedia based marketing course. Journal of Marketing Education23(2): 84-90.
Peter, J. Paul. 1979. Reliability: A review of psychometric basics and recent marketing practices. Journal of Marketing Research16 (February): 6-17.
24.
Priluck, Randi. 2004. Web-assisted courses for business education: Anexamination of two sections of Principles of Marketing. Journal of Marketing Education26 (2): 161-173.
25.
Reichardt, Charles S.1979. The statistical analysis of data from nonequivalent group designs. In Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings, edited by Thomas D. Cook and Donald T. Campbell, 147-205. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
26.
Reilly, Richard R., and Michael A. Warech. 1994. The validity and fairness of alternatives to cognitive tests. In Policy issues in employment testing, edited by Linda C. Wing and Bernard R. Giffords, 131-224. Boston: Kluwer.
27.
Roth, Philip L., Craig A. BeVier, Fred S. Switzer III, and Jeffrey S. Schippmann. 1996. Meta-analyzing the relationship between grades and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology81 (5): 548-556.
28.
Roth, Philip L., and Richard L. Clarke. 1998. Meta-analyzing the relationship between grades and salary. Journal of Vocational Behavior53 (3): 386-400.
29.
Shrout, Patrick E., and Joseph L. Fleiss. 1979. Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin86 (2): 420-428.
30.
Smith, Karen H.2004. Implementing the “Marketing You” project in large sections of Principles of Marketing. Journal of Marketing Education26 (2): 123-136.
31.
Warren, Jonathan R.1971. College grading practices: An overview. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, BBB01751.
32.
Werts, Charles, Robert L. Linn, and Karl G. Jöreskog. 1978. Reliability of college grades from longitudinal data. Educational and Psychological Measurement38 (1): 89-95.
