University of Maryland
College Park, Maryland
Predicting the Academic
Achievement of Female Students Using the SAT and Noncognitive Variables
Julie R. Ancis
William E. Sedlacek
Research Report #17-95
Computer time for this project has been provided through the Computer Science Center of the University of Maryland, College Park.
Counseling Center
University of Maryland
College Park, Maryland
Predicting the Academic
Achievement of Female Students Using the SAT and Noncognitive Variables
Julie R. Ancis William E.
Sedlacek
Research Report #17-95
SUMMARY
The relationship between noncognitive variables, SAT scores, and the academic performance of 1,930 female students over 4 years was examined. Results suggest that both noncognitive variables and standardized measures, are predictive of women's educational achievement. Among the NCQ variables, Demonstrated Community Service, Realistic Self-Appraisal, and Nontraditional Knowledge significantly predicted cumulative GPA in semesters 1, 3, 5, and 7. Successful Leadership Experience significantly predicted cumulative GPA in Semester 5 only. Availability of a Strong Support Person was significantly predictive of cumulative GPA in semester 7 only. Finally, SAT scores were significantly predictive of grades in all semesters. Limitations and implications for fostering female student's academic success are discussed.
Predicting the Academic Achievement of Female
Student's Using the SAT and Noncognitive Variables
Women
have made many gains in higher education over the last twenty years (Shavlik,
Touchton, & Pearson, 1989). The majority of all students in higher
education are women (Danowitz Sagaria, 1988) and women are increasingly
pursuing nontraditional degrees (Ossana, Helms, & Leonard, 1992); allowing
for access to a wider range of careers.
Despite
these gains, much evidence exists that women continue to experience both subtle
and overt forms of gender bias in academia such as discouraging comments,
differential opportunities, and sexual harassment (Ancis, 1994; Brush, 1991;
Sandler, 1987). The implications of gender bias for women's educational
development is enormous as women student's perception of university gender bias
is implicated in lower self-estimates of their academic abilities (Ancis,
1994; Bernard, 1988; Hall & Sandler, 1982), a decrease in academic and
career aspirations from freshman to senior year (Ossana, Helms, & Leonard,
1992), and a decrease in grades from freshman to senior year (Leonard & Sigall,
1989).
In
order for educators, counselors, and student affairs staff to develop and
foster learning environments which encourage women's educational success, it is
critical to identify and measure those variables specifically related to
women's academic achievement. Admissions offices have often relied on
standardized tests, such as the SAT, to predict women's academic success
despite considerable evidence that traditional measures
are not as valid for women as for men (Gamache &
Novick, 1985). While women receive higher grades than do men in college (Betz,
1994; Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987), the SAT consistently underpredicts women's
grades (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987; Rosser, 1989).
Since
the experiences of women students are often vastly different from their male
counterparts, it can be expected that predictors of their academic achievement
will vary from those of men. Faced with barriers to their educational
development, female students must often possess additional skills to succeed.
For example, several authors have described nonacademic variables, such as self-esteem
(Stericker & Johnson, 1977), exposure to role models (Tidball, 1986) and
leadership experiences (Astin, 1977), related to women's educational
achievement (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987). Whereas the SAT and other
standardized tests tend to measure what Sternberg (1985, 1986) refers to as
componential intelligence; the ability to interpret information in a
hierarchical and taxonomic fashion in a welldefined and unchanging context,
research findings suggest that individuals who experience bias tend to
demonstrate their abilities through experiential and contextual intelligence;
Sternberg's second and third types of intelligence. Experiential intelligence
involves the ability to interpret information in changing contexts; whereas
contextual intelligence refers to the ability to adapt to a changing
environment.
Relatedly,
it has been demonstrated that noncognitive variables, measured by the
Noncognitive Questionnaire (NCQ)
(Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984), predict the academic
achievement of students who often experience inequities in university settings.
This includes African-American (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1985; 1989),
Hispanic (Fuertes & Sedlacek, 1994), and international students (Boyer
& Sedlacek, 1988). For example, the noncognitive variable, realistic self-appraisal,
is significantly predictive of the grades of African-American students
who often receive faulty feedback regarding their abilities (Boyer &
Sedlacek, 1988; Tracey & Sedlacek, 1985). Similarly, these noncognitive
variables may help predict women student's academic achievement as they also
encounter discouraging educational environments and often require additional
competencies to succeed.
The purpose of this study was to determine the
validity of the NCQ and SAT in predicting women's academic achievement
throughout college. Participant's Grade Point Average served as the criterion.
The NCQ (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984) was
administered to random samples of entering female freshmen attending
orientation at a large, mid-atlantic university over a ten year period
from 1979 to 1988 (n = 1,930). More than 90% of all entering freshmen attended
the orientation program. Each student's cumulative grade point average (GPA)
over a seven semester period following matriculation was obtained from
university records. AsianAmericans composed 60 of the sample; African-Americans,
120; Hispanics, 40%; and European-Americans, 78%.
The
NCQ (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984) is designed to assess the following eight
noncognitive variables: (1) Positive Self-Concept or Confidence (strong
sense of competence, determinism, and independence), (2) Realistic Self-Appraisal
(accurate selfassessment of one's academic abilities wherein one recognizes
his/her strengths as well as limitations and commits to selfdevelopment), (3)
Understands and Deals with Racism (recognizes racism and has developed a method
for responding assertively and resourcefully), (4) Prefers Long-Range
Goals to Short-Term Goals (motivated to defer gratification), (5)
Availability of a Strong Support Person (presence of an individual who supports
one's pursuit of a college education and is available to provide advice); (6)
Successful Leadership Experience (demonstrated ability to organize and
influence others), (7) Demonstrated Community Service (active in community
activities), (8) Nontraditional Knowledge (non-academically related ways
of obtaining information and demonstrating knowledge).
The
NCQ consists of 23 items: 18 Likert-type items pertaining to educational
expectations and self-estimates ranging from strongly agree (1) to
strongly disagree (5), 2 nominal items which assess educational aspirations,
and 3 open-ended items pertaining to present goals, past accomplishments,
and involvement in community and leadership activities.
A
median coefficient alpha reliability estimate of .83 has been obtained in
previous investigations (Sedlacek & AdamsGaston, 1992). Test-retest
reliability estimates over a two-week
Predicting Academic
Achievement 5
period have ranged from .70 to .94 for each item,
with a median test-retest of .85 (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984). Adequate
construct validity for the dimensions of the NCQ has been established by factor
analysis (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984).
Stepwise multiple regressions were
performed with NCQ variables and SAT Verbal and Math scores as predictors, and
grades (GPA) as the criterion over seven semesters. NCQ variables were entered
first, followed by SAT Verbal and Math scores. This allowed for an assessment
of the relationship between noncognitive variables and grades before SAT scores
were added as predictors. Tracey and Sedlacek (1981) recommend this procedure
for investigations involving more established measures, such as the SAT, and
less established measures such as the NCQ.
Table 1 presents significant zero-order
correlations between NCQ and SAT scores and cumulative GPA per semester. Table
2 presents significant predictors of cumulative GPA per semester using multiple
regression. The NCQ variables Demonstrated Community Service, Realistic Self-Appraisal,
and Nontraditional Knowledge emerged as significant predictors of cumulative
GPA in semesters 1, 3, 5 and 7. Successful Leadership Experience significantly
predicted cumulative GPA in Semester 5 only. Availability of a Strong Support
Person was significantly predictive of cumulative GPA in semester 7 only. A
significant negative relationship was found between Positive Self-Concept
and
GPA in semesters 1, 3, 5, and 7. Finally, SAT scores
significantly predicted grades in all semesters.
The
results suggest that both noncognitive and academic variables are significantly
related to female student's GPA throughout their university experience. This
study was unique in allowing for the concurrent investigation of traditional
and nontraditional predictors of women's scholastic achievement. Moreover, the
findings provide further evidence for the predictive validity of the NCQ and
support the need for more comprehensive models of women's educational success.
Both
verbal and mathematical skills seem to predict the academic success of college
women. Among the NCQ variables, Demonstrated Community Service before college
emerged as the strongest predictor of grades in semesters 1, 3, 5, and 7.
Community service activities may provide female students with the skills and
resources needed to achieve in a challenging environment. For example,
community service activities may facilitate the development of interpersonal
skills, such as instrumentality, which are positively related to women's
educational and career development (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987; Orlofsky &
Stake, 1981).
Realistic
Self-Appraisal was also demonstrated to significantly predict grades.
Realistic self-appraisal is particularly important for women students who
often receive faulty feedback regarding their academic performance. This
feedback includes disparaging comments from faculty regarding
women's commitment or scholastic achievement, the
favoring of male contributions in class, and inattentiveness when women
students do participate (Hall & Sandler, 1982; Huntington, 1986). Women
students who are able to accurately appraise their abilities, as well as
recognize challenges in the system despite negative or inaccurate external
feedback may be at a significant advantage.
Nontraditional
Knowledge also emerged as a significant predictor of grades. Women who seek
alternative venues for obtaining knowledge and expressing themselves, such as
participating in community or non-academic activities, seem to be more
likely to succeed than those who do not seek such opportunities. This is
particularly true for women who pursue personally meaningful knowledge or
information of direct relevance to their lives as women's contributions and
perspectives have been relatively absent from traditional curriculum (Thorne,
1989). Moreover, in mixed-sex college classes male students often receive
more instructor attention and encouragement (Fehrs & Czujko, 1992) than
female students. Thus, women who perceive a limited opportunity to fully engage
in the traditional classroom may benefit from venues which allow for greater
participation.
Successful
Leadership Experience and Availability of a Strong Support Person emerged as
significant predictors of grades in semesters 5 and 7, respectively. The
significant relationship between leadership experiences and grades is
consistent with prior research demonstrating the importance of leadership
experiences to women's self-esteem and
learning (Astin & Kent, 1983; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). The
significant relationship between Availability of a Strong Support Person and
grades is consistent with the demonstrated importance of role models to women's
educational and career success (Tidball, 1986; 1989). The fact that these two
noncognitive variables emerged as significant predictors only in later
semesters requires further investigation.
Finally,
the significant negative relationship between Positive Self-Concept and
GPA was unexpected and certainly warrants additional study. Additional
psychological variables not measured here may be related to these findings. For
example, the Impostor Phenomenon, "a psychological syndrome or pattern
based upon intense, secret feelings of fraudulence in the face of achievement
tasks and situations" (Harvey & Katz, 1985), has been identified among
high-achieving high school students, college women, and career women
(Clance & Imes, 1978; Cromwell, Brown, Sanchez-Hucles, & Adair,
1990). Previous research has demonstrated that individuals who experience the
Impostor Phenomenon tend to be self-doubting, and self-rejecting
(Cromwell et al., 1990), and thus may present with a negative self-concept.
Several
methodological limitations exist. The aggregating of participants across years
assumes similarity of academic environment and subject's experience across
those years. Educational gains for women in academia from 1979 to 1988 may have
contributed to the variance in GPA. However, this technique
allowed for a larger and more statistically stable
sample. Second, the participant's represent a select sample as they have
already been admitted to a university. The restricted range of scores,
particularly on the SAT, may have contributed to lower correlations between
predictor scores and the criterion. Third, grades may be viewed as only one
component of women's academic achievement. Other variables such as quality of
interpersonal relationships or the development of autonomy may certainly be
considered indicators of achievement. However, grades often influence women's
educational and career opportunities through eligibility for grants and
scholarships, admittance to graduate programs, and admittance to special
educational training programs. Implications
The
results have significant implications for predicting women's academic success.
As past research indicates that SAT scores tend to underpredict women's grades,
the inclusion of noncognitive variables as predictors provides for a more
accurate and complete understanding of women's educational development.
In
order to prepare female students for the challenges they may face in
institutions of higher learning, as well as develop educationally facilitative
learning environments, several programmatic interventions are indicated. For
example, as demonstrated community service involvement before college emerged
as an important predictor of women's grades, high schools may develop linkages
with community agencies to expose students to a range of applied skills and
support persons. Support systems may
also be established through college mentor programs
whereby students receive help and advice from an encouraging individual. In
order to facilitate female student's realistic self-appraisal in the face
of faulty performance feedback, school counselors may employ cognitive
restructuring strategies. Psycho-educational groups may provide a way to
foster women's competency-related self-estimates in a supportive
milieu.
The
development of interventions such as those described above, and the creation of
environments which foster the personal and academic growth of female students,
requires further research on valid predictors of educational achievement. This
research must attend to the multiplicity of variables which impact student's
academic success.
Predicting Academic Achievement 11
Ancis, J. R. (1994). Academic gender
discrimination and women's behavioral agency self-efficacy. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University at Albany, New York.
Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical
years. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Astin, H.S., & Kent, L. (1983).
Gender roles in transition: Research and policy implications for higher
education. Journal of Higher Education, 54, 309-324.
Bernard, J. (1988). The inferiority
curriculum. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 261-268.
Betz, N. E. (1994). Basic issues and
concepts in career counseling for women. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. osipow
(Eds.). Career counseling for women ( pp. 1-41). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Betz, N. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F.
(1987). The career psychology of women. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Boyer, S. P., & Sedlacek, W. E.
(1988). Noncognitive predictors of academic success for international students:
A longitudinal study. Journal of College Student Development, 29, 218-223
.
Brush, S. G. (1991). Women in science
and engineering. American Scientist, 79, 404-419.
Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A.
(1978). The impostor phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and
therapeutic interventions. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 15
(3), 241-247.
Cromwell, B., Brown, N., Sanchez-Hucles,
J., Adair, F. L. (1990). The impostor phenomenon and personality
characteristics of high school honor students. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality,
5 (6), 563-573.
Danowitz Sagaria, M. A. (Ed.). (1988).
Empowering women: Leadership development strategies on campus (New Directions
for Student Services No. 44). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fehrs, M., & Czujko,.R. (1992).
Women in physics: Reversing the exclusion. Physics Today, 45, 33-40.
Fuertes, J. N. & Sedlacek, W. E.
(1994). Predicting the academic success of Hispanic college students using SAT
scores. College Student Journal, 28, 350-352.
Gamache, L. M., & Novick, M. R.
(1985). Choice of variables and gender differentiated prediction within
selected academic programs. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22, 53-70.
Hall, R. M. & Sandler, B. R.
(1982). The campus climate: A chilly one for women. Washington, DC: Project on
the Status.and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges.
Harvey, J. C., & Katz, C. (1985).
If I'm so successful, why do I feel like a fake. New York: Random House.
Huntington, R. (1986). Sexism in the
classroom. Equity and Excellence, 22, 100-04.
Leonard, M. M., & Sigall, B. A.
(1989). Empowering women student leaders: A leadership development model. In C.
S. Pearson, D. L. Shavlik, & J. G. Touchton (Eds.). Educating the majority:
Women challenge tradition in higher education (pp. 230249). New York: American
Council on Education-Macmillan.
Predicting
Academic Achievement 13
Orlofsky, J. L., & Stake, J. E.
(1981). Psychological masculinity and femininity: Relationship to striving and
selfconcept in the achievement and interpersonal domains. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 6, 218-233.
Ossana, S. M., Helms, J. E., &
Leonard, M. M. (1992). Do "womanist" identity attitudes influence
college women's selfesteem and perceptions of environmental bias? Journal of
Counseling and Development, 70, 402-408.
Pascarella, E. T.,-&
Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rosser, P. (1989). The SAT gender gap.
Washington, DC: Center for Women Policy Studies.
Sandler, B. R. (1987). The classroom
climate: Still a chilly one for women. In C. Lasser (Ed.), Educating men and
women together: Co-education in a changing world (pp. 113-123).
Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Sedlacek, W. E., & Adams-Gaston,
J. (1992). Predicting the academic success of student-athletes using SAT
and noncognitive variables. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 724-727.
Shavlik, D. L., Touchton, J. G., &
Pearson, C. S. (1989). The new agenda of women for higher education. In C. S.
Pearson, D. L. Shavlik, & J. G. Touchton (Eds.). Educating the majority:
Women challenge tradition in higher education (pp. 441-458). New York:
American Council on Education-Macmillan.
Stericker, A. B., & Johnson, J. E.
(1977). Sex role identification and self-esteem in college students: Do
men and women differ? Sex Roles, 3, 19-26.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ.
London: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). What would
better intelligence tests look alike? Measures in the College Admissions
Process (pp. 146150). New York: The College Entrance Examination Board.
Thorne, B. (1989). Rethinking the ways
we teach. In C.S. Pearson, Shavlik, D. L., & Touchton, J. G. (Eds.).
Educating the majority: Women challenge tradition in higher education (pp.
311325). New York: American Council on Education-Macmillan.
Tidball, M. E. (1986). Baccalaureate
origins of recent natural science doctorates. Journal of Higher Education, 57,
606-620.
Tidball, M. E. (1989). Women's
colleges: Exceptional conditions, not exceptional talent, produce high
achievers. In C.S. Pearson, Shavlik, D. L., & Touchton, J. G. (Eds.).
Educating the majority: Women challenge tradition in higher education (pp. 157-
172). New York: American Council on Education-Macmillan.
Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E.
(1981). A description and illustration of a model for conducting student
retention research. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators
Journal Field Report, 5 (2), 5-6.
Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E.
(1984). Noncognitive variables in predicting academic success by race.
Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 16, 171-178.
Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E.
(1985). The relationship of noncognitive variables to academic success: A
longitudinal
comparison
by race. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 405-410.
Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E.
(1989). Factor structure of the Noncognitive Questionnaire-revised across
samples of Black and White college students. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 49, 637-648.
|
Table 1: Significant * Zero-Order Correlations
Between NCQ and SAT Scores and Cumulative GPA Per Semester |
|
|
Variable |
r |
|
Semester 1 |
|
|
Positive Self Concept |
-0.08 |
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.12 |
|
Support Person |
0.05 |
|
Leadership Experience |
0.08 |
|
Community Service |
0.13 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.08 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.27 |
|
SAT Math |
0.27 |
|
Semester 3 |
|
|
Positive Self Concept |
-0.07 |
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.15 |
|
Handling Racism |
0.05 |
|
Support Person |
0.07 |
|
Leadership Experience |
0.08 |
|
Community Service |
0.15 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.1 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.26 |
|
SAT Math |
0.29 |
|
Semester 5 |
|
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.16 |
|
Handling Racism |
0.05 |
|
Support Person |
0.07 |
|
Leadership Experience |
0.11 |
|
Community Service |
0.16 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.12 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.25 |
|
SAT Math |
0.28 |
|
Semester 7 |
|
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.12 |
|
Handling Racism |
0.07 |
|
Support Person |
0.1 |
|
Leadership Experience |
0.09 |
|
Community Service |
0.15 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.12 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.18 |
|
SAT Math |
0.22 |
Note.
NCQ = Noncognitive Questionnaire. SAT = Scholastic Assessment Tests. GPA =
Grade Point Average. * p < .05
|
Table 2: Significant * Predictors of Cumulative GPA
Per Semester Using Multiple Regression |
||
|
Variable |
R |
Standardized Beta |
|
Semester 1 |
|
|
|
Community Service |
0.13 |
0.13 |
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.17 |
0.11 |
|
Positive Self Concept |
0.22 |
-0.14 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.23 |
0.06 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.36 |
0.18 |
|
SAT Math |
0.36 |
0.16 |
|
Semester 3 |
|
|
|
Community Service |
0.15 |
0.15 |
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.21 |
0.14 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.24 |
-0.14 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.37 |
0.15 |
|
SAT Math |
0.37 |
0.18 |
|
Semester 5 |
|
|
|
Community Service |
0.16 |
0.16 |
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.21 |
0.14 |
|
Positive Self Concept |
0.24 |
-0.1 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.25 |
-0.09 |
|
Leadership Experience |
0.26 |
0.05 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.36 |
0.13 |
|
SAT Math |
0.36 |
0.18 |
|
Semester 7 |
|
|
|
Community Service |
0.15 |
0.15 |
|
Realistic Self Appraisal |
0.18 |
0.11 |
|
Nontraditional Knowledge |
0.2 |
0.09 |
|
Support Person |
0.21 |
0.07 |
|
Positive Self Concept |
0.22 |
-0.07 |
|
SAT Verbal |
0.3 |
0.09 |
|
SAT Math |
0.3 |
0.14 |
Note.
SAT Verbal and SAT Math scores were entered together at the same step. *p <
.05.