Cited by 15Higher Education Research StudiesMedical Education and AdmissionsEducational Outcomes and Influences

Why Do Achievement Measures Underpredict Female Academic Performance?

Mattern, Krista, Sanchez, Edgar, Ndum, Edwin·2017·Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Abstract

In the context of college admissions, the current study examined whether differential prediction of first‐year grade point average (FYGPA) by gender could be explained by an omitted variable problem—namely, academic discipline, or the amount of effort a student puts into schoolwork and the degree to which a student sees him/herself as hardworking and conscientious. Based on nearly 10,000 college students, the current study found that differences in intercepts by gender were reduced by 45% with the inclusion of academic discipline in a model that already included high school grade point average (HSGPA) and ACT Composite score. Moreover, academic discipline resulted in an additional 4% of variance accounted for in FYGPA. Gender differences in slopes were not statistically significant (p > .001) regardless if academic discipline was included in the model. The findings highlight the utility of taking a more holistic approach when making college admission decisions. Namely, the inclusion of noncognitive measures has benefits that are twofold: increased predictive validity and reduced differential prediction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/emip.12138

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Gender-based underprediction has been partly accounted for by Conscientiousness, study habits, and course-grading differences.

    “Applying this approach, gender-based underprediction has been partly accounted for by Conscientiousness, study habits, and course-grading differences (Keiser et al., 2016;Mattern et al., 2017;Zhou et al., 2022).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mattern, K., Sanchez, E., & Ndum, E.
Affiliations
ACT Inc.
Corresponding author
  • Mattern, Krista
  • Sanchez, Edgar
  • Ndum, Edwin
Venue
Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01-25
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
47-57
ISSN
  • 0731-1745 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-3992
OpenAlex
W2581846226
Cited by
15
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2
FWCI
11.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Educational Measurement Issues and Practice (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Outcomes and Influences
Keywords
gender differences in academic performance, first-year grade point average, university admission, academic disciplines, conscientiousness, high school grade point average, ACT composite score, predictive validity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review