The Scholastic Aptitude Test: A Critical Appraisal

References

1. Alderman, D. L., & Powers, D. E. The effects of special preparation on SAT-Verbal scores (RDR 78-79, No. 4). Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1979.
2. Angoff, W. H., & Dyer, H. S. The Admissions Testing Program. In W. H. Angoff (Ed.), The College Board Admissions Testing Program. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1971.The Admissions Testing Program. The College Board Admissions Testing Program.
3. Breland, H. M. Population validity and college entrance measures (Research Monograph No. 8). New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1979.Population validity and college entrance measures.
4. Brigham, C. C. A study of error. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1932.A study of error.
5. Brill, S. The secrecy behind the college boards. New York, October 7, 1974, pp. 67-83.
6. Brown, C. W., & Ghiselli, E. E. Per cent increases in proficiency resulting from use of selective devices. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1953, 37, 341-344.Per cent increases in proficiency resulting from use of selective devices. Journal of Applied Psychology 37:341–344.
7. Burt, C. Intelligence and social mobility. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 1961, 14, 3-24.Intelligence and social mobility. British Journal of Statistical Psychology 14:3–24.
8. Coffman, W. E. A factor analysis of the verbal sections of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (College Entrance Examination Board RDR 65-6, No. 17 & RB 66-30). Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1966.A factor analysis of the verbal sections of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (College Entrance Examination Board RDR 65-6, No. 17 & RB 66-30).
9. Coffman, W. E. The Achievement Tests. In W. H. Angoff (Ed.), The College Board AdmissionsTesting Program. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1971.The Achievement Tests. The College Board Admissions Testing Program.
10. Coffman, W. E., & Parry, M. E. Effects of an accelerated reading course on SAT-V scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1967, 46, 292-296.Effects of an accelerated reading course on SAT-V scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal 46:292–296.
11. College Entrance Examination Board. A statement by the Board of Trustees on test coaching. College Board Review, 1959, No. 38, p. 3.
12. College Entrance Examination Board. Effects of coaching on Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. New York: Author, 1965.
13. College Entrance Examination Board. Effects of coaching on Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. New York: Author, 1968.
14. Cronbach, L. J., & Gleser, G. C. Psychological tests and personnel decisions Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1957.Psychological tests and personnel decisions.
15. Dear, R.E. The effects of a program of intensive coaching on SAT scores (RB 58-5). Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1958.The effects of a program of intensive coaching on SAT scores (RB 58-5).
16. Declaration of Helsinki. Recommendations guiding doctors in clinical research. Journal of theAmerican Medical Association, 1966, 197(11), 32.
17. Declining scores prompt study of coaching for College Boards. Boston Globe, January 1, 1978, p. C-9.
18. Donlon, T. F., & Angoff, W. H. The Scholastic Aptitude Test. In W. H. Angoff (Ed.), TheCollege Board Admissions Testing Program. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1971.The Scholastic Aptitude Test. The College Board Admissions Testing Program.
19. Dorfman, D. D. The Cyril Burt question: New findings. Science, 1978, 201, 1177-1186.The Cyril Burt question: New findings. Science 201:1177–1186.
20. Dyer, H. S. Does coaching help? College Board Review, 1953, No. 19, pp. 331-335.Does coaching help? College Board Review 19:331–335.
21. Dyer, H. S. How adequate are the admissions tests? College Board Review, 1962, No. 47, pp. 3-7.How adequate are the admissions tests? College Board Review 47:3–7.
22. Dyer, H. S., & King, R. G. College Board scores: Their use and interpretation (No. 2). Princeton: College Entrance Examination Board, 1955.College Board scores: Their use and interpretation.
23. Educational Testing Service. About the Achievement Tests 1974-75. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1974.
24. Educational Testing Service. About the SAT and the Test of Standard Written English. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1977a.
25. Educational Testing Service. Guide to the Admissions Testing Program 1977-78. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1977b.
26. Educational Testing Service. Taking the SAT: A guide to the Scholastic Aptitude Test and theTest of Standard Written English. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1978.
27. Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection. Effects of coaching on standardized admission examinations: Revised statistical analysis of data gathered by the Boston Regional Office of the Federal Trade Commission. Washington, D.C.: Author, March, 1979.
28. Fincher, C. Is the SAT worth its salt? An evaluation of the Scholastic Aptitude Test in the University System of Georgia over a thirteen-year period. Review of Educational Research, 1974, 44, 293-305.Is the SAT worth its salt? An evaluation of the Scholastic Aptitude Test in the University System of Georgia over a thirteen-year period. Review of Educational Research 44:293–305.
29. Fishman, J. A. 1957 Supplement to College Board scores (No. 2). New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1957.1957 Supplement to College Board scores.
30. Ford, S. F., & Campos, S. Summary of validity data from the Admissions Testing ProgramValidity Study Service. Princeton: College Extrance Examination Board, 1977.Summary of validity data from the Admissions Testing Program Validity Study Service.
31. Frankel, E. Effects of growth, practice, and coaching on Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1960, 38, 713-719.Effects of growth, practice, and coaching on Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal 38:713–719.
32. Fremer, J., & Chandler, M. O. Special studies. In W. H. Angoff (Ed.), The College BoardAdmission Testing Program. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1971.Special studies. The College Board Admission Testing Program.
33. French, J. W. An answer to test coaching. College Board Review, 1955, No. 27, pp. 5-7.An answer to test coaching. College Board Review 27:5–7.
34. French, J. W. The validity of new tests for performance of college students with high-levelaptitude. (Research Bulletin 63-7). Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1963.
35. French, J. W. New tests for predicting the performance of college students with high-level aptitude. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1964, 55,185-194.New tests for predicting the performance of college students with high-level aptitude. Journal of Educational Psychology 55:185–194.
36. French, J. W., & Dear, R. E. Effect of coaching on an aptitude test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1959, 19, 319-330.Effect of coaching on an aptitude test. Educational and Psychological Measurement 19:319–330.
37. Goldman, R. D., & Widawski, M. H. An analysis of types of errors in the selection of minority college students. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1976, 13, 185-200.An analysis of types of errors in the selection of minority college students. Journal of Educational Measurement 13:185–200.
38. Guilford, J.P. Fundamental statistics in psychology and education (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.Fundamental statistics psychology and education.
39. Hoffmann, B. The tyranny of testing. New York: Crowell-Collier Press, 1962.The tyranny of testing.
40. Houts, P. L. (Ed.). The myth of measurability. New York: Hart, 1977.The myth of measurability.
41. Kamin, L. J. The science and politics of I. Q Potomac, Md.: Erlbaum, 1974.The science and politics of I. Q.
42. Layzer, D. Heritability analyses of IQ scores: Science or numerology? Science, 1974, 183, 1259-1266.Heritability analyses of IQ scores: Science or numerology? Science 183:1259–1266.
43. Levine, A. E. The effects of coaching on standardized admissions examinations. Staff Memorandum of the Boston Regional Office of the Federal Trade Commission, September, 1978. Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection, May, 1979.
44. Marron, J. E. Preparatory school test preparation: Special test preparation, its effect on CollegeBoard scores and the relationship of effected scores to subsequent college performance (Study No. I-A1.02-63-001). West Point, N.Y.: United States Military Academy, 1965.Preparatory school test preparation: Special test preparation, its effect on College Board scores and the relationship of effected scores to subsequent college performance (Study No. I-A1.02-63-001).
45. Moll, R. W. Optional SAT—two years of testing the tradition of tests at Bowdoin. CollegeBoard Review, 1972, No. 86, pp. 11-13, 38-41.Optional SAT—two years of testing the tradition of tests at Bowdoin. College Board Review 86:11, 38–13, 41.
46. Moll, R. W. Untitled pamphlet on elimination of the College Board Examination requirement Brunswick, Me.: Bowdoin College Admissions Office, 1974.Untitled pamphlet on elimination of the College Board Examination requirement.
47. Moulthrop, R. Letter to the editor. New York Times, December 13, 1977, p. 42.
48. Nairn, A., & Associates. The reign of ETS: The corporation that makes up minds. Washington: Ralph Nader, 1980.The reign of ETS: The corporation that makes up minds.
49. Olsen, M. Summary of main findings on the validity of the College Entrance Examination Boardtests of developed ability as predictors of college grades (Statistical Report 57-41). Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1957.
50. Pallone, N.J. Effects of short- and long-term developmental reading courses upon S.A.T. verbal scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1961, 39, 654-657.Effects of short- and long-term developmental reading courses upon S.A.T. verbal scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal 39:654–657.
51. Pike, L.W. Short-term instruction, testwiseness, and the Scholastic Aptitude Test: A literaturereview with research recommendations (RB 78-2). Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1978.Short-term instruction, testwiseness, and the Scholastic Aptitude Test: A literature review with research recommendations (RB 78-2).
52. Pike, L.W., & Evans, F.R. Effects of special instruction for three kinds of mathematics aptitudeitems (Research Report 1). New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1972.Effects of special instruction for three kinds of mathematics aptitude items (Research Report 1).
53. Roberts, S.O., & Oppenheim, D. B. The effect of special instruction upon test performance ofhigh school students in Tennessee (Research and Development Report 66-7, No. 1). Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1966.The effect of special instruction upon test performance of high school students in Tennessee (Research and Development Report 66-7, No. 1).
54. Ryans, D. G., & Frederiksen, N. In E. F. Lindquist (Ed.), Educational measurement. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1951.Educational measurement.
55. Schrader, W. B. A taxonomy of expectancy tables. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1965, 2, 29-35.A taxonomy of expectancy tables. Journal of Educational Measurement 2:29–35.
56. Schrader, W. B. The predictive validity of College Board Admissions tests. In W. H. Angoff (Ed.), The College Board Admissions Testing Program. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1971.The predictive validity of College Board Admissions tests. The College Board Admissions Testing Program.
57. Schrader, W.B., & Stewart, E. E. Descriptive statistics on College Board candidates and other reference groups. In W. H. Angoff (Ed.), The College Board Admissions Testing Program. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1971.Descriptive statistics on College Board candidates and other reference groups. The College Board Admissions Testing Program.
58. Slack, C.W. How I tried to tell the world how to pass IQ tests. Psychology Today, 1976, 8, 28.How I tried to tell the world how to pass IQ tests. Psychology Today 8:28.
59. Taylor, H. C., & Russell, J. T. The relationship of validity coefficients to the practical effectiveness of tests in selection: Tables and discussion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1939, 23, 565-578.The relationship of validity coefficients to the practical effectiveness of tests in selection: Tables and discussion. Journal of Applied Psychology 23:565–578.
60. Tippett, L. H. C. On the extreme individuals and the range of samples taken from a normal population. Biometrika, 1925, 17, 364-387.On the extreme individuals and the range of samples taken from a normal population. Biometrika 17:364–387.
61. Watson, J. B. Behaviorism. New York: Norton, 1924.Behaviorism.
62. Whimbey, A., & Whimbey, L.S. Intelligence can be taught. New York: Dutton, 1975.Intelligence can be taught.
63. Whitla, D. Effect of tutoring on Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1962, 41, 32-37.Effect of tutoring on Scholastic Aptitude Test scores. Personnel and Guidance Journal 41:32–37.
64. Willie, C. V. Education in the year 2000. Harvard Graduate School of Education Association Bulletin, Summer 1978, pp. 3-5.Education in the year 2000. Harvard Graduate School of Education Association Bulletin, 3–5.
65. Wirtz, W., & Panel. On further examination: Report of the Advisory Panel on the Scholastic Aptitude Test Score decline. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1977.On further examination: Report of the Advisory Panel on the Scholastic Aptitude Test Score decline.