COUNSELING CENTER

UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND AT COLLEGE PARK

COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND

Using the SAT and Noncognitive Variables

to Predict the Grades and Retention of

Asian-American University Students

Jairo N. Fuertes, William E. Sedlacek, &

William M. Liu

Research Report #8-93

Computer time for this project has been supported

through the facilities of the Computer Science Center of the

University of Maryland at College Park

COUNSELING CENTER

UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND AT COLLEGE PARK

COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND

Using the SAT and Noncognitive Variables to Predict

the Grades and Retention of Asian-American University

Students

Jairo N. Fuertes, William E. Sedlacek, &

William M. Liu

Research Report #8-93

Summary

The Noncognitive Questionnaire and SAT scores were significant predictors (p < .05) of grades and retention of 431 Asian-American students entering a large eastern university.

1

Asian-Americans have recorded a steady growth in higher education since 1980 (American Council on Education, 1993). This reflects not only an increase in numbers of Asian-Americans , but also the importance they place on education (Hsia & Hirano-Nakanishi, 1989; Hu, 1989; Nagasawa & Espinosa, 1992; Wang, 1993). Statistics show that between 1980 and 1990, the percentage of Asian-American students in college increased from 286,000 to 555,000, a 94% increase, compared with an 8.5% increase for Whites during the same time period (The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1992) .

A profile of most Asian-Americans in higher education shows a consistent pattern of enrollment in the sciences (Kohatsu & Sedlacek, 1990; Pace, 1990). This pattern can be explained by Asian-Americans' tendency to do well on quantitative scales, and parental and cultural encouragement toward these areas (Hsia & Hirano-Nakanishi, 1989: Nagasawa & Espinosa, 1992). Statistics for the year 1991 show that Asian Americans had the highest (Scholastic Assessment Tests; formerly Scholastic Aptitude Test) SAT Math score (530) in the United States, and the highest averaged combined total of any ethnic group (941; The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1992). At the University of California-Berkeley, the academic qualifications for Asian

2

Americans, measured by GPA and test scores, rose faster than for Whites (Wang, 1988). Moreover, a campus-wide study of University of California students found that SAT Math scores were a better predictor than SAT Verbal scores of first-year grades for Asian Americans, and the reverse was true for Whites (Nakanishi, 1989). Additionally, SAT Math achievement scores were a better predictor than English composition scores for Asian Americans, and the reverse was true for Whites (Nakanishi, 1989).

The success of students in mathematics and the sciences has lead to the popular image of Asian Americans as the model minority (Chan, 1991; Magner, 1993; Nagasawa & Espinosa, 1992; Okutsu, 1989; Toupin & Son; Wang, 1988). However, the model minority myth is an inaccurate depiction of Asian-Americans in higher education. Bennett and Okinaka (1990) found that, despite their low attrition rates, Asian-American students reported a negative quality of campus life as well as strong feelings of social alienation and dissatisfaction. Asian-Americans have been found to perform below the levels of Whites when socioeconomic status and prior intellectual background is held constant (Toupin & Son, 1991). Asian-Americans seem to be keenly aware of racial discrimination and institutional prejudices in the academic environment

3

(Sodowsky, Lai, & Plake, 1991, Wang, Sedlacek, & Westbrook, 1992).

The ability to cope with racism has been shown to be related to academic success for African-American and Hispanic college students (Sedlacek, 1989, 1993; Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984, 1985, 1987; Fuertes & Sedlacek, 1993). However, since Asian-Americans are often seen as a successful group, studies predicting their academic performance, let alone analyses of correlates of adjusting to racism have not generally be conducted.

Sedlacek, (in press) has proposed two criteria for consideration of a group as a "nontraditional" group. The first criterion is that prejudice is shown to exist toward a group. The studies noted above would seem to support that conclusion. The second criterion proposed by Sedlacek is that noncognitive variables be shown to predict academic success for the group.

Sedlacek (in press) contends that nontraditional groups tend to present their abilities in ways other than on the typical standardized examinations, such as the SAT, or what Sternberg (1986) calls componential intelligence. Sternberg's experiential and contextual types of intelligence concern abilities to be flexible in one's perceptions and to negotiate a system. The Noncognitive Questionnaire (NCQ) has been shown to measure constructs concerning having nontraditional

4

views of academic areas and being able to handle racism (Sedlacek 1989, 1993; Tracey and Sedlacek 1984, 1985, 1987).

The purpose of this study was to determine the validity of the NCQ and SAT as predictors of grades and retention of Asian-American university students.

METHOD

Participants and Procedures

The NCQ was administered over a ten-year period to random samples of entering Asian-American freshmen attending orientation at a large, predominantly White university in the northeast from 1979 to 1988. More than,90% of entering freshmen attended the orientation program. The NCQ was administered on randomly selected days and 100% participation was achieved on those days. Asian-American students comprise approximately 90 of the students at the university. The sample totaled 431 and 58% were male, and 99% were between 16 and 20 years of age.

5

Instrument

The NCQ (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984) is designed to assess eight noncognitive variables and contains 23 items: 18 Likert-format items, 2 multiple-choice items on educational aspirations, and 3 open-ended items pertaining to present goals, past accomplishments, and other activities. Test-retest reliabilities over a 2week interval ranged from .70 to .94 for each item, and the median test-retest reliability was found to be .85 (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984). Construct validity on the eight noncognitive dimensions was demonstrated using factor analysis (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984). The eight non-cognitive variables are 1) self-concept; 2) realistic self-appraisal, especially regarding academic abilities; 3) ability to identify and cope with racism; 4) preference for long-term goals; 5) availability of a strong support person; 6) demonstrated leadership experience; 7) demonstrated community service; and 8) acquired knowledge in a non-traditional area (see Exhibit 1).

Analyses

The NCQ items and SAT Verbal and Mathematical . scores were used as predictors in stepwise multiple regression to predict grades and in stepwise multiple discriminant analysis to predict retention over seven semesters. Analyses were done allowing all NCQ

6

variables to enter the equations first in a step-wise fashion, then either SAT score.

RESULTS

Predicting Grades

Table 1 shows zero-order correlations between NCQ scores and cumulative GPA and SAT scores and cumulative GPA per semester. Table 2 shows multiple regression results using NCQ and SAT scores as predictors of grades.

NCQ variables Self-Concept, Realistic, Self Appraisal and Community Service were related to GPA in semesters 1, 3 and 5 in both zero order and multiple correlations. Nontraditional Knowledge had a significant zero order correlation with GPA in all semesters studied, but was a significant contributor to multiple correlations in semesters 3 and 5 only. SAT scores had the highest zero order and multiple correlation contributions of any variable, with SAT Math having the highest correlations.

Handling Racism did not correlate with grades until semester 7, where it showed zero order and multiple correlation relationships to grades.

Generally, the zero order and multiple correlations were significant but low, and consistent across the years.

7

Predicting Retention

Table 3 shows significant predictions of student enrollment by semester. Table 3 shows discriminant analysis results using NCQ and SAT predictors and student enrollment as the criterion.

In semester 5 all predictors except Handling Racism contributed to a significant canonical correlation, while in semester 7 Handling Racism was related to retention but Leadership, Self Concept and SAT Verbal were not.

DISCUSSION

It appears that academic as well as non-academic variables are important and indicative of Asian American students' success in college. With regard to the SAT, mastery of the English language and of basic mathematical principles appear to be important to the success of Asian-American students in college. The importance of the SAT Mathematical score has been discussed by Nakanishi (1989), and it seems particularly important to a population which values the computational sciences.

Of particular interest are the noncognitive correlates of college success found in this study. It is important that Asian-American students have a positive self-concept, and confidence in their ability to negotiate the social demands of the college

8

environment. They also need to be able to identify and cope with racism, and to able to realistically appraise their academic and non-academic strengths in college. Interestingly, handling racism is a skill that is related to performance (grades and retention) later in Asian-American students' careers.

A consistent predictor of students' grades was demonstrated community service and acquired knowledge in a non-traditional area. Students who seek knowledge in a non-traditional area, for example, a cultural group and its history, appear to do well in their traditional scholastic activities in college. Students who are active in community activities not only show an interest in altruistic activities but also a command of their time and available resources. Noncognitive variables may be related to retention because they help students cope with reported feelings of alienation and dissatisfaction in college (Bennett and Okinaka, 1990). In particular, a positive self-concept, the availability of a strong support person on or off campus, and a preference for long-term goals appear to explain why some students persist in college and others do not. Students scoring high on these variables probably are better able to combat culture-shock to the campus, and feeling "home sick" during college.

9

Demonstrated community service may draw upon the Asian-American cultural value of communality; The sense that their actions reflect and influence the image of the group. This may indicate that why self-concept is related to community service among Asian Americans. Demonstrated community service may offer students a network of social support and a sense of belonging which is essential to student persistence. Additionally, self-concept, self-appraisal, and community service are related constructs that influence the formation of each other for Asian-Americans, who place value on personal responsibility to a larger group.

The noncognitive variables, such as knowledge in a non-traditional area, may reveal Asian-American learning in courses and on campus that do not allow for quantitative communication, but emphasize the use of the English language (e.g. an English compository course). The student is thus compelled to seek alternative ways of completing their course work through non-traditional learning methods. For example, a student that is challenged to write an essay may copy a style of writing that is easy for them to understand. Non-traditional learning may also reflect coping strategies among Asian-Americans who must reside on a predominantly White Campus. For example, they may feel

10 it is necessary to know about subjects that they are not interested in (e.g. football) in order to interact more meaningfully with non-Asian students.

There are some methodological limitations in the study that should be noted. First, the study represents the experience of one university in one geographical area and it may differ in other settings. However, the results appear compatible with other studies. Second, the aggregating of participants across years may be problematic in that it assumes some commonality of experience at the institution across those years. However, the technique did allow for achieving larger and potentially more statistically stable sample.

Third, there is an increased risk of a Type I error considering the number and type of analyses conducted (e.g., examine NCQ variables first). There was more concern here for making Type II errors and missing some existing relationships. The consistency of the findings across the analyses reduces the likelihood that a Type I error was made. Further study is needed with additional samples, and methods of analysis, to support or refute the findings presented here.

In conclusion, it appears Asian-American students share some characteristics with nontraditional student groups in that some noncognitive variables are related to their success in school. However, Sternberg's componential intelligence, as measured by SAT scores, appear to be the best predictors of Asian-American student success. Thus, it appears that the most valid selection system for Asian-Americans would include both cognitive and noncognitive variables.

12

References

American Council on Education (1993). Minorities in higher education: 1992 eleventh annual status report. Washington D.C.

Bennett, C. & Okinaka, A.M. (1990). Factors related to persistence among Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White undergraduates at a predominantly

White university: Comparison between first and fourth year cohorts. The Urban Review, 22, 33-60.

Chan, S. (1991). Asian=Americans: An interpretive history. Boston: Twayne Publishers.

Fuertes, J. N., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1993). A five-step program on handling racism for Hispanic students. Counseling Center Research Report

#1-93. University of Maryland, College Park.

Hsia, J. & Hirano-Nakanishi, M. (1989, November). The demographics of diversity: Asian Americans and higher education. Change Magazine,

(pp.20-27).

Hu, A. (1989). Asian Americans: Model minority or double minority? American Journal, 15, 243-257.

13

Kohatsu, E.L & Sedlacek, W.E. (1990). Breaking the myth: An analysis of Asian-Americans on a university campus over a decade (Research Report

No. 13-90). College Park: University of Maryland Counseling Center.

Magner, D.K. (1993, February 10). Colleges faulted for not considering differences in Asian-American groups. The Chronicle of Higher

Education, (pp.A32, A34).

Nagasawa, R. & Espinosa, D.J. (1992). Educational achievement and the adaptive strategy of AsianAmerican college students: Facts, theory, and

hypotheses. Journal of College Student Development, 33 (2), 137-142.

Nakanishi, D.T. (1989, November/ December). A quota on excellence? The Asian-American admissions debate. Change Magazine, 38-47.

Okutsu, J.K. (1989). Pedagogic hegemonicide and the Asian-American student. Amerasia Journal, 15, 233-242.

Pace, R. (1990). The undergraduates. Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.

Sedlacek, W.E. (1989). Noncognitive indicators of student success. Journal of College Admissions, 1 (Fall) (125),2-9.

14

Sedlacek, W. E. (1993). Employing noncognitive variables in admissions and retention in higher education. In Achieving diversity: Issues in

the recruitment and retention of underrepresented racial/ethnic students in higher education. (pp. 33-39) Evanston, Illinois. National

Association of College Admission Counselors.

Sedlacek, W. E. (in press). Issues in advancing diversity through assessment. Journal of Counseling and Development.

Sodowsky, G.R., Lai, E.W.M., & Plake, B.S. (1991). Moderating effects of sociocultural variables on acculturation attitudes of Hispanics and

Asian Americans. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 194-204.

Sternberg, R. J. What would better intelligence tests look like? Measures in the college admission process (pp. 146-150) New York. The

College Entrance Examination Board.

The Chronicle of Higher Education (August, 1992). Pg. 9, 11.

Toupin, E.S.W. & Son, L. (1991). Preliminary findings on Asian-Americans: "The model minority" in a small private east coast college. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 22 (3), 403-417.

15

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. (1987). Prediction of college graduation using noncognitive variables by race. Measurement and Evaluation in

Counseling and Development, 19, 177-184.

Wang, L.L.C. (1988). Meritocracy and diversity in higher education: Discrimination against AsianAmericans in the post-Bakke era. The Urban

Review, 20 (3), 189-209.

Wang, L.L.C. (1993). Trends in admissions for AsianAmericans in colleges and universities- Higher education policy. (The State of Asian

Pacific America: Policy Issues to the year 2020). (pp.49-60). Los Angeles: University of California, Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics-Asian Pacific American Public Policy Institute.

Wang, Y.Y., Sedlacek, W. E., & Westbrook, F. D. (1992). Asian-Americans and student organizations:

Attitudes and participation. Journal of College Student Development, 33 (3), 214-221.

17

Exhibit 1

Noncognitive Minority Admissions Variables

I. POSITIVE SELF-CONCEPT OR CONFIDENCE. Strong

self-feeling, strength of character.

Determination, independence.

II. REALISTIC SELF-APPRAISAL, especially

academic. Recognizes and accepts any

deficiencies and works hard at

self-development. Recognizes need to broaden

his/her individuality.

III. UNDERSTAND AND DEALS WITH RACISM. Realist

based upon personal experience of racism. Is

committed to fighting to improve existing

system. Not submissive to existing wrongs,

nor hostile to society, nor a "cop-out."

Able to handle racist system. Asserts school

or organization role to fight racism.

IV. PREFERS LONG-RANGE GOALS TO SHORT-TERM OR

IMMEDIATE NEEDS. Able to respond to deferred

gratification.

V. AVAILABILITY OF STRONG SUPPORT PERSON to whom

to turn in crises.

VI. SUCCESSFUL LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE in any area

pertinent to his/her background (gang leader,

church, sports, noneducational groups, etc.)

VII. DEMONSTRATED COMMUNITY SERVICE. Has

involvement in his/her cultural community.

VIII. KNOWLEDGE ACQUIRED IN A FIELD. Unusual

and/or culturally related ways of obtaining

information and demonstrating knowledge.

Field itself may be non-traditional.

18

Table 1: Significant* Correlations Between NCQ and SAT Scores with Cumulative GPA per Semester
Variable in Semester	r
Semester 1
Self Concept	0.11
Realistic Self Appraisal	0.12
Handling Racism	0.11
Community Service	0.14
Nontraditional Knowledge	0.13
SAT Verbal	0.2
SAT Math	0.38
Semester 3
Self Concept	0.11
Realistic Self Appraisal	0.16
Handling Racism	0.13
Community Service	0.13
Nontraditional Knowledge	0.22
SAT Verbal	0.15
SAT Math	0.36
Semester 5
Self Concept	0.12
Realistic Self Appraisal	0.15
Handling Racism	0.13
Community Service	0.13
Nontraditional Knowledge	0.19
SAT Verbal	0.22
SAT Math	0.35
Semester 7
Handling Racism	0.24
Nontraditional Knowledge	0.18
SAT Verbal	0.19
SAT Math	0.31

* p < .05 ** Stepwise for NCQ variables; then stepwise for two SAT scales.

Table 2: Significant* Predictors of Cumulative GPA by Semester Using Multiple Regression**
Predictors By Semester	R	Standardized Beta
Semester 1
Community Service	0.14	0.14
Realistic Self Appraisal	0.18	0.13
Self Concept	0.23	0.15
SAT Math	0.44	0.37
SAT Verbal	0.46	0.08
Semester 3
Nontraditional Knowledge	0.22	0.22
Realistic Self Appraisal	0.26	0.14
Self Concept	0.32	0.2
Community Service	0.34	0.12
SAT Math	0.47	0.33
SAT Verbal	0.48	0.01
Semester 5
Nontraditional Knowledge	0.19	0.19
Realistic Self Appraisal	0.22	0.13
Self Concept	0.27	0.18
Community Service	0.3	0.12
SAT Math	0.45	0.32
SAT Verbal	0.47	0.11
Semester 7
Handling Racism	0.24	0.18
SAT Math	0.37	0.29
SAT Verbal	0.38	0.09

*p<.05

**Stepwise for NCQ variables; then stepwise for two SAT scales.

20

Table 3: Significant* Predictors of Enrollment by Semester**
	Canonical Correlation	Standardized Discriminant Function	% Enrolled/ Graduated	%Enrolled/Graduated Correctly Predicted
Semester 1 and Semester 3			89%
No significant predictors
Semester 5	.27*	0.6	84%	64%
Self Concept
Realistic Self Appraisal		0.44
Leadership		0.38
Long Term Goals		0.36
Community Service		0.28
Nontraditional Knowledge		0.23
Support Person		0.16
SAT Math		0.54
SAT Verbal		0.19
Semester 7	.30*		77%	68%
Realistic Self Appraisal		0.58
Long Term Goals		0.4
Community Service		0.35
Nontraditional Knowledge		0.28
Support Person		0.26
Handling Racism		0.17
SAT Math		0.47

* p < .05

** Stepwise for NCQ variables, then stepwise for two SAT scales.