Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!watdragon!dahlia!rmpinchback
From: rmpinchback@dahlia.waterloo.edu (Reid M. Pinchback)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: High I.Q., etc.
Message-ID: <6301@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Date: 9 Apr 88 00:37:15 GMT
References: <1346@microsoft.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu
Reply-To: rmpinchback@dahlia.waterloo.edu (Reid M. Pinchback)
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 43

In article <1346@microsoft.UUCP> t-peterl@forward.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE) writes:
>
>On a less cutting note: does anyone know (especially in the land of academia)
>what the popular attitude toward xxAT tests is? i.e. how important
>are these marks in getting into a reputable school. I assume that
>a _good_ (how do you measure this?) school would just glance
>at them in order to determine whether or not they differed greatly
>from the rest of the "evidence".
>

   Though I don't know the attitude re: xxAT tests, some schools have their
own versions of such tests.  The math department here at U of Waterloo uses
their Descartes exams to HELP screen 1st-year entry students, particularly
in allowing them automatic entrance to advance-honours level courses.  They
know the limitations of such tests, but they are in a good position to 
control the design of the test and check its relevance to the variables that
they are interested in.  In particular, it helps them adjust for differing
qualities of Ontario high schools.  

   I doubt that an xxAT exam would ever be so applicable to anything.  Its
like trying to use government statistics for marketing research.  Census
questionnaires are designed to answer different questions than most
research problems imply, thus different data is collected (and in a different
way).  I suspect the same problems with xxAT tests, particularly when applied
to students leaving high-school to enter college/university.  Those students
will be shifting to a different learning environment.  From my own 
experiences as a student (good and bad), I suspect that other variables than
aptitude might be more relevant.  Good work/study habits is something that
comes to mind.  I've seen SO many B-level high school students outperform
the A-level high school students in 1st year programs.  I suspect that the
A-level students found high school easy and never had to work.  B-level
students had to sweat blood for their marks and don't take them for granted.
Conversations with students seem to bear this out, though this isn't
conclusive obviously.

   If anybody is up on education research, do they have anything more
conclusive to add to that hypothesis?


       Reid M. Pinchback
       -----------------

average