The Effectiveness of Coaching for the Sat: Review and Reanalysis of Research From the Fifties to the FTC

Messick, Samuel; Alderman, Donald L.; Angoff, William H.; Jungeblut, Ann; Powers, Donald E.; Rock, Donald A.; Rubin, Donald B.; Stroud, T. W. F.

doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.1980.tb01198.x

Cited by 41 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(38 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such self-selection in test repetition would lead to a nonzero, negative sum of errors of measurement on repeaters' initial test scores which would, in turn, distort the magnitude of score changes and preclude the application of existing models for measuring change (e.g., Lord, 1963). These findings would also seem to increase the likelihood that the student self-selection posited in other contexts (e.g., Messick, 1980) is an important factor in score change.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Student Self‐selection and Test Repetition

Alderman

1981

ETS Research Report Series

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Student self‐selection in deciding to repeat a test was examined by contrasting the test performance of students taking the College Board's Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) as juniors and again as seniors with the test performance of students taking the SAT only once as juniors. Estimates of expected test performance on a common initial administration in the junior year were derived from separate equating sections and background variables. Residuals of observed minus expected test scores revealed statistically significant differences between students who took a single administration of the SAT as juniors and students who took the same initial administration but also repeated the test as seniors; the initial observed scores of students later repeating the test were consistently lower than their expected scores for both the verbal and mathematical sections. These results indicate that self‐selection occurs when students decide to repeat a test and that score changes among these students reflect negative errors of measurement on the initial test administration as well as other factors.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Student Self‐selection and Test Repetition

Alderman

1981

ETS Research Report Series

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the main lessons from the critique and reanalysis of the FTC study was stated by Messick (1980) in the preface to the report. Messick wrote that the issue of the effectiveness of coaching for the SAT is much more complicated than the simplistic question of whether coaching works or not.…”

Section: Federal Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather, it matters what materials and practices are involved, at what cost in student time and resources, and with what effect on student skills, attitudes, and test scores (p. v). Messick's (1980) insight was that complex issues, like the coaching controversy, are rarely ever usefully framed as either/or, yes/no questions. Rather, those questions turn out to involve degrees and multiple factors that need to be appreciated and sorted out.…”

Section: Federal Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the Impact of Special Preparation for Admissions Tests

Powers¹

2017

Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By examining unique developments and singular advancements, it is possible to sort the history of educational and psychological testing into a number of distinct phases. One topic that seems to permeate all stages, however, is the question of how best to prepare for such tests. This chapter documents some of Educational Testing Service's (ETS's) contributions to understanding the role of test preparation in the testing process. These contributions include (a) analyzing key features of test preparation, (b) understanding the effects of various sorts of preparation on test performance, and (c) devising tests that will yield meaningful scores in the face of both legitimate as well as questionable attempts to improve test-taker performance. The chapter begins with a definition of special test preparation and then elaborates on its significance. Next, it examines the nature of interest in the topic. Finally, it explores ETS Research and Development (R&D) contributions to explicating the issues associated with special test preparation. DefinitionsThe first issue that one encounters when discussing test preparation is terminology. This terminology applies both to the tests that are involved and to the kinds of preparation that are directed at test takers. Most of the research described below pertains to several tests that are designed to measure academic abilities (e.g., verbal and quantitative reasoning abilities) that develop relatively slowly over a significant This chapter was originally published in 2012 by Educational Testing Service as a research report in the ETS R&D Scientific and Policy Contributions Series.

show abstract

“…Also in this period, research on coaching burgeoned in response to widespread public and institutional user concerns (see Powers,Chap. 17,this volume (Messick 1980), though many other studies were also released (Alderman and Powers 1980;Messick 1982;Powers 1985;Powers and Swinton 1984;Swinton and Powers 1983). Other sources of constructirrelevant variance were investigated, particularly test anxiety (Powers 1988).…”

Section: Validity and Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing Human Assessment: A Synthesis Over Seven Decades

Bennett

Davier

2017

Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book has documented the history of ETS's contributions to educational research and policy analysis, psychology, and psychometrics. We close the volume with a brief synthesis in which we try to make more general meaning from the diverse directions that characterized almost 70 years of work.Synthesizing the breadth and depth of the topics covered over that time period is not simple. One way to view the work is across time. Many of the book's chapters presented chronologies, allowing the reader to follow the path of a research stream over the years. Less evident from these separate chronologies was the extent to which multiple streams of work not only coexisted but sometimes interacted.From its inception, ETS was rooted in Henry Chauncey's vision of describing individuals through broad assessment of their capabilities, helping them to grow and society to benefit (Elliot 2014). Chauncey's conception of broad assessment of capability required a diverse research agenda.Following that vision, his research managers assembled an enormous range of staff expertise. Only through the assemblage of such expertise could one bring diverse perspectives and frameworks from many fields to a problem, leading to novel solutions.In the following sections, we summarize some of the key research streams evident in different time periods, where each period corresponds to roughly a decade. Whereas the segmentation of these time periods is arbitrary, it does give a general This work was conducted while M. von Davier was employed with Educational Testing Service.

show abstract

The Effectiveness of Coaching for the Sat: Review and Reanalysis of Research From the Fifties to the FTC

Cited by 41 publications

References 26 publications

Student Self‐selection and Test Repetition

Student Self‐selection and Test Repetition

Understanding the Impact of Special Preparation for Admissions Tests

Advancing Human Assessment: A Synthesis Over Seven Decades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About