Page 122 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 122 of 136 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
114
Limitation of the Study
There were several limitations identified as noteworthy when considering the
results in this study. The following limitations are concerns related to this
investigation:
1. Previous scholastic achievement was recognized as the most significant
predictor of student success identified in this study, however, several limitations
associated with the interpretation of scholastic achievement in this study was noted;
First, the cumulative grade point average was not calculated using all college course
work completed, only the prerequisite courses was used in this calculation.
Therefore a true cumulative GPA was not determined. Second, the science grade
point average was calculated using anatomy, physiology and microbiology;
chemistry and physics prerequisite grades were not included in the GPAsci, but were
included in the calculation of the cumulative grade point average. Consequently, the
true science grade point average was not calculated for this study. Third, the number
of units that an individual took at any one time was not considered and therefore
does not truly reflect student ability to succeed. Fourth, the number of units taken at
any given time was not considered when assessing student academic ability.
Students who take one course at a time will probably have better course grades than
students who take multiple courses or a combination of complex courses at once.
Finally, the number of times a course was repeated was not calculated into the grade
point average for GPAsci or GPAcum. The number of times that a course was
completed was not considered in this study and was not considered in the admission
Object Description
| Title | A predictive valdity study: correlation of admission variables with program completion and student performance on the National Certification Examination in a physician assistant program |
| Author | Middleton, Delores E. |
| Author email | delores.middleton@rcc.edu; lolokinard@yahoo.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-29 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-18 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Jimenez y West, Ilda |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Cole, Darnell Hocevar, Dennis J. |
| Abstract | The purpose of this investigation was to examine the reliability and predictive validity of the of admission data in predicting student success in completing a community college-based physician assistant program and their performance on the National Certification Examination (NCE). The files of 170 graduates were reviewed and the following data was complied: 1) science grade point average (GPAsci), 2) cumulative grade point average (GPAcum), 3) reference letter ratings, 4) personal statement ratings, and 5) work experience -- each identified as a predictor measure in this study. The criterion measures identified in the study were 1) program completion, 2) performance on the NCE, and 3) skills. Findings demonstrated variations in the degree of relationship among predictor measures and criterion measures. The GPAsci demonstrated the greatest degree of correlation with student outcome in comparison with other predictor measures, which is consistent with previous research. Overall, the research demonstrated that there was practical significance or potentially significance correlations between the majority of the predictor measures. |
| Keyword | admission variable; criterion measures; national certification examination; criterion related evidence; reliability and predictive validy; prior academic achievement; letters of reference; personal statement; work experience |
| Coverage date | 1999/2005 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1678 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Middleton, Delores E. |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Middleton-2420 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume32/etd-Middleton-2420.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 122 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 114 Limitation of the Study There were several limitations identified as noteworthy when considering the results in this study. The following limitations are concerns related to this investigation: 1. Previous scholastic achievement was recognized as the most significant predictor of student success identified in this study, however, several limitations associated with the interpretation of scholastic achievement in this study was noted; First, the cumulative grade point average was not calculated using all college course work completed, only the prerequisite courses was used in this calculation. Therefore a true cumulative GPA was not determined. Second, the science grade point average was calculated using anatomy, physiology and microbiology; chemistry and physics prerequisite grades were not included in the GPAsci, but were included in the calculation of the cumulative grade point average. Consequently, the true science grade point average was not calculated for this study. Third, the number of units that an individual took at any one time was not considered and therefore does not truly reflect student ability to succeed. Fourth, the number of units taken at any given time was not considered when assessing student academic ability. Students who take one course at a time will probably have better course grades than students who take multiple courses or a combination of complex courses at once. Finally, the number of times a course was repeated was not calculated into the grade point average for GPAsci or GPAcum. The number of times that a course was completed was not considered in this study and was not considered in the admission |
