Schofield W, Garrard J
Br J Med Educ. 1975 Jun;9(2):86-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1975.tb01900.x.
This study evaluates a "mid period" follow-up evaluation of the outcomes of selection of medical students by customary committee review procedures versus actuarial selection. One-third of a freshman class was selected solely on the basis of a predictor index which was a previously validated, optimally weighted combination of scores on the Medical College Aptitude Test and the premedical grade-point average. The remaining two-thirds were selected by committee decision based on review of the total application file which, in addition to the aptitude test scores and academic record, included basic demographic data, information on extracurricular activities, avocational interests, work experience, letters of recommendation, personality test profiles, and interview impressions. In a previous study, it was reported that the two groups of students were undifferentiated with respect to their academic standing at the close of their sophomore year. In the present study, the actuarially selected and committee selected students were compared on class rank at the end of the junior year, total and subtest scores on part II of the National Board Examinations administered toward the close of their senior year, and type and location of internship, and practice or training status one year after graduation. The two groups were not reliably differentiated on any of these variables. Implications of the findings are discussed with respect to reliability, efficiency, and economy in the selection process and the function of the admissions committees with respect to borderline cases and issues of school policy and philosophy.
本研究评估了对通过常规委员会评审程序选拔医学生与精算选拔的结果进行的“中期”随访评估。一个新生班级的三分之一仅基于一个预测指标进行选拔,该指标是医学院入学能力测试成绩和医学预科平均绩点的先前验证过的、最佳加权组合。其余三分之二则由委员会根据对整个申请文件的审查来决定,申请文件除了能力测试成绩和学术记录外,还包括基本人口统计数据、课外活动信息、业余爱好、工作经历、推荐信、性格测试档案以及面试印象。在之前的一项研究中,据报道,两组学生在大二结束时的学业成绩方面没有差异。在本研究中,对精算选拔和委员会选拔的学生在大三结束时的班级排名、大四结束时进行的国家委员会考试第二部分的总分和子测试成绩、实习类型和地点以及毕业后一年的实习或培训状况进行了比较。在这些变量中的任何一个上,两组之间都没有可靠的差异。针对选拔过程中的可靠性、效率和经济性以及招生委员会在边缘情况和学校政策及理念问题方面的作用,对研究结果的影响进行了讨论。