University admission models that address quality and equity

Turner, Rolf; Shulruf, Boaz; Li, Meisong; Yuan, Johnson

doi:10.1080/02188791.2012.684955

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such an approach may be based on two separate assumptions. Either that all selection tools measure approximately the same set of attributes or academic performance, and therefore the reason for using multiple measures is to increase the reliability and validity of the assessments for selection [16]; or that there is a range of combined attributes or academic performances that differ from each other, though each may indicate sufficient competence for being a successful student [17,18].…”

Section: Compensatory and Non-compensatory Selection Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting top candidates for medical school selection interviews- a non-compensatory approach

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Medical schools apply a range of selection methods to ensure that admitted students succeed in the program. In Australia, selection tools typically include measures of academic achievement (e.g. the Australian Tertiary Admission Rank -ATAR) and aptitude tests (e.g. the Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admissions Test -UMAT). These are most commonly used to determine which applicants are invited for additional selection processes, such as interviews. However, no previous study has examined the efficacy of the first part of the selection process. In particular, are compensatory or non-compensatory approaches more effective in evaluating the outcomes of cognitive and aptitude tests, and do they affect the demographics of students selected for interview?Methods: This study utilised data from consecutive cohorts of mainstream domestic students who applied to enter the UNSW Medicine program between 2013 to 2018. A compensatory ranked selection model was compared with a non-compensatory ranked model. Initially, ATAR marks and UMAT scores for each applicant were ranked within each cohort. In the compensatory model, the mean of the ATAR and UMAT ranks were used to determine the outcome. In the non-compensatory model, the lowest rank of ATAR and UMAT determined the outcome for each applicant. The impact of each model on the gender and socioeconomic status of applicants selected to interview was evaluated across all cohorts. Results: The non-compensatory ranked selection model resulted in substantially higher ATAR and UMAT thresholds for invitation to interview, with no significant effect on the socioeconomic status of the selected applicants.Conclusions: These results are important, demonstrating that it is possible to raise the academic threshold for selection to medicine without having any negative impact on applicants from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Overall, the evidence gathered in this study suggests that a non-compensatory model is preferable for selecting applicants for medical student selection interview.

show abstract

Section: Compensatory and Non-compensatory Selection Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting top candidates for medical school selection interviews- a non-compensatory approach

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies undertaken since have shown that the admission criteria set up in 2003 were not optimal and revision of those admission policies and criteria was essential (Agnew, 2010;Shulruf, Wang, Zhao, & Baker, 2011;Turner, Shulruf, Li, & Yuan, 2012;Vlaardingerbroek, 2006). That research has led to some changes in the way the NCEA results were reported, as well as some amendments in the UoA admission criteria to selected programmes (NZQA, 2004(NZQA, , 2005a(NZQA, , 2009UoA, 2004UoA, , 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…The first NCEA cohort completed their schooling in 2004, and to date, only a small number of studies have been published on the impact of NCEA results on university achievements (Hipkins, 2004;Scott, 2008;Shulruf et al, 2008;Shulruf & Keuskamp, 2007;Shulruf, Turner, & Hattie, 2009;Turner et al, 2012). These studies suggest that the quality of learning (i.e., the grades achieved in NCEA exams) has a higher predictive power on student achievement at university than the number of credits acquired (for details, see Shulruf et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

How the admission criteria to a competitive-entry undergraduate programme could be improved

Shulruf

Shaw

2014

Higher Education Research & Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of a new standards-based secondary school assessment system, the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA), necessitated significant changes to the admissions processes for New Zealand universities, particularly for competitive-entry programmes such as medicine, engineering and pharmacy. Selection to such programmes was traditionally based on marks or grades in designated science subjects. Under NCEA, the emphasis changed to the number of credits obtained. This article uses the case of pharmacy at The University of Auckland to examine whether the admission criteria under NCEA are 'fit for purpose' in terms of academic progression during the degree. The negative consequences of students having to repeat courses are both academic and financial. Using data from six cohorts of NCEA entrants to the Bachelor of Pharmacy (BPharm) degree, the findings of this study clearly suggest that the best predictor of course success, measured by not failing courses, is the NCEA Grade Point Average. This is at variance with the current practice for admission to pharmacy and other limited-entry degrees which rely on prerequisite courses and the number of NCEA Credits gained. These results suggest that a reappraisal of admissions processes for pharmacy and similar programmes is required.

show abstract

“…Menurut Turner et al (2012), kriteria masuk universitas bisa menjadi suatu topik yang diperselisihkan, terutama dalam kepatuhan tentang keadilan sehingga perbaikan-perbaikan dari kriteria itu dapat memiliki dampak positif terhadap pihak-pihak yang dirugikan yang melakukan pendaftaran. Pada Universitas Tribhuwana Tunggadewi (UNITRI), informasi dan persyaratan pendaftaran telah dipersepsikan jelas oleh mahasiswa, yang dapat ditemukan melalui brosur yang disebarkan.…”

Section: Hasil Dan Pembahasanunclassified

Students' Perceptions of Equal Opportunities for Higher Education

Fithriana

Firdausi

2020

pedagogia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research aim was measuring perception of students to equality of opportunity to get higher education at Tribhuwana Tunggadewi University. To meet the aim and collect the primary data, a questionnaire survey was held to 326 Tribhuwana Tunggadewi active students in the year of 2019 by simple random sampling. Data validation was with construct validity and Alpha Cronbach. The analyzed data was with a quantitative technique by Microsoft Excel and IBM SPSS 22. The research results measured from the prospects that most students perceived “yes” the admission pathways were diverse (M = 6); the admission phases were enough (M = 6); the information and requirements were clear (M = 6); the campus promotion got to school (M = 5); most students perceived admission opportunity to all class (M = 6); and most students perceived “no” ethnic discrimination when registering (M = 4). From the means equality, most students perceived “yes” the admission test was acceptable for all registrants (M = 6); the general test informed the score to the registrants (M = 6); the registration rules equal for all registrants (M = 6); the general test informed schedule before (M = 6); the admission considered achievements, interests, and talents (M = 6); and the applicants passed the general test accepted (M = 6). The research results had a measurement score if it was true significant that the mean of perception equals to 6 of the undergraduate students perception.

show abstract

University admission models that address quality and equity

Cited by 9 publications

References 8 publications

Selecting top candidates for medical school selection interviews- a non-compensatory approach

Selecting top candidates for medical school selection interviews- a non-compensatory approach

How the admission criteria to a competitive-entry undergraduate programme could be improved

Students' Perceptions of Equal Opportunities for Higher Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About