Interpreting test performance in selective admissions for Hispanic students.

Pennock-Román, María

doi:10.1037/10115-006

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(By one estimate, 25% of Puerto Ricans and Mexican Americans and at least 40% of Cubans speak English "not well" or "not at all" [Rodriguez, 1992]). For high school students of moderate to high English proficiency, standard aptitude tests predict first-year college grades about as well as they do for non-Hispanic Whites (Pennock-Roman, 1992). It is not surprising that Latino children typically score higher on the performance than on the verbal subtests of the English-based Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--Revised (WISC-R; Kaufman, 1994).…”

Section: Hispanic Americans Hispanic Immigrants Havementioning

confidence: 97%

Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns.

Neisser

Boykin²,

Brody³

et al. 1996

American Psychologist

2,272

1,523

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the fall of 1994, the publication of Herrnstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve sparked a new round of debate about the meaning of intelligence test scores and the nature of intelligence. The debate was characterized by strong assertions as well as by strong feelings. Unfortunately, those assertions often revealed serious misunderstandings of what has (and has not) been demonstrated by scientific research in this field. Although a great deal is now known, the issues remain complex and in many cases still unresolved. Another unfortunate aspect of the debate was that many participants made little effort to distinguish scientific issues from political ones. Research findings were often assessed not so much on their merits or their scientific standing as on their supposed political implications. In such a climate, individuals who wish to make their own judgments find it hard to know what to believe. tatives. Other members were chosen by an extended consultative process, with the aim of representing a broad range of expertise and opinion.The Task Force met twice, in January and March of 1995. Between and after these meetings, drafts of the various sections were circulated, revised, and revised yet again. Disputes were resolved by discussion. As a result, the report presented here has the unanimous support of the entire Task Force.

show abstract

Section: Hispanic Americans Hispanic Immigrants Havementioning

confidence: 97%

Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns.

Neisser

Boykin²,

Brody³

et al. 1996

American Psychologist

2,272

1,523

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are a variety of factors that may contribute to individual or group differences in time on a test, including personal characteristics, such as risk aversion (Mislevy & Wu, 1996) or demographics such as native language or culture (Emengou & Childs, 2005;Pennock-Román, 1992). Dorans and colleagues (1988) suggested groups may have differing omit patterns, and Evans and Reilly (1972) suggested some groups may be less likely to guess.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…In the review by Pennock-Román (1992), the efficacy of test scores varied with level of English proficiency and subject areas. Studies have suggested there are no significant differences in predictive validity for Hispanic students compared to non-Hispanic white students in the United States (Pennock-Román, 1992;Sireci & TalentoMiller, 2006), but comparing ethnicities may provide little information regarding language differences. A study by Talento-Miller (2008) validity across different citizenship and language groups in non-U.S. schools suggested admission test scores were effective across the groups studied.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Examining Test Speededness by Native Language

Talento-Miller¹,

Guo²,

Han³

2013

International Journal of Testing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Alderman (1982) concluded that "the generality of [these] results is limited by the nature of the sample, chosen for its heterogeneity of previous test scores rather than for its representativeness of college-bound students in Puerto Rico, and by the specific cultural context of the study ... [Nevertheless,] the importance of these results regarding the role of language proficiency as a moderator variable in testing academic aptitude bear replication in other populations and extension to other tests" (pp. 17-18 Pennock-Roman, 1992). One study at the undergraduate level showed that the academic achievement of Latinos and other groups with limited English proficiency was underestimated by SAT scores, particularly by the verbal test (Ramist, Lewis, & McCamley, 1994).…”

Section: Strength Of the Association Between Ability Test Scores In Ementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has long been recognized that identifying talent among bilingual students presents special problems, especially when the test used is in the bilingual's weaker language (e.g., Olmedo, 1977;Pennock-Roman, 1992;Sanchez, 1932aSanchez, , 1932bSanchez, , 1934aSanchez, , 1934b. This issue deserves attention because it affects a large and growing segment of Latino American applicants to graduate institutions.…”

Section: Background Demographic Trendsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Developed Academic Abilities Using Spanish‐language and English‐language Tests: Paeg/Gre Relationships for Puerto Ricans Who Are More Proficient in Spanish Than in English

Pennock-Román¹

1998

ETS Research Report Series

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to clarify the relationship between developed abilities for graduate‐level study as measured in two languages, Spanish and English, for bilingual Puerto Rican examinees more proficient in Spanish than in English. The sample consisted of 451 persons who had taken both the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) General Test and the Prueba de Admisión Para Estudios Graduados (PAEG), a test in Spanish used for admission to graduate study and law schools in Puerto Rico. The PAEG contains sections that measure verbal, quantitative, and writing ability in Spanish. The verbal and quantitative sections contain item types that are similar to those of the GRE. The existence of the PAEG provided the rare opportunity to compare test performance in the students' native language with their test performance in a second language. In addition there were two measures of the students' English language proficiency. Besides the aforementioned verbal and quantitative tests in Spanish, the PAEG contains a subtest in English that measures reading comprehension and vocabulary. The normative sample for this test were non‐native speakers of English. For a subset of 102 individuals in this data set, the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) was also available. The PAEG‐English and the TOEFL were used as measures of English proficiency to investigate how the relationship between the two aptitude tests was moderated by English proficiency. The analyses were patterned after the procedures followed by Alderman (1982) with undergraduate‐level English and Spanish measures. That is, several regression models were run in which a Spanish‐language measure (one PAEG ability test), an English proficiency measure (TOEFL or PAEG‐English), and a term for the interaction between the PAEG ability test score and the English‐proficiency test score were used to predict each criterion. The regression analyses had five different criteria: the GRE General Test verbal, quantitative, and analytic measures and two GRE Subject Tests, Psychology and Biology. The regression analyses revealed that each GRE General Test measure had approximately the same proportion of total variance explained by the predictors (63%‐67%; see Table 7), but the proportion of variance in test scores explained by the terms associated with measures of English proficiency varied substantially across tests. The proportion of variance explained by the English proficiency terms (both the main effect for score and the interaction) was highest for the GRE verbal test (34%), lowest for the quantitative test (8%), and intermediate for the analytical test (16%). Among the two groups with GRE Subject Test scores, the proportion of variance explained by the English proficiency terms for the Psychology and Biology tests was also intermediate between the values for the verbal and quantitative tests. The degree to which the variance in verbal scores was explained by the English‐proficiency terms was approximately double the corresponding value for the Subject Test...

show abstract

Interpreting test performance in selective admissions for Hispanic students.

Cited by 24 publications

References 42 publications

Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns.

Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns.

Examining Test Speededness by Native Language

Measuring Developed Academic Abilities Using Spanish‐language and English‐language Tests: Paeg/Gre Relationships for Puerto Ricans Who Are More Proficient in Spanish Than in English

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About