Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A validation of some predictive criteria used by dental faculty admissions 1978

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1978_A8 W66.pdf [ 4.4MB ]
UBC_1978_A8 W66.pdf
Metadata
JSON: 1.0055788.json
JSON-LD: 1.0055788+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0055788.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0055788+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0055788+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0055788+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0055788.ris

Full Text

A VALIDATION OF SOME PREDICTIVE CRITERIA USED BY DENTAL FACULTY ADMISSIONS by WILLIAM WINSTON WOOD B.D.Sc, Melbourne U n i v e r s i t y , 1966 D.D.S., U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto, 1970 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES ( THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION ) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA SEPTEMBER 197 8 © William Winston Wood, 1978 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree ly ava i lab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th is thes is for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives . It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion o f th is thes is fo r f inanc ia l gain shal1 not be allowed without my wri t ten permission. Department of The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ABSTRACT A d m i s s i o n i n t o F a c u l t i e s o f D e n t i s t r y i s b a s e d h e a v i l y o n o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l a v e r a g e , p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e a n d D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t s c o r e s amongst o t h e r c r i t e r i a . The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s o n s u c c e s s i n t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . T h i s s u c c e s s was m e a s u r e d by s t a n d a r d i z e d g r a d e s f o r i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e s , a nd y e a r a v e r a g e s w h i c h w e r e t h e sum o f c o u r s e g r a d e s w e i g h t e d f o r u n i t v a l u e . A f u r t h e r m e a s u r e o f s u c c e s s i n p s y c h o m o t o r s k i l l s was d e n t o f o r m t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s f o r s e c o n d y e a r F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a n d O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y . D a t a w e r e c o l l e c t e d f r o m 312 s t u d e n t s a d m i t t e d t o t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a b e t w e e n 1969 a n d 1976. The d a t a w e r e o r g a n i z e d i n t o f i l e s o n w h i c h m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s w e r e p e r f o r m e d . The r e s u l t s o f t h e s e a n a l y s e s showed t h a t o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l a v e r a g e s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d .17 t o .29 w i t h e i g h t i n d i v i d u a l f i r s t a n d s e c o n d y e a r c o u r s e g r a d e s . O v e r a l l a v e r a g e a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d , . 3 6 w i t h f i r s t y e a r a v e r a g e a n d .29 w i t h s e c o n d y e a r a v e r a g e . i i i P r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e d i d n o t c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h a n y o f t h e c r i t e r i a s t u d i e d . Of t h e DAT s c o r e s , t h e c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w e r e b e t w e e n DAT M a n u a l A v e r a g e a n d f i v e i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e g r a d e s . T h e s e w e r e s e c o n d , t h i r d a n d f o u r t h y e a r R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (.36, .21 and .20 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , O r a l B i o l o g y O c c l u s i o n .31 a n d B i o c h e m i s t r y 300 a t .27. DAT M a n u a l A v e r a g e c o r r e l a t e d .20 w i t h s e c o n d y e a r a v e r a g e a n d .30 w i t h t h i r d y e a r a v e r a g e g r a d e s . M a n u a l A v e r a g e a l s o showed s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h p r e c l i n i c a l t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s , .38 w i t h F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a n d .32 w i t h O p e r a t i v e . C h a l k C a r v i n g showed c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s r a n g i n g f r o m ;20 t o .40 w i t h f i v e i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e g r a d e s . T h e s e w e r e s e c o n d and t h i r d y e a r R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y , O r a l B i o l o g y O c c l u s i o n , B i o c h e m i s t r y and Anatomy ( N e u r o ) . C h a l k C a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d .24 w i t h t h i r d y e a r a v e r a g e , .31 w i t h F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and .33 w i t h O p e r a t i v e t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s . DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h f i v e i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e g r a d e s i n t h e f i r s t t w o y e a r s , i t a l s o c o r r e l a t e d .2 0 w i t h f i r s t y e a r a v e r a g e . The r e m a i n i n g DAT s u b s c o r e s showed f e w s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s which c o u l d be used i n the s e l e c t i o n o f students f o r admission t o the F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y . I t i s recommended t h a t o v e r a l l average and c h a l k c a r v i n g should be g i v e n equal emphasis i n the s e l e c t i o n process and t h a t Manual Average may be d i s r e g a r d e d i f the c h a l k c a r v i n g score i s a v a i l a b l e . TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT L I S T OF TABLES CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I I : REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t B a t t e r y F a c t o r A n a l y s i s S t u d i e s P r e d i c t i v e S t u d i e s CHAPTER I I I : DESIGN OF THE STUDY P r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e D a t a F i l e A n a l y s i s o f t h e D a t a CHAPTER I V : RESULTS R e s t r i c t i o n o f Range C o r r e l a t i o n s o f I n d i v i d u a l C o u r s e G r a d e s w i t h P r e d i c t o r s C o r r e l a t i o n s o f Y e a r A v e r a g e s w i t h P r e d i c t o r s C o r r e l a t i o n s B e t w e e n Y e a r A v e r a g e s C o r r e l a t i o n s B e t w e e n T e c h n i q u e : S c o r e s a n d P r e d i c t o r s CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER V I : BIBLIOGRAPHY CHAPTER V I I : APPENDICES v i LIST OF TABLES TABLE I F a c t o r A n a l y s i s Summary o f L i t e r a t u r e TABLE II P r e d i c t i o n S t u d i e s Summary of L i t e r a t u r e TABLE I I I Summary of Regression Analyses TABLE IV Means and standard d e v i a t i o n s o f o v e r a l l averages and DAT subscores f o r t o t a l a p p l i c a n t s group and admitted group f o r e n t e r i n g years 1972 to 1976 Summary of r e s u l t s of r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y ses A 1 to A-:4 f o r f i r s t year course grades Summary of r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s A 1 to A 4 f o r second year course grades. Summary of r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y ses A 1 t o A 4 f o r t h i r d year course grades Summary o f r e s u l t s of r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y ses A 1 to A 4 f o r f o u r t h year course grades Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted 1st year averages and p r e r e q u i s i t e average, o v e r a l l average and DAT subscores f o r years e n t e r i n g 1972-76 TABLE X Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted 2nd year averages and p r e r e q u i s i t e average, o v e r a l l average and DAT subscores f o r years e n t e r i n g 1972-76 TABLE XI Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted 3rd year averages and p r e r e q u i s i t e average, o v e r a l l average and DAT subscores f o r years e n t e r i n g 1972-76 TABLE V TABLE VI TABLE VII TABLE V I I I TABLE IX page 15 18-22 37 42 45 46-47 48 49 53 54 55 v i i TABLE X I I TABLE X I I I TABLE X I V TABLE XV TABLE X V I TABLE X V I I S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n w e i g h t e d 56 4 t h y e a r a v e r a g e s a nd p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a n d DAT s u b s c o r e s f o r y e a r s e n t e r i n g 1972-76 S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n w e i g h t e d 57 t o t a l a v e r a g e s a n d p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a n d DAT s u b s c o r e s f o r y e a r s e n t e r i n g 1972-76 Means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s f o r 58 y e a r a v e r a g e , p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a nd DAT s u b s c o r e s f o r y e a r s e n t e r i n g 1972-76 Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n 59 a n a l y s e s B 1 t o B 4 f o r y e a r a v e r a g e a n d t o t a l a v e r a g e Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n 61 a n a l y s e s C 1 t o C 5. C o r r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n y e a r a v e r a g e s a n d p r e v i o u s y e a r a v e r a g e s S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n p s y c h o - 63 m o t o r a n d p e r c e p t u a l s c o r e s o f DAT and t e c h n i q u e c o u r s e g r a d e s i n f i x e d p r o s t h o d o n t i c s , o p e r a t i v e d e n t i s t r y a n d a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b o t h TABLE X V I I I Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n 64 a n a l y s e s D 1 t o D 6. C o r r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n p s y c h o m o t o r a n d p e r c e p t u a l s c o r e s o f DAT a n d t e c h n i q u e c o u r s e g r a d e s i n f i x e d p r o s t h o d o n t i c s , o p e r a t i v e d e n t i s t r y a n d a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b o t h 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The h i g h c o s t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e d u c a t i o n i n u n i v e r s i t i e s a n d t h e h i g h a t t r i t i o n r a t e i n p r o f e s s i o n a l s c h o o l s i n t h e e a r l y p a r t o f t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y l e d t o a n i n c r e a s i n g demand f o r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y b y g o v e r n m e n t a n d u n i v e r s i t y a d m i n i s t r a t o r s * , D e n t a l s c h o o l s i n N o r t h A m e r i c a a r e among t h e m o s t e x p e n s i v e o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l f a c u l t i e s a n d t h e p r e s s u r e o n d e n t a l a d m i s s i o n s ' p r o c e d u r e s l e d t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f b a t t e r i e s o f a p t i t u d e e t e s t s a i m e d a t p r e d i c t i n g s u c c e s s i n d e n t a l s c h o o l s . The f i r s t s c h o o l s t o d e v e l o p a p t i t u d e t e s t s w e r e t h e U n i v e r s i t y o o f Iowa i n 1927 a n d C o l u m b i a a n d New Y o r k U n i v e r s i t i e s i n 1929. T h e s e t e s t s w e r e e x p e r i m e n t a l a n d w e r e r e g a r d e d w i t h some s k e p t i c i s m b y d e n t a l e d u c a t o r s * / T h i s a t t i t u d e was r e f l e c t e d b y C o w l i n g (1943), who c o m p l a i n e d t h a t " . . . i n t h i s s t a t i s t i c a l age e v e r y q u a l i t y m u s t be m e a s u r e d ; s o i t seems. E x e c u t i v e s f r e q u e n t l y a r e f o r c e d t o a s s e n t t o t h e p r o n o u n c e m e n t s o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s i n p r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i r own j u d g m e n t . " 2 Although most d e n t a l s c h o o l s r e l i e d h e a v i l y on p r e d e n t a l grades as a b a s i s f o r s e l e c t i o n , few s t a t i s t i c a l s t u d i e s of t h e i r p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y had been undertaken p r i o r t o 1940. An e x c e p t i o n was McGrath, who analyzed data a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B u f f a l o i n a l t e r n a t e c l a s s e s from 1932 to 1940. McGrath's f i n d i n g of a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f .54 between p r e d e n t a l grades and t o t a l grade p o i n t average i n d e n t a l school i s c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r than t y p i c a l r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d today. Lower c o r r e l a - t i o n s found i n c u r r e n t s t u d i e s r e f l e c t the impact o f improved admissions procedures which r e s t r i c t the range of a b i l i t i e s of those who apply to d e n t a l s c h o o l s . T h i s r e s t r i c t i o n o ccurs through s e l e c t i o n of b e t t e r students and r e j e c t i o n of l e s s competent stu d e n t s . The standard d e v i a t i o n of the t o t a l group, taken as a measure of range of a b i l i t y , w i l l be g r e a t e r than the standard d e v i a t i o n of the s e l e c t e d group on t h a t same a b i l i t y , whether i t be academic or psychomotor. Thus, the more s e l e c t i o n by a b i l i t y o c c u r s , the lower w i l l be c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s between t h a t a b i l i t y and any c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e where the sample i s the s e l e c t e d group ( G u l l i k s e n , 1950). A f t e r s e v e r a l years of t e s t i n g , the nationwide Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g Program was i n s t i t u t e d i n 1951, and s i n c e 3 t h a t t i m e d e n t a l s c h o o l s i n t h e U.S.A. h a v e r e q u i r e d a p p l i c a n t s t o t a k e t h e D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t (DAT). S u b s e q u e n t l y , i n 1 9 6 6 , t h e C a n a d i a n D e n t a l A s s o c i a t i o n t o o k t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a d m i n i s t e r i n g a n d e v a l u a t i n g t h e DAT p r o g r a m f o r C a n a d a . The n a t u r e o f t h e DAT b a t t e r y h a s c h a n g e d o v e r t h e y e a r s a s r e l i a b i l i t y a n d v a l i d i t y s t u d i e s h a v e p r o d u c e d more d e t a i l e d i n f o r m a t i o n . I n t h e U.S.A. i n 1 9 7 7 , f i v e s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s w e r e u s e d f r o m w h i c h e l e v e n c o d e d s c o r e s w e r e d e r i v e d ( s e e A p p e n d i x A f o r c o d i n g m e t h o d , C h a p t e r I I f o r n a t u r e o f t e s t s a n d s c o r e s ) . I n C a n a d a i n 197 7 , t h e r e i s t h e c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e t e s t s u s e d i n t h e U.S.A. A l s o , t h e 1 6 P F , a p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s t e s t h a s b e e n a d m i n i s t e r e d o n a n e x p e r i m e n t a l b a s i s s i n c e 1 9 7 4 ; t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s t e s t a r e , a s y e t , u n p u b l i s h e d . The A m e r i c a n D e n t a l A s s o c i a t i o n D i v i s i o n o f E d u c a t i o n M e a s u r e m e n t s i n 1 9 7 5 , s u r v e y e d d e n t a l s c h o o l s t o d e t e r m i n e how t h e y u s e d i n f o r m a t i o n i n a d m i s s i o n s . N i n e t y - t h r e e p e r c e n t o f s c h o o l s r a t e d t h e p r e d e n t a l g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e a s " v e r y i m p o r t a n t " , t h e DAT was s e c o n d w i t h s e v e n t y - f i v e p e r c e n t o f s c h o o l s r a t i n g i t " v e r y i m p o r t a n t " . F i f t y - f o u r p e r c e n t r a t e d p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s v e r y h i g h l y . 4 R a t i n g o r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s by p r e d e n t a l a d v i s o r s w e r e c o n s i d e r e d v e r y i m p o r t a n t b y t h i r t y - n i n e p e r c e n t o f s c h o o l s . No o t h e r m e a s u r e was o f u n i v e r s a l i m p o r t a n c e . A t what c r i t e r i a a r e t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s a i m i n g ? S u c c e s s i n d e n t a l s c h o o l i s t h e o n l y c r i t e r i o n a t p r e s e n t b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d , a l t h o u g h one may l o o k f u r t h e r t o p r e d i c t s u c c e s s o f g r a d u a t e s . T h i s l a t t e r a r e a i s a s y e t n o t r e s e a r c h e d . The m a i n a i m o f d e n t a l s c h o o l s i s t o t r a i n a n d e d u c a t e d e n t i s t s f o r p r a c t i c e i n t h e c o m m u n i t y . A d d i t i o n a l l y , d e n t a l s c h o o l s a r e c h a r g e d w i t h t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l s f o r g r a d u a t e w o r k l e a d i n g t o s p e c i a l i z e d p r a c t i c e , t e a c h i n g a n d r e s e a r c h . I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t t h e d e n t a l c u r r i c u l u m h a s a b r o a d s p e c t r u m o f o b j e c t i v e s . T h e s e may be s u m m a r i z e d a s f o l l o w s : 1. A c a d e m i c e x c e l l e n c e i n b a s i c b i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e s a n d d e n t a l s c i e n c e s . 2. E x c e l l e n c e i n s u r g i c a l t e c h n i q u e s w i t h h a r d a n d s o f t t i s s u e s a n d m a n i p u l a t i o n o f d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s . 3. E x c e l l e n c e i n p a t i e n t management. 4. P r o f e s s i o n a l i s m . I n C a n a d a , t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s a r e met t o a g r e a t e r o r l e s s e r d e g r e e i n a f o u r - y e a r p r o g r a m o f s t u d i e s a f t e r a 5 t h r e e - y e a r p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l b a s i c s c i e n c e a n d a r t s p r o g r a m . The p r e d i c t i o n o f a c a d e m i c e x c e l l e n c e a n d m a n u a l d e x t e r i t y i n t h e s u r g i c a l a r e a s i s a i m e d a t b y b o t h e n t e r i n g g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e a n d DAT s c o r e s , w h i l e a n a t t e m p t w i l l be made i n t h e f u t u r e t o p r e d i c t s u c c e s s i n t h e b e h a v i o u r a l a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l a r e a s b y t h e n e w l y e m p l o y e d 16PF. Somee f a c u l t i e s i n C a n a d a a r e m a k i n g an a t t e m p t t o d e a l w i t h b e h a v i o u r a l a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l p r o b l e m s b y t h e u s e o f i n t e r - v i e w s . The 16PF a n d i n t e r v i e w t e c h n i q u e w e r e n o t i n v e s t i - g a t e d i n t h i s s t u d y . The A d m i s s i o n s C o m m i t t e e f o r t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a h a s u s e d o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l a v e r a g e , p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t s c o r e s , l e t t e r s o f r e f e r e n c e a n d p l a c e o f r e s i d e n c e a s c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i n g s t u d i e s . The C o m m i t t e e i s a s k e d t o a s s i g n s e v e n t y p e r c e n t o f a c a n d i d a t e ' s s c o r e t o o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a n d p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , t e n p e r c e n t t o DAT, and t h e r e m a i n i n g t w e n t y p e r c e n t f o r l e t t e r s o f r e f e r e n c e a n d p l a c e o f r e s i d e n c e . I t was t h e a i m o f t h i s s t u d y t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p r e d i c t i v e a v e r a g e , a n d DAT o n " s u c c e s s i n t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a " a n d t o make s p e c i f i c r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e u s e o f t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s . 6 These p r e d i c t o r s were i n v e s t i g a t e d f o r c o r r e l a t i o n with i n d i v i d u a l course grades, with year averages, and with an o v e r a l l average f o r the four years of d e n t a l s c h o o l . S e l e c t e d p r e d i c t o r s were i n v e s t i g a t e d f o r c o r r e l a - t i o n w i t h p u r e l y t e c h n i c a l grades as measures of p e r c e p t u a l and psychomotor a b i l i t i e s . The study was conducted on a t o t a l of 312 students admitted to the F a c u l t y of D e n t i s t r y between 1969 and 1976. 7 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The l i t e r a t u r e reviewed i n t h i s study encompasses m a t e r i a l r e l a t e d to the nature o f the Dental A p t i t u d ^ e T e s t b a t t e r y , f a c t o r a n a l y s i s s t u d i e s performed on the DAT as a whole, c e r t a i n s u b t e s t s o f the b a t t e r y , and p r e d i c t i v e s t u d i e s of the DAT and o t h e r academic c r i t e r i a . The nature of the DAT t r a c e s some of the h i s t o r y o f the t e s t b a t t e r y t o i t s p r e s e n t form. The DAT b a t t e r y has been s u b j e c t e d to f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i n o r d e r t o b e t t e r d e s c r i b e j u s t what i s being measured. The p r e d i c t i v e s t u d i e s cover an o v e r a l l approach c o r r e l a t i n g grade p o i n t average and DAT w i t h success i n d e n t a l s c h o o l . C l o s e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o the p e r c e p t u a l and manual p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f s u b t e s t s o f the DAT b a t t e r y i s done i n t h i s s e c t i o n . I t i s g e n e r a l l y the case t h a t p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades c o r r e l a t e more h i g h l y w i t h student performance i n d e n t a l s c h o o l than do DAT s c o r e s . T h i s happens because the p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grade p o i n t average r e p r e s e n t s a composite 8 of many tes t scores and grades received over a period of several years. Moreover, the preprofessional grade point average may r e f l e c t motivational factors which influence the academic performance of students i n dental school. In contrast, DAT academic scores constitute a more unitary measure of achievement and scholastic aptitude than preprofessional grades. Preprofessional grades have l i m i t a t i o n s which can be minimized by expressing them i n terms of standardized scores. There are variations between i n s t i t u t i o n s i n grading procedures. There are even variati o n s i n grading procedures within i n s t i t u t i o n s , and between the d i f f i c u l t y or l e v e l of courses within an i n s t i t u t i o n . Thus, by taking preprofessional grades, DAT academic average, and other relevant variables into consideration, better predictions r e s u l t . The Dental Aptitude Test Battery The D i v i s i o n of Educational Measurement of the American Dental Association i n 1951, designed the DAT battery to include f i v e types of predictive t e s t s : 1. Mental l e v e l 2. Reading comprehension 3. Science comprehension 4. V i s u a l i z a t i o n or space c o n c e p t i o n 5. C a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y In the U.S.A. i n 1977, e l e v e n coded scores from e i g h t s u b t e s t s were used. C a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y was dropped and the Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t became the P e r c e p t u a l Motor A b i l i t i e s t e s t . The e l e v e n coded scores were as f o l l o w s : A. QUANTITATIVE REASONING - p r e s e n t l y the DAQVT (Dental Admission Q u a n t i t a t i v e - V e r b a l Test) i s used t o y i e l d the " Q u a n t i t a t i v e Reasoning", V e r b a l Reasoning", and " T o t a l Q + V" s c o r e s . Q u a n t i t a t i v e r e a s o n i n g o r numerical a b i l i t y i s the a b i l i t y t o reason w i t h numbers, t o manipulate numerical r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and t o d e a l i n t e l l i g e n t l y w i t h q u a n t i t a t i v e m a t e r i a l s . B. VERBAL REASONING - l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t y o r v e r b a l r e a s o n i n g i s the a b i l i t y t o use and understand the meaning o f words. C. TOTAL Q + V - t h i s score i s a combination o f the " Q u a n t i t a t i v e Reasoning" and the "Verbal Reasoning" s c o r e s . I t i s sometimes r e f e r r e d t o as an " i n t e l l i g e n c e " s c o r e . T h i s t e s t has broad norms, 10 thus, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o compare d e n t a l a p p l i c a n t s w i t h c o l l e g e p o p u l a t i o n s i n g e n e r a l . The comparisons are r o u t i n e l y made by the Admissions T e s t i n g Committee and any t r e n d s , e i t h e r f a v o u r - a b l e or unfavourable, are r e p o r t e d immediately t o the d e n t a l s c h o o l s . D. READING COMPREHENSION - a r e a d i n g t e s t i s o f t e n a b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r of s c h o l a s t i c success than i s an i n t e l l i g e n c e o r mental l e v e l t e s t . T h i s i s an instrument t o measure the a p p l i c a n t ' s a b i l i t y t o read, o r g a n i z e , analyze and comprehend new i n f o r m a t i o n . I t i s a measure of r e a d i n g compre- hension and i s not a speed t e s t . E. BIOLOGY - t h i s s c o r e i s a measure o f the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f the elementary p r i n c i p l e s of b i o l o g y and a b i l i t y t o apply these p r i n c i p l e s . F. INORGANIC CHEMISTRY - t h i s score i s a measure of the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f the most elementary p r i n c i p l e s of i n o r g a n i c c h e m i s t r y and a b i l i t y t o app l y these p r i n c i p l e s . G. ORGANIC CHEMISTRY - t h i s score i s a measure o f the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge of the most elementary p r i n c i p l e s o f o r g a n i c chemistry and a b i l i t y t o 11 apply these p r i n c i p l e s . H. TOTAL SCIENCE - the t o t a l s c i e n c e i s a combination o f E, P and G above and r e f l e c t s the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f f a c t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n i n b i o l o g y and che m i s t r y and a b i l i t y t o apply t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . I. PMAT/2D - t h i s score r e f l e c t s the a b i l i t y o f the a p p l i c a n t t o d e a l w i t h and s o l v e two dimensional p e r c e p t u a l problems. J . PMAT/3D - t h i s score measures the a p p l i c a n t ' s a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h and s o l v e t h r e e dimensional p e r c e p t u a l problems. P a r t s of the Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t f o r m e r l y i n c l u d e d i n the Dental Admission T e s t are a l s o i n c l u d e d i n t h i s s u b t e s t . K. MANUAL AVERAGE - i s a PMAT average of 2D and 3D. In Canada i n 1977, the coded scores d e r i v e d a r e : A. ACADEMIC AVERAGE - t h i s i s a combination o f B, C, D, E below. B. READING COMPREHENSION - as f o r the U.S.A. C. BIOLOGY - as f o r the U.S.A. D. INORGANIC CHEMISTRY - as f o r the U.S.A. E. TOTAL SCIENCE - as f o r the U.S.A. u s i n g o n l y b i o l o g y and i n o r g a n i c chemistry. 12 F. 2D - as f o r the U.S.A. G. 3D - as f o r the U.S.A. H. PMAT AVERAGE - average o f 2D and 3D I. CHALK CARVING - c a r v i n g t e s t u s i n g a k n i f e , a r u l e and a p i e c e o f c h a l k . The c r i t e r i a measured are l e n g t h s , sharp a n g l e s , f l a t p l a n e s , symmetry and s i m i l a r i t y t o the p l a n g i v e n . K. MANUAL AVERAGE - a combination o f 2D, 3D, and ch a l k c a r v i n g weighted by ch a l k c a r v i n g . In the U.S.A., a f t e r t w e n t y - f i v e years of use, the cha l k c a r v i n g t e s t was r e p l a c e d by the PMAT i n 1972. However, i n Canada, the c a r v i n g t e s t was dropped f o r a sh o r t p e r i o d between A p r i l 1972, and January 1975. I t was then r e - i n t r o d u c e d f o r f u r t h e r v a l i d a t i o n s t u d i e s s i n c e i t s d i s c o n t i n u a n c e was accepted w i t h mixed f e e l i n g s by many s c h o o l s . Althoughhthe p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the PMAT and c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t are s i m i l a r , many people are not convinced t h a t the c h a l k c a r v i n g should be dropped. The l a c k of f i n g e r d e x t e r i t y as a c o n s t r u c t i n the DAT b a t t e r y has concerned many. Peterson (1974) speaks s t r o n g l y i n favour o f the ch a l k c a r v i n g t e s t and c l a i m s i t i s p a r t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the a t t r i t i o n r a t e dropping from as much 13 as f i f t y per c e n t i n the middle 1940's t o the n a t i o n a l average of s i x per cent i n 1973. He c l a i m s t h a t the simple f a c t t h a t a manual d e x t e r i t y t e s t i s i n the DAT b a t t e r y adds t o the a p p l i c a n t ' s c o n c e p t i o n t h a t he i s t r u l y b e i n g t e s t e d i n d i g i t a l d e x t e r i t y . Graham (1972) showed t h a t i n f i v e separate s t u d i e s i n f o u r c o n s e c u t i v e y e a r s , the PMAT (2-3D) and c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t s performed e q u a l l y i n p r e d i c t i n g success i n t e c h n i c a l performance i n a sample o f U.S.A. d e n t a l s c h o o l s . The c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t i s an expensive t e s t t o a d m i n i s t e r , e s p e c i a l l y on l a r g e numbers of a p p l i c a n t s whose c a r v i n g s have t o be m a i l e d t o e v a l u a t i o n c e n t r e s w i t h the po;s;s:3jbil]3i.%y o f damage. Even though the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f the two t e s t s i s the same, they do measure d i f f e r e n t fcon's'ttu'cts^, as shown by Z u l l o (1971 b ) . However, the DAT Committee deci d e d to d i s c o n t i n u e the c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t i n the U.S.A. Much emphasis i s p l a c e d on p e r c e p t u a l and psycho- motor t e s t s mainly because of the p a u c i t y o f i n f o r m a t i o n about these c o n s t r u c t s f o r c a n d i d a t e s e n t e r i n g d e n t a l s c h o o l . A d d i t i o n a l l y , approximately h a l f o f the time spent i n d e n t a l s c h o o l i s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o these s k i l l s . 14 F a c t o r A n a l y s i s S t u d i e s S e v e r a l s t u d i e s have shown s i m i l a r r e s u l t s r e g a r d i n g the nature of the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t b a t t e r y . A summary of these i s shown i n Table I. Chen, .<ret ffatl. (1967) found t h a t the c a r v i n g a b i l i t y t e s t o f the DAT measured a f a c t o r r e l a t e d t o temperament r a t h e r than d i g i t a l s k i l l and t h a t the e n t i r e DAT b a t t e r y w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f q u a n t i t a t i v e and v e r b a l r e a s o n i n g and c a r v i n g a b i l i t y measures one common f a c t o r suggested t o be c o g n i t i v e f a c i l i t y . Dworkin (1970) found t h a t the r e s u l t s o f a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s of the t h i r t e e n scores o f the DAT based on the data o b t a i n e d from the c l a s s o f 1966, a t New York«;Univer- s i t y y i e l d e d t h r e e f a c t o r s : 1. Science f a c t o r w i t h l o a d i n g s by academic average, b i o l o g y , chemistry, f a c t u a l s c i e n c e , s c i e n c e a p p l i c a t i o n , t o t a l s c i e n c e and r e a d i n g . 2. Manual f a c t o r w i t h l o a d i n g s by manual average*; s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s and c a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y . 3. I n t e l l i g e n c e f a c t o r w i t h l o a d i n g s by academic average, i n d i v i d u a l S c h o l a s t i c and C o l l e g e :/. A p t i t u d e T e s t (SCAT) and r e a d i n g . These r e s u l t s do not va r y g r e a t l y from those o f the TABLE I FACTOR ANALYSIS - SUMMARY OF LITERATURE Authors and Year o f Study Sample St u d i e d V a r i a b l e s E x t r a c t i o n / T r an s fo rma t i on R e s u l t s 1. Padshadley, Chen and Shrock, 1967 72 j u n i o r s U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a 196 5-66 DAT s u b t e s t s p r i n c i p l e componeht/na* 1. Temperament f a c t o r loaded by c a r v i n g t e s t . 2. C o g n i t i v e f a c i l i t y loaded by remainder o f DAT. 2. Dworkin, 19 70 123 students 1966 c l a s s of New York School o f D e n t i s t r y 13 scores o f DAT na/varimax 1.Science f a c t o r , l o a d i n g s by b i o l o g y , chemistry, f a c t u a l s c i e n c e , s c i e n c e a p p l i c a t i o n , t o t a l s c i e n c e , r e a d i n g . 2.Manual f a c t o r , l o a d i n g s by manual average, s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s , c a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y . 3. Z u l l o , 1971 111 students 196 8 Freshmen U n i v e r s i t y o f P i t t s b u r g h 7 subt e s t s o f DAT p r i n c i p l e component/ varimax 1. V e r b a l science 2. A b s t r a c t reasoning 3. Carving d e x t e r i t y . 4. Z u l l o , 19 71 100 students 1968-69 U n i v e r s i t y o f P e r c e p t u a l and motor a b i l i t i e s p r i n c i p l e component/ varimax 1 . S p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s loaded on d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r y from PMAT and PMAT d i d not l o a d on d e x t e r i t y f a c t o r s . 5. F u l l and F o l e y , 1971 119 Freshmen U n i v e r s i t y of Iowa, 196 7, 1968 DAT averages De n t a l Anatomy P r e d e n t a l GPA 1st y e a r GPA p r i n c i p l e component/ varimax 1. Academic p o t e n t i a l 2. D e x t e r i t y and space 3. Anatomy s u r v i v a l 6. Graham, 19 74 1163 randomly sampled from 19 73 U.S. DAT Program. PMAT items operator c h o i c e / varimax 1. Block design 2. Length of l i n e s 3.3D drawing 4.Space r e l a t i o n s 5.Sequence of id e a s 6.Passing o b j e c t through h o l e . * n/a - i n f o r m a t i o n not s t a t e d 16 t e s t d e s i g n e r s . Reading comprehension i s not a separate f a c t o r but does l o a d on both s c i e n c e and i n t e l l i g e n c e . In a d d i t i o n , the manual f a c t o r appears t o r e p r e s e n t both v i s u a l i z a t i o n and space c o n c e p t i o n and c a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y . Dworkin suggested f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f these f i n d i n g s . Z u l l o (1971 a) looked a t o n l y the seven s u b t e s t s o f the DAT used a t t h a t time and found s i m i l a r l y t h a t o n l y three f a c t o r s emerged. He l a b e l l e d t h e s e : 1. V e r b a l s c i e n c e 2. A b s t r a c t r e a s o n i n g 3. C a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y . Z u l l o (1971 b) f a c t o r - a n a l y z e d p e r c e p t u a l and motor a b i l i t i e s i n d e n t a l students and produced f i n d i n g s i n c o n f l i c t w i t h Chen, e t a l . He suggested t h a t h i s d e f i n i t i o n of manual d e x t e r i t y may be d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f Chen whose t e s t s f o r manual s k i l l s are more g e n e r a l l y accepted. Z u l l o observed from h i s a n a l y s i s t h a t the S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s t e s t o f the DAT loaded on a d i f f e r e n t s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s f a c t o r from the P e r c e p t u a l Motor A b i l i t y T e s t (PMAT). F u r t h e r , the PMAT loaded on the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s f a c t o r but not on any of the d e x t e r i t y f a c t o r s e x t r a c t e d . F u r t h e r evidence t h a t the PMAT does not measure any motor a b i l i t y i n a p o s i t i v e f a s h i o n i s 17 offered by the tests that loaded on the Bipolar Factor. This factor i s so named because of the opposite p o l a r i t y of the factors loading on i t . The finger dexterity t e s t and to a lesser degree the chalk carving t e s t loaded p o s i t i v e l y on t h i s factor, whereas the PMAT loaded negatively. F u l l and Foley (1971) performed a factor analysis on nine variables including three DAT averages, dental anatomy grades, predental, and f i r s t year grade point averages (GPA). They found three factors emerging which they l a b e l l e d academic p o t e n t i a l , dexterity and space, and anatomy s u r v i v a l . The anatomy s u r v i v a l , as would be expected, rel a t e s highly to f i r s t year grade point average, but not to academic p o t e n t i a l . This indicates that performance i n f i r s t year i s related to anatomy but not to the predictive t e s t s . Graham (1974) performed a factor analysis of the items of the PMAT (which now included space r e l a t i o n s as part of the test) and observed that six separate factors emerged: 1. Block design 2. Length of l i n e s 3. 3D drawing . TABLE II PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF LITERATURE Authors and Sample P r e d i c t o r C r i t e r i o n . . . Year o f Study S t u d i e d V a r i a b l e s V a r i a b l e s M a i n F i n d i n 9 s 1. P a r k i n , 1958 Nationwide p o p u l a t i o n of freshmen d e n t a l students P r e p r o f . GPA, DAT academic and technique average, other DAT s u b t e s t Freshmen technique GPA, theory GPA C o r r e l a t i o n o f .34 between p r e p r o f . grades and freshmen theory grades; c o r r e l a t i o n o f .28 between DAT academic average and freshmen theory scores grades. 2. T o c c h i n i , Endy, Thomassen and Reinke, 1961 148 students from graduat- i n g c l a s s e s 1955-57 a t U n i v e r s i t y o f Age, p r e r e q . GPA, p r e p r o f . GPA Four-year d e n t a l school GPA C o r r e l a t i o n not r e p o r t e d ; p r e p r o f . GPA b e s t p r e d i c t o r , then DAT academic average and m a r i t a l s t a t u s . the P a c i f i c 3. DeRevere, 1961 U n i v e r s i t y o f P e n n s y l v a n i a c l a s s o f 1959 Space r e l a t i o n s , c h a l k c a r v i n g . 1st year o p e r a t i v e technique grades, 4th year c l i n i c a l o p e r a t i v e grades .37 and .39 between 1st year o p e r a t i v e and chalk c a r v i n g and space r e l a t i o n s r e s p e c t - i v e l y . .26 between 4th y e a r c l i n i c and chalk c a r v i n g . Same f o r space r e l a t i o n s . 4. Hood, 1963. 30 0 freshmen d e n t a l students admitted from 1957-60 a t U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota P r e p r o f . GPA, DAT academic average, other DAT s u b t e s t s , p r e p r o f . c o l l e g e attended. Years o f pre- p r o f . e ducatior age, m a r i t a l s t a t u s . Freshmen over- a l l theory grades, technique grade p o i n t average. .49 c o r r e l a t i o n between p r e p r o f . GPA and o v e r a l l d e n t a l GPA; .51 c o r r e l a t i o n between p r e p r o f . GPA and theory GPA i n d e n t a l s c h o o l ; c o r r e l a t i o n o f .36 and .33 between DAT academic average and o v e r a l l and theory GPA i n d e n t a l s c h o o l . TABLE II - continued PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF LITERATURE Authors and Year o f Study Sample S t u d i e d P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s Main F i n d i n g s Manhold and Manhold, 1965 1960-64 graduating c l a s s a t Seton H a l l . T o t a l number o f students ranged from 134 to 140. DAT academic average, DAT manual average p r e p r o f . s c i e n c e GPA, p r e p r o f . non- s c i e n c e GPA, p r e p r o f . over- a l l GPA Four-year d e n t a l school o v e r a l l GPA, b a s i c s c i e n c e GPA, p r e c l i n i c , GPA, c l i n i c . GPA. C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .32 between DAT academic average and b a s i c science i n d e n t a l s c h o o l , p r e p r o f . s c i e n c e grades c o r r e l a t e d .22 and .40 with b a s i c s c i e n c e GPA i n d e n t a l s c h o o l . 6. H e l l e r , Carson and Douglas, 1965 88 students i n 1961, 87 students i n 1962, 79 students i n 1963 a t U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s . DAT manual average, DAT academic average, p r e p r o f . s c i e n c e GPA, p r e p r o f . non- s c i e n c e GPA, p r e p r o f . t o t a l hours, t o t a l s c i e n c e hours, t o t a l non- l s t year over- a l l grades, 1st year theory grades, 1st year technique grades. s c i e n c e hours. DAT academic average c o r r e l a t i o n s ranged from .22 to .27 with o v e r a l l GPA i n d e n t a l s c h o o l ; DAT academic average c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h theory grades i n only one of three c l a s s e s . C o r r e l a t i o n s h i g h between a l l c a t e g o r i e s o f p r e p r o f . grades and c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s , e.g. .61 f o r 1961 between p r e d e n t a l grades and theory grades i n d e n t a l s c h o o l . G i n l e y , 1966 500 s e n i o r d e n t a l students chosen randomly from a n a t i o n a l p o p u l a t i o n DAT manual average, DAT academic average, DAT s u b t e s t s c o r e s . Theory grades of s e n i o r s , technique grades of s e n i o r s . i n C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .21 f o r 1962 and 1964 between DAT academic average and theory grades. A l l DAT scores except f o r space r e l a t i o n s i n 1962 c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with theory grades. C o r r e l a t i o n s ranged from .06 to .23 1962 and 19 64 '. TABLE II, - continued PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF LITERATURE Authors and Year o f Study Sample S t u d i e d P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s Main F i n d i n g s 8. Manhold and Manhold, 196 7 Seton H a l l 8-year study DAT academic DAT manual General s c i e n c e grades o v e r a l l av. B a s i c s c i e n c e s , P r e c l i n i c a l d e n t a l s c i e n c e s , c l i n i c a l av., f i n a l standing. Chalk p r e d i c t e d p r e c l i n i c a l and c l i n i c a l performance b e t t e r than space r e l a t i o n s . 9. Fernandez-Pabon, 1968. 3 c l a s s e s a t U n i v e r s i t y o f C a r o l i n a , 1955, N = 40 1965, N = 49 1966, N = 47 O v e r a l l c o l l e g e av, o v e r a l l c o l l e g e s c i e n c e av, t o t a l c o l l e g e c r e d i t hours, c o l l e g e s c i e n c e c r e d i t hours, DAT manual, academic av. 1st year t o t a l GPA, 4th year t o t a l GPA, b a s i c s c i e n c e GPA, l a b o r a t o r y technique GPA No s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between p r e p r o f . grades or academic DAT w i t h f o u r year GPA; o v e r a l l c o l l e g e grade was b e s t p r e d i c t o r o f b a s i c s c i e n c e GPA - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f .50 and .28 f o r 1955 and 1966 c l a s s e s . DAT s u b t e s t . 10. P h i p p s , F i shman, S c o t t , 1968 1960-1963 gr a d u a t i n g c l a s s e s o f U n i v e r s i t y o f B u f f a l o (361 students P r e p r o f . r e q u i r e d GPA, e l e c t i v e GPA,. t o t a l GPA, DAT academic av, DAT manual av, DAT s u b t e s t s c o r e s . Freshmen d e n t a l school DAT. C o r r e l a t i o n s of DAT academic average with 1st and 4th year d e n t a l students .19 and .20. T o t a l p r e p r o f . grades c o r r e l a t e d .41 and .39 w i t h 1st and 4th year grades. Required and e l e c t i v e p r e p r o f GPA not as e f f e c t i v e i n p r e d i c t i n g success as t o t a l p r e p r o f . grade s. o TABLE I I - continued PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF LITERATURE Authors and Sample P r e d i c t o r C r i t e r i o n Year o f Study S t u d i e d V a r i a b l e s V a r i a b l e s 11. K r e i t and MacDonald, 1968 510 students from e i g h t g r a d u a t i n g c l a s s e s a t Indiana U n i v e r s i t y School o f D e n t i s t r y (1956-6 3) P r e p r o f . grades, DAT academic and manual average, other DAT s u b t e s t s . Dental school GPA, N a t i o n a l Boards, P a r t I, N a t i o n a l Boards, P a r t I I . C o r r e l a t i o n o f .38 between pr e p r o f . grades and o v e r a l l d e n t a l school GPA. C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .24 between DAT academic average and de n t a l school grades. 12. Dworkin, 19 70 134 students from 19 66 c l a s s o f New York U n i v e r s i t y School o f D e n t i s t r y P r e p r o f . GPA, years o f pre- p r o f . educ- a t i o n , DAT manual av, DAT academic av, ot h e r DAT su b t e s t s c o r e s . Freshman, sopho- more, j u n i o r , s e n i o r theory and technique grades, freshman GPA i n d e n t a l s c h o o l , o v e r a l l c l a s s standing. S i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .25 and .43 between DAT academic average and freshman and sophomore theory grades. C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .19 and .24 between pr e p r o f . grades and freshman and sophomore theory grades. 13. Grainger, 1972 Canadian N a t i o n a l A l l DAT scor e s Chalk c a r v i n g g i v e s f a l s e negatives but not f a l s e p o s i t i v e s . 14. B e l l a n t i , Mayberry, T i r a , 1972. UMKC 3 years 344 students DAT c a r v i n g , DAT space v i s u a l i z a t i o n , DAT g e n e r a l achievement, GPA (predent.) P r e c l i n i c a l F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s grades C a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y .37 w i t h technique grades. TABLE I I - continued PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF LITERATURE Authors and Year o f Study Sample . S t u d i e d P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s Main F i n d i n g s 15. Chebib, 19 74 U n i v e r s i t y o f Manitoba, f i v e c l a s s e s . 11 DAT scores, chemistry, p h y s i c s , b i o l o g y , p r e d e n t i s t r y GPA. D i d a c t i c average l a b o r a t o r y average, c l i n i c average f o r each year and f o r a l l years. Manual average and l i s t y ear l a b o r a t o r y .46. Second year l a b o r a t o r y .42. Chalk c a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d .36 to .45 wit h l a b o r a t o r y o r c l i n i c f o r a l l four y e a r s . 16. Thompson, 19 75 Canadian N a t i o n a l A l l DAT s c o r e s . PMAT and chalk c a r v i n g .36 with each o t h e r . 17. Thompson, 1977 Canadian N a t i o n a l DAT scores 16PF scores D i d a c t i c average P r e c l i n i c a l average. Chalk and p r e c l i n i c a l .19 and PMAT and p r e c l i n i c a l .15. NJ 23 4. Space r e l a t i o n s 5. Sequence of ideas 6. P a s s i n g an o b j e c t through a h o l e . He suggested t h a t stepwise m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s should be a p p l i e d t o these d a t a when c r i t e r i o n measures are a v a i l a b l e t o determine whether subscores of the PMAT on these f a c t o r s would g i v e b e t t e r p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y than the t o t a l t e s t s c o r e . To date t h i s has not been p u b l i s h e d . P r e d i c t i v e S t u d i e s i A summary o f the p r e d i c t i v e s t u d i e s i s presented i n Table I I . Many of the s t u d i e s i n the l i t e r a t u r e r e f l e c t the f a c t t h a t p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades are the bes t p r e d i c t o r s of academic performance i n d e n t a l s c h o o l , and t h a t the p r e d i c t a b i l i t y i n c r e a s e s when used i n combination w i t h DAT academic average. P a r k i n (1958) examined a U.S. n a t i o n a l sample and found a c o r r e l a t i o n of .35 between p r e d e n t a l grades and f i r s t year t h e o r y grades and a c o r r e l a t i o n o f .28 between DAT academic and f i r s t year theory grades. T o c c h i n i e t a l (1961) found t h a t the bes t p r e d i c t o r s of success were grade p o i n t average, DAT academic average and m a r i t a l s t a t u s . They found t h a t m a r ried students performed b e t t e r than unmarried students. 24 Hood (1963) employed twenty-two p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s and t h r e e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s i n a study i n v o l v i n g 300 freshmen students admitted t o the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota School of D e n t i s t r y from 1957 t o 1960. He found t h a t o n l y two p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s , p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grade p o i n t average and DAT manual average, c o n t r i b u t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n (R) o f .50 w i t h freshman technique grades. In c o n t r a s t , R's f o r p r e d i c t i n g t h e o r y and o v e r a l l freshman grades were .60 and .61 w i t h the same p r e d i c t o r s . H e l l e r , Carson and Douglas (1965) s t u d i e d d a t a from 254 students of the e n t e r i n g c l a s s e s o f 1961, 1962 and 1963, to the U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s , u t i l i z i n g m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n techniques i n v o l v i n g e i g h t p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s . For each of the t h r e e c l a s s e s , m u l t i p l e Rs i n p r e d i c t i n g freshmen technique grades w e r e p d i s a p p o i n t i n g , * 22-,*?": 1'9 .and .29. M u l t i p l e Rs f o r p r e d i c t i n g f i r s t year theory and f i r s t year t o t a l grades ranged from .40 to .60. The f i n d i n g t h a t i t was more d i f f i c u l t to p r e d i c t motor s k i l l s performance than academic performance, r e p o r t e d by H e l l e r e t a l , i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the r e s u l t s of Hood's (1963) study. Phipps, Fishman and S c o t t (1968), found i t was not p o s s i b l e t o p r e d i c t c l i n i c a l grades, although they 25 o b t a i n e d f a i r l y good r e s u l t s i n p r e d i c t i n g v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a i n v o l v i n g academic performance. The p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s employed by Phipps and h i s c o l l e a g u e s were p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l r e q u i r e d GPA, p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l e l e c t i v e GPA, t o t a l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l GPA, and the t h i r t e e n s c o r e s d e r i v e d from the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t . However, i n t h e i r study, f a i l u r e s and dropouts were omitted which r e s t r i c t e d the range of the c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e c o n s i d e r a b l y . Manhold and Manhold (1965) found DAT academic average was the best p r e d i c t o r o f b a s i c s c i e n c e s and i n 1967, suggested t h a t c h a l k c a r v i n g p r e d i c t e d p r e c l i n i c a l technique and c l i n i c a l performance b e t t e r than space r e l a t i o n s or a combination of the two. K r e i t and MacDonald (1968) found a c o r r e l a t i o n o f .38 between p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades and f i n a l d e n t a l school grade p o i n t average f o r 509 students over an e i g h t year p e r i o d a t Indiana U n i v e r s i t y . The c o r r e l a t i o n between DAT academic average and f i n a l d e n t a l s c h o o l grades was fonllyj .25. Combining p r e d e n t a l grades w i t h DAT academic average to p r e d i c t f i n a l d e n t a l s c h o o l grades y i e l d e d a modest i n c r e a s e to a m u l t i p l e R of .44 and 2 R of .19. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , i n t h i s study, the r e a d i n g 26 comprehension s u b t e s t and the t o t a l s c i e n c e score were as e f f e c t i v e as the DAT academic average i n p r e d i c t i n g d e n t a l s c h o o l grades. T h i s was found a l s o by G r a i n e r (1972) i n a n a t i o n a l survey i n Canada. He a l s o found t h a t c h a l k c a r v i n g g i v e s some f a l s e n e g a t i v e s but no f a l s e p o s i t i v e s and t h a t those students who score 4 o r b e t t e r on the t e s t never f a i l e d or dropped out o f the courses i n v o l v i n g manual d e x t e r i t y . L a t e r , G r a i n g e r (1974) added t h a t the c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t y i e l d e d a measurement o f c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and d i g i t a l d e f t n e s s . In a study done a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f M i s s o u r i a t Kansas C i t y , B e l l a n t i e t a l (1972) found t h a t c a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y c o r r e l a t e d .39 t o .51 wit h an o v e r a l l c o r r e l a - t i o n o f .37 w i t h f i x e d p r o s t h o d o n t i c technique grades. Thompson (1975) found PMAT average and c h a l k c a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d .36 w i t h each other and obtained s i m i l a r r e s u l t s i n 1976. H i s s t u d i e s were on the Canadian n a t i o n a l r e s u l t s . In 1977, he found a c o r r e l a t i o n of .19 between c h a l k c a r v i n g and p r e c l i n i c a l technique grades and .15 between PMAT average and p r e c l i n i c a l grades. In Dworkin's study (1970) i n v o l v i n g 134 students of the c l a s s of 1966 a t New York U n i v e r s i t y , i t was found t h a t m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s between p r e d i c t o r 27 v a r i a b l e s and sophomore and s e n i o r technique averages were .45 and .36, u t i l i z i n g the f i r s t f i v e v a r i a b l e s of the stepwise a n a l y s i s . T h i s c o n t r a s t s w i t h the i n i t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s of .37 between DAT manual average and sophomore technique grades, and -.17 between DAT academic average and s e n i o r technique grades. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note t h a t f o r s e n i o r technique grade p o i n t average, the academic p o r t i o n o f the DAT was more h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h technique grades than was .the manual p o r t i o n of the DAT. Chebib (1974) a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f Manitoba found the c o r r e l a t i o n between the manual average and f i r s t year technique courses to be .46 and second year technique courses .42. He a l s o found t h a t the academic average of DAT c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h GPA throughout the f i r s t t h r e e years and showed no c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h technique performance. Chalk c a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i - c a n t l y w i t h technique and c l i n i c performance throughout the f o u r years ranging from .36 t o .45. Most s t u d i e s t y p i c a l l y found low but s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between the manual p o r t i o n o f the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t and performance i n d e n t a l s c h o o l . In some cases, the c o r r e l a t i o n s may have been 28 s p u r i o u s l y low because the c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e was contaminated with non-technique c o u r s e s . T h i s was the case i n the study conducted by K r e i t and MacDonald (1968). An average c o r r e l a t i o n of .26 was found between the manual p o r t i o n of the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t and t o t a l grade p o i n t average i n d e n t a l s c h o o l f o r the 502 students on whom data were a v a i l a b l e d u r i n g the e i g h t year p e r i o d . C o r r e l a t i o n s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n f o u r of the e i g h t c l a s s e s ; the h i g h e s t c o r r e l a t i o n o b t a i n e d f o r any c l a s s was .38. DeRevere (1961) used more r e f i n e d c r i t e r i a i n h i s p r e d i c t i o n study; grades i n the f i r s t year o p e r a t i v e techniques course and grades i n the f o u r t h year c l i n i c s . C o r r e l a t i o n s of .37 and .39 were found between freshmen o p e r a t i v e technique grades and the c h a l k c a r v i n g and s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t s r e s p e c t i v e l y . In c o n t r a s t , c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .26 and .26 were found between f o u r t h year c l i n i c grades and the c h a l k c a r v i n g and s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t s r e s p e c t i v e l y . The d i s c r e p a n c y between the c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the f o u r t h year v e r s u s the freshmen grades may r e f l e c t g r e a t e r r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y o f freshmen o p e r a t i v e technique grades asaa c r i t e r i o n measure of p e r c e p t u a l motor s k i l l s i n DeRevere's study. 29 S e v e r a l workers have i n v e s t i g a t e d other t e s t s t o p r e d i c t psychomotor a b i l i t y . These i n c l u d e Smith (1976) , Deubert, et a l , '(1975) and B r i g a n t e and Lamb (1968). B r i g a n t e and Lamb d e s c r i b e d a s e r i e s of mechanical d e v i c e s they developed a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a School o f D e n t i s t r y , which were designed t o measure p e r c e p t u a l motor a p t i t u d e s o f a p p l i c a n t s . Thdy were b e t t e r a b l e t o p r e d i c t the technique performance of d e n t a l students u s i n g the t e s t s they developed than by the manual p o r t i o n o f the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t . The p e r c e p t i o n and c o n t r o l t e s t s they used were designed to measure e l e v e n a b i l i t i e s : 1. T a c t i l e p a l p a t i o n 2. P u r p o s e f u l hand d i r e c t i o n 3. Depth p e r c e p t i o n 4. V i s u a l a c u i t y 5. T a c t i l e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n 6. Hard / s o f t s e n s i t i v i t y 7. Surface contour matching 8. F i n g e r p r e s s u r e c o - o r d i n a t i o n 9. F i n g e r t e n s i o n c o - o r d i n a t i o n 10. Hand s t e a d i n e s s w i t h support 11. Texture s e n s i t i v i t y . 30 They found that correlations between t h e i r t e s t battery and technique course grades ranged between .42 and .58 over a three year period for f o r t y to s i x t y - f i v e students i n each year. By contrast, the chalk carving t e s t correlated between .21 and .26 f o r the same students. Since then, no further reports on t h i s subject have appeared i n the l i t e r a t u r e . In a Canadian survey, Grainger (1973) found that females performed better than males i n dental school and that younger students performed better than older. Graham (1976) on a similar group found that eight per cent of applicants were female but eleven per cent were accepted. He concluded, however, that there was not a large enough discrimination on which to base admissions p o l i c y . Some work has been done with regard to attitudes and personality. An unpublished report to the Canadian Dental Association by Thompson (1977), compared admitted applicants with rejected applicants on the basis of a d u l l / b r i g h t range as measured by the i n t e l l i g e n c e scale of the 16PF. No s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found. There was a wide range of d u l l and bright students throughout each group. 31 To summarize, the c o r r e l a t i o n s of p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l o v e r a l l average w i t h f i r s t year theory ranged from .19 by Dworkin to .60 by H e l l e r e t a l . Hood, P a r k i n , and P.hip.pjs.i a l l observed c o r r e l a t i o n s i n t h i s range. DAT academic average c o r r e l a t e d w i t h f i r s t year t h e o r y .25 a c c o r d i n g to Dworkin and w i t h o v e r a l l GPA i n d e n t a l s c h o o l .22 by H e l l e r e t a l and .36 by Hood. P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l o v e r a l l average c o r r e l a t e d w i t h o v e r a l l GPA i n d e n t a l s c h o o l from 0.0 by Ferandez-Pabon to .49 by Hood w i t h K r e i t and McDonald, and Phipps o b t a i n i n g c o r r e l a t i o n s i n t h i s range. Chalk c a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d w i t h technique grades from .19 by Thompson t o .42 by Chebib w i t h most o t h e r s i n c l u d i n g B e l l a n t i e t a l , DeRevere o b t a i n i n g c o r r e l a t i o n s of .37. Manual average a l s o c o r r e l a t e d s t r o n g l y w i t h technique grades r a n g i n g from .36 t o .46 by Chebib. G e n e r a l l y , the o n l y p r e d i c t o r s c u r r e n t l y b e i n g measured c o r r e l a t i n g w i t h any c r i t e r i a of success i n d e n t a l s c h o o l are p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l o v e r a l l average, DAT academic average, DAT manual average and c h a l k c a r v i n g . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t o n l y the one s u b t e s t o f the DAT b a t t e r y i s , g e n e r a l l y speaking, o f any p r e d i c t i v e v a l u e , although the two averages - academic and manual - are of v a l u e . 32 CHAPTER I I I DESIGN OF THE STUDY The purpose of t h i s study was to i n v e s t i g a t e the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l average, p r e r e q u i s i t e average, and Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t b a t t e r y on "success i n the F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia". "Success" was measured i n s e v e r a l ways. F i r s t l y , grades f o r i n d i v i d u a l courses throughout the f o u r year d e n t a l program were used. Secondly, year averages which were the averages of the grades f o r courses a c r o s s the year weighted a c c o r d i n g to u n i t v a l u e as assigned by the i n s t i t u t i o n were used. T h i r d l y , as a measure of psychomotor and p e r c e p t u a l "success", technique grades from the second year F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y courses were used. F i n a l l y , a c o r r e l a t i o n between years t o estimate the p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f one year by another was done. P r e p a r a t i o n o f the Data F i l e Data were c o l l e c t e d from the f i l e s o f 312 d e n t a l students admitted t o the F a c u l t y of D e n t i s t r y a t The 33 U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia between 1969 and 1976. The v a r i a b l e s were: 1. O v e r a l l e n t e r i n g average: A percentage score r e p r e s e n t i n g the average of a l l courses over the t h r e e or f o u r years of p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l e d u c a t i o n . Student grades from the U n i v e r s i t y o f V i c t o r i a , the U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , and Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y were converted t o a percentage score a c c o r d i n g t o the c o n v e r s i o n t a b l e presented i n Appendix B. Student s c o r e s from o t h e r u n i v e r s i t i e s were taken a t f a c e v a l u e s i n c e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n t o the s c a l e used by The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia was not p o s s i b l e . 2. P r e r e q u i s i t e average: A percentage score r e p r e s e n t i n g the average of a l l the p r e r e q u i s i t e courses f o r admission i n t o the F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y . The courses are l i s t e d i n Appendix C. 3. Subscores of the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t b a t t e r y : These were norm-referenced scores coded ase presented i n Appendix A and r e p r e s e n t i n g s u b t e s t s and averages as presented i n Chapter I I . 4. The course grades f o r each student i n the d e n t a l 34 program. A grade expressed as a M c C a l l ' s T standard s c o r e . The standard score f o r each course was d e r i v e d a c c o r d i n g t o the formula: Score = 50 + ( r f m e f ? ) x 10 'standard d e v i a t i o n T h i s was done so t h a t a l l grades a c r o s s years f o r a p a r t i c u l a r course c o u l d be pooled f o r the purpose o f a n a l y s i s . 5. Weighted Year Averages: As the DAT s u b t e s t compo- s i t i o n changed somewhat around the years 1970-72 and s t a b i l i z e d i n 1973, i t was decided t o analyze o n l y the data from 1972 onwards. An average grade f o r a l l courses i n each year was c a l c u l a t e d f o r each student w e i g h t i n g the standard s c o r e s a c c o r d i n g t o u n i t v a l u e of the course (see Appendix D). (The u n i t value i s a measure of course time. One hour l e c t u r e and a t h r e e hour l a b o r a t o r y o r c l i n i c s e s s i o n each week f o r the year r e p r e s e n t s 3.0 u n i t s . ) Subsequently, an o v e r a l l average f o r each o f the f o u r years and f o r the t o t a l d e n t a l program was c a l c u l a t e d f o r each student. Thus, f i v e c l a s s e s of f i r s t year students e n t e r i n g from 1972-76 t o t a l l i n g 195 s t u d e n t s , f o u r 35 c l a s s e s o f second year students e n t e r i n g from 1972-75 t o t a l l i n g 157 stude n t s , t h r e e c l a s s e s o f t h i r d year students e n t e r i n g from 1972-74 t o t a l l i n g 109 students, two c l a s s e s o f f o u r t h year students e n t e r i n g from 1972-73 t o t a l l i n g 71 studen t s , and 76 students.over a l l f o u r years were examined. Hence, a new s e t of f i v e dependent v a r i a b l e s was c r e a t e d . 6. St a n d a r d i z e d Technique Grades: Second year technique course grades i n F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y developed from e v a l u a t i o n of dentoform technique work u n t a r n i s h e d by any d i r e c t d i d a c t i c grades. The second year c l a s s e s of 1976, 1977 and 1978 were used. The method o f t e a c h i n g and e v a l u a t i o n f o r each o f these two courses was constant over t h i s p e r i o d as were the f a c u l t y members who taught the c o u r s e s . s During t h i s time, the i n s t r u c t o r s developed a gr a d i n g procedure which was c o n c e p t u a l l y r e l i a b l e , though i t s r e l i a b i l i t y was unmeasured. The grades were developed on a 10-point system a t f i r s t by each i n d i v i d u a l and subsequently d i s c u s s e d u n t i l a mutually agreeable grade was e s t a b l i s h e d . 36 For O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y , the dentoform technique work c o n s i s t e d o f c l a s s I , I I and V amalgam a l l o y p r e p a r a t i o n s and r e s t o r a t i o n s and c l a s s I I I , IV and V composite crown p r e p a r a t i o n s . For F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s , c l a s s i c a l crown p r e p a r a t i o n s were r e q u i r e d o f the students i n c l u d i n g f u l l g o l d , 3/4 g o l d , o n l a y , ceramo metal and p o r c e l a i n j a c k e t . Gold c a s t i n g s and temporary r e s t o r a t i o n s were a l s o r e q u i r e d . For these y e a r s , a l l s u b j e c t s completed the 2D f 3D and PMAT t e s t s , the 1975-76 and 1976-77 years completed the ch a l k c a r v i n g , and o n l y the 1976-77 year had a manual average recorded. A n a l y s i s o f the Data Computer f i l e s were c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h these data and a n a l y s i s performed by a packaged program TRP ( T r i a n g u l a r Regression Package) on the AMDAHL 470 Model V6 computer. T h i s program c o n s i s t e d of a step-wise m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s . The l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r both e n t e r i n g and d e l e t i n g v a r i a b l e s was .05. A summary o f the r e g r e s s i o n analyses i s presented i n Table I I I . 37 "•TABLE I I I SUMMARY OF REGRESSION ANALYSES Dependent V a r i a b l e A. l . . I n d i v i d u a l course grades 2. I n d i v i d u a l course grades 3. I n d i v i d u a l course grades 4. I n d i v i d u a l course grades Independent V a r i a b l e O v e r a l l average P r e r e q u i s i t e average DAT averages O v e r a l l average P r e r e q u i s i t e average DAT s u b t e s t s DAT averages DAT s u b t e s t s B. 1. Weighted year average grades 2. Weighted year average grades 3. Weighted year average grades 4. Weighted year average grades O v e r a l l average DAT average O v e r a l l average DAT s u b t e s t s DAT averages DAT s u b t e s t s C. 1. Second year average grades 2. T h i r d year average grades 3. Fourth y e a r average grades 4. T h i r d year average grades 5. Fourth year average grades 6. Fourth year average grades F i r s t y ear average grades F i r s t y e a r average grades F i r s t y ear average grades Second year average grades Second year average grades T h i r d year average grades D. 1. F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique grades 2. F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique grades 3. Ope r a t i v e technique grades 4. Operative technique grades 5. Combined Op e r a t i v e and P r o s t h o d o n t i c s grades 6. Combined Operative and Pr o s t h o d o n t i c s grades PMAT, Manual average 2D, 3D, cha l k c a r v i n g PMAT, Manual average 2D, 3D, chalk c a r v i n g PMAT, Manual average 2D, 3D, chalk c a r v i n g 38 Tatsuoka (1969) wrote "Use of t h i s t o o l (multiple regression equation) i s indicated whenever one wishes to make quantitative predictions on some c r i t e r i o n variable (such as success on a job or i n college) on the basis of scores on several predictor variables - such as tests of general a b i l i t y , s p e c i f i c aptitudes, personality t r a i t s , i n t e r e s t patterns and the l i k e . I t i s therefore indispensable when one undertakes to valid a t e a battery of t e s t s being used for screening candidates for school admission.'..." Houston and Mensh (1975) support t h i s stand, but Chambers (1972) i s very c r i t i c a l of the regression model. His reasons are that: 1. there i s a selection of redundant predictors. 2. there i s an in t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t of some predictors. 3. the predictors may be non-linear. 4. the c r i t e r i o n variables are heterogeneous. However, these reasons are, at least i n part, f a l l a c i o u s . Stepwise methods do not select redundant predictors and, i f divided c a r e f u l l y into groups of sub- te s t s and averages, do not have much in t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t . The non-linearity of predictors has not been reported previously. Fernandez-Pabon (1968) was i n agreement with Chambers and suggested a d d i t i o n a l l y the problems of 39 r e s t r i c t i o n o f range of the c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e , the u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f the c r i t e r i o n , s m a l l sample s i z e s , and the f a i l u r e t o c r o s s v a l i d a t e . Since each a n a l y s i s was based on l i n e a r i t y o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the dependent v a r i a b l e and each of the p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s , a scattergram of each independent v a r i a b l e w i t h each dependent v a r i a b l e was made and i n s p e c t e d v i s u a l l y t o ensure t h a t no n o n - l i n e a r c o r r e l a - t i o n s e x i s t e d . S e l e c t i o n of the students by the Admissions Committee of the Dental F a c u l t y of The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia was made mainly on the b a s i s o f o v e r a l l academic average, t a k i n g i i n t o account the improvement made d u r i n g the t h r e e q u a l i f y i n g years and the types of courses making up the average. L e s s e r importance was p l a c e d on DAT sco r e s and l e t t e r s o f r e f e r e n c e and a p p l i c a t i o n " p r o v i d e d by the a p p l i c a n t . P r i o r i t y was g i v e n to B r i t i s h Columbians - so much so t h a t v e r y few oth e r Canadian o r f o r e i g n a p p l i c a n t s gained admission. Since s e l e c t i o n i s based h e a v i l y on o v e r a l l average, a c o r r e c t i o n f o r r e s t r i c t i o n o f range r e s u l t i n g from e x p l i c i t s e l e c t i o n was i n v e s t i g a t e d t o estimate the c o r r e l a t i o n between the independent v a r i a b l e s and the 40 dependent variables (R) for the unrestricted group. The formula was: SX r — s x - •• - R = • • • (Gullicksen, 1950) n 2 ^ 2 ,SX.2 1 - r + r (—) * x where r i s the c o r r e l a t i o n between the variables for r e s t r i c t e d group, S x i s the standard deviation of the t o t a l group including e l i g i b l e unsuccessful applicants, and s i s the standard deviation of the r e s t r i c t e d x group, i . e . the admitted students. I t should be noted that the above correction may be applied only to the applicant group. I t i s noted that there i s an additional R e s t r i c t i o n of range i n the form that s i x t y - f i v e per cent o v e r a l l average i s required before the Admissions Committee w i l l accept an application for review. R e s t r i c t i o n of range r e s u l t i n g from e x p l i c i t s e l e c t i o n was also investigated for a l l the subscores of the DAT. 41 CHAPTER IV RESULTS The r e s u l t s o f the a n a l y s i s o f the data are presented i n the f o l l o w i n g o r d e r . There i s a d i s c u s s i o n of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of r e s t r i c t i o n o f range f o l l o w e d by the c o r r e l a t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l courses w i t h p r e d i c t o r s , year averages w i t h p r e d i c t o r s , c o r r e l a t i o n s between year averages and f i n a l l y c o r r e l a t i o n s between technique scores and p r e d i c t o r s . R e s t r i c t i o n of Range As seen i n G u l l i c k s e n ' s formula (see Chapter I I I ) f o r c o r r e c t i o n of a c o r r e l a t i o n f o r r e s t r i c t i o n of range r e s u l t i n g from e x p l i c i t s e l e c t i o n , a comparison o f the standard d e v i a t i o n s of the grades of the t o t a l group of a p p l i c a n t s t o the admitted group i s necessary. I n s p e c t i o n of Table IV f o r the years e n t e r i n g 1972 to 1975 r e v e a l s t h a t the standard d e v i a t i o n s of the grades o f the two groups are s i m i l a r and i n some cases the standard d e v i a t i o n f o r the admitted group was g r e a t e r than t h a t o f the t o t a l a p p l i c a n t s . Thus, to c o r r e c t the c o r r e l a t i o n s TABLE IV : MEANS (X) AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS (S) OF OVERALL AVERAGES AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR TOTAL APPLICANTS GROUP AND ADMITTED GROUP FOR ENTERING YEARS 1972 TO'1976 Year OVAV AA MA RC BIOL INCHEM TOTSCI 2D 3D PMAT CHALK T o t a l X 72.6 4. 74 4.40 4.4 8 4.98 no 5.54 no no no 4.15 1972-73 s 4. 96 1.39 1.45 2.07 1.91 t e s t 1.95 t e s t t e s t t e s t 1.76 n=163 Admit X 75.1 5.24 4.53 4.92 5.50 6.29 4.16 s 4.36 1.50 1.57 2.17 1.61 1.66 2.26 T o t a l X 73. 4 4. 75 no 4.66 4.82 5.24 4.02 4.01 4.25 4.00 1973-74 s 5.0 8 1.33 t e s t 2.04 1.85 1.77 2.08 1.99 1.84 1.70 n=164 Admit X 77.6 5.29 5.0 8 5.21 6.13 5. 89 5.00 3.74 4.06 4.57 s 4.62 1.29 1.91 1. 85 1.63 1.80 1.87 1. 71 1.60 1.27 • T o t a l X 74.3 5.20 no 4. 75 5.51 5.44 6.55 4.63 4.26 4.94 no 1974-75 s ' 5.47 1.76 t e s t 2.08 1.46 1.70 1.60 2.04 1. 79 1.81 t e s t n=116 Admit X 78. 8 5.92 5.05 5.67 6.15 6.18 4.90 5.28 5.23 s 4.88 1.46 1.83 1.53 1.41 1.32 2.19 1. 76 2.02 T o t a l X 74.9 4.64 no 4.76 4.67 5.04 4.13 4.54 4.61 4.79 1975-76 s 5.93 1.69 t e s t 1.60 1.92 1.70 2.13 1.90 1. 85 1.71 n=104 Admit X 78.4 4.95 3.80 5.15 5.40 5.78 4.55 4.85 4.81 5.28 s 4.56 1.72 1.86 1.44 1. 78 1.58 2.12 1.78 1. 80 1.53 T o t a l X n/a* n/a 4.43 n/a n/a n/a n/a 4.23 4.24 4.42 4.14 1976-77 s 2.07 1.84 1.75 1.77 2.06 n=201 Admit X 78. 3 5. 73 5.13 5.2 8 4.83 5.05 5.35 4.35 4. 38 4.63 4.81 s 3.89 1. 38 2.09 1.63 1.81 1.91 1.55 1.53 1.53 1.48 2.21 *n/a - Data not used i n t h i s study. f o r r e s t r i c t i o n o f range by e x p l i c i t s e l e c t i o n was o f no v a l u e . C o r r e l a t i o n s of I n d i v i d u a l Course Grades wi t h P r e d i c t o r s The r e s u l t s of the f i r s t f o u r r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s (Al to A4) as l i s t e d i n Table I I I are presented i n T a b l e s V - V I I I a c c o r d i n g t o y e a r s . Four r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s were performed f o r each c o u r s e , the r e s u l t s o f which are entered i n columns 1 - 4 f o r each course. A. 1. I n d i v i d u a l course grades 2. I n d i v i d u a l course grades 3. I n d i v i d u a l course grades 4. I n d i v i d u a l course grades O v e r a l l average P r e r e q u i s i t e average DAT averages O v e r a l l average P r e r e q u i s i t e average DAT s u b t e s t s DAT averages DAT s u b t e s t s Each e n t r y i s the v a l u e of the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t a t the time the a s s o c i a t e d v a r i a b l e entered the r e g r e s s i o n equation as a p r e d i c t o r . For example, f o r ANAT 401, o v e r a l l average was the o n l y v a r i a b l e t o e n t e r the f i r s t e q u a t i o n , thus .24 r e p r e s e n t s the zero order c o r r e l a t i o n . O v e r a l l average e n t e r e d the second equation b e f o r e BIOL, hence 1 2 .24 r e p r e s e n t s a zero o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n and .17 r e p r e s e n t s 44 a f i r s t o r d e r p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n . Zero o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n r e f e r s t o the Pearson Product Moment c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h no v a r i a b l e p a r t i a l l e d out. From Tables V - V I I I , c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s o f the o v e r a l l average w i t h i n d i v i d u a l course grades were g e n e r a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t f o r f i r s t and second year c o u r s e s , e s p e c i a l l y those courses i n b a s i c s c i e n c e s , i . e . Anatomy (ANAT 400, 401, 425), P h y s i o l o g y (PHYL 400, 425), Pharmacology (PCOL 425) , O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 423) and M i c r o b i o l o g y (MICR 425) ranging from .17 to .29. The DAT academic average tended t o support these c o r r e l a t i o n s , but l e s s s t r o n g l y , ranging f o r f i r s t and second year from .08 t o .22. T o t a l Science e x h i b i t e d weak c o r r e l a t i o n s . DAT Manual Average c o r r e l a t e d w i t h p r e c l i n i c a l and c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y grades (REST 422, 431, 441) .36, .21 and .20 f o r second, t h i r d and f o u r t h years r e s p e c t i v e l y . DAT Manual Average c o r r e l a t e d w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y O c c l u s i o n (ORBI 42 0) .31 and a l s o c o r r e l a t e d .27 w i t h B i o c h e m i s t r y (BIOC 300) which has now become a p r e r e q u i s i t e course. PMAT average c o r r e l a t e d n e g a t i v e l y w i t h grades f o r s i x c o u r s e s , o n l y one of which i n v o l v e s any psychomotor or p e r c e p t u a l s k i l l s and p o s i t i v e l y w i t h p r e c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 422) grades a t .21 TARTfl V SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF REGRESSION ANALYSES Al TO 4 FOR FIRST YEAR COURSE GRACES Mean S.D. ANAT 400 1 2 3 4 ANAT 401 1 2 3 4 1 BICC 2 300 3 4 ORBI 410 1 2 3 4 PHYL 400 1 2 3 OVAAV 76.81 5.00 .23 .23 .24 .241 .162 .231 .231 PREAV 76.04 6.71 EAT AVERAGES DATAC 5.26 1.47 .221 .221 DftOJftN 4.73 1.70 .271 .271 .162 .162 TOTSCI 5.82 1.71 .15 .182 .22 PMAT AV 4.75 1.77 -.342 -.342 DAT SUBTESTS RDQOOM 4.70 1.93 BIOL 5.29 1.81 .172 .18 .232 .232 • 201 .20. .202 INCHEM 5.61 1.72 2D 4.41 1.97 3D 4.63 1.75 CHALK 4.62 1.95 .311 .311 R2 .05 .05 .06 .09 .02 .03 .18 .14 .18 .14 .08 .06 .08 .04 .08 .09 .05 .21 Note: Entry is the value of the correlation coefficient at the time the associated variable entered the equation as a predictor. The superscript indicates the order of entry. SUMftlg OF RESULTS OF REGRESSION TO RTF. V I ANALYSES A l TO 4 FOR SECOND YEAR COURSE GRADES Mean S .D. ANAT 425 1 2 3 4 MT.CR 1 2 425 3 4 1 ORBI 420 2 3 4 ORBI 1 2 423 3 4 ORMS 425 1 2 3 4 1 ORTH 429 2 3 4 OVAAV 75.98 5.27 . 2 9 1 . 2 9 1 .18 . 2 6 1 .26 .19 .19 PREAV 75.13 6.72 DAT AVERAGES DATAC 5.11 1.46 .20 . 1 8 1 . 1 9 2 . 19 2 . 1 9 2 DATMAN 4.60 1.58 . 1 9 3 .31 .31 TOISCI PMAT AV 5.85 4.79 1.71 1.87 2 1 -.2r -.20 - . 1 6 2 - . 19 2 - . 1 8 1 - . 3 0 1 - . 3 0 1 DAT SUBTESTS RDGCOM 4.57 1.97 BTOT, INCHED 5.43 5.83 1.77 1.60 .j . 2 1 2 . 21 2 2D 3D CHALK 4.42 4.72 4.52 2.04 1.84 1.86 2 1 -.2r - .20^ 3 2 . 2 0 J .20* . 2 9 1 .29 1 - . 2 8 1 - .28 ] R 2 .16 .16 .08 .11 .03 .06 .10 .12 .10 .10 .07 .07 .12 .12, .12 .12 .04 .04 TABLE V I - ccmtiiiued SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF REGreSSION ANALYSES A l TP 4 FOR SECOND YEAR COURSE GRACES Mean S . D . PCDH 427 1 2 3 POOL 425 1 2 3 4 PHYL 425 1 2 3 REST 421 1 2 3 REST 422 1 2 3 ORSU 426 1 2 3 OVAAV PIEAV DAT AVERAGES! DATAC DATMAN TOTSCI PfftT AV DAT SUBTESTS! HDGCOM BIOL DKHEM 2D 3D CHALK 75.98 75.13 5.11 4.60 5.85 4.79 4.57 5.43 5.83 4.42 4.72 4.52 5.27 6.72 1.46 1.58 1.71 1.87 1.97 1.77 1.60 2.04 1.84 1.86 ^20 .04 ^20 .27 .27 .04 .07 .07 .17 .03 .36 1 .36 1 .21 2 .21 2 .40 .40 .17 .16' .17 .16 T A B L E V I I SUMMARY OF gSULTS OF REGIESSICM ANALYSES A l TO 4 FOR THIRD YEAR COUISE GRADES Mean S.D. OVAAV 75.42 5.27 praav 74.54 6.75 DAT AVERAGES DATAC 4.98 1.35 DATMAN 4.54 1.56 TOTSCI 5.80 1.82 PMAT AV 4.03 1.64 DAT SUBTESTS RDGCOM 4.66 1.98 BIOL 5.49 1.81 XNCHEM 6.11 1.47 2D 4.30 2.04 3D 4.64 1.91 CHALK 4.30 1.91 R 2 OPBI 430 1 2 3 OPME 434 1 2 3 OWE 435 1 2 3 ORSU 436 1 2 3 ORTH 439 1 2 3 PCDH 437 1 2 3 REST 431 1 2 3 .27 .07 .27 .07 .16 .17 .19 .03 . 3 0 1 .30 .22 .06 .23 .21 .20 .21 .20 14 .09 .05 .05 .04 .05 .04 00? T A B L E V I I I SUMMARY OF KSULTS OF REGRESSION ANALYSES A l TO 4 FOR FOURTH YEAR COURSE GRADES Mean S.D. 1 ORBI 440 2 3 4 OVAAV 74.84 5.17 .22 3 PREAV 73.79 6.46 DAT AVERAGES DATAC 5.14 1.40 DATMAN 4.51 1.59 TOTSCI 5^88 1.74 PMAT AV 4.70 1.97 .24 .24 DAT SUBTESTS RDQCCM 4.48 2.02 BIOL 5.45 1.85 INCHEM 6.04 1.56 2D 4.28 1.98 , 3 4 2 - ,34 2 3D 3.63 1.62 . 2 9 1 . 2 9 1 CHALK 4.25 1.95 R 2 .06 .23 .06 .19 Of*E 444 1 2 3 OF*E 445 1 2 3 ORSU 446 1 2 3 ORTH 449 1 2 3 PCDH 447 1 2 3 FEST 441 1 2 3 r>24 .24 .42 -.30 .42' ->30J .06 .25 .06 .25 .20 .04 5 b which was the second v a r i a b l e e n t e r i n g the r e g r e s s i o n a f t e r the DAT Manual Average. PMAT average a l s o c o r r e l a t e d .24 w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 44 0) grades. The c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the DAT s u b t e s t s showed some t r e n d s . Reading Comprehension d i d not c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h any course grades. B i o l o g y , however, c o r r e l a t e d w i t h Anatomy (ANAT 401) , Physiol'ogyy (PHYL 400) and O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 410) i n f i r s t year ra n g i n g from .18 to .21 as the f i r s t v a r i a b l e e n t e r i n g the r e g r e s s i o n and was a l s o the second v a r i a b l e to e n t e r the r e g r e s s i o n equation f o r these same cou r s e s . The 2D and 3D showed no t r e n d c o r r e l a t i n g n e g a t i v e l y and p o s i t i v e l y w i t h grades i n a v a r i e t y of courses which r e q u i r e no psychomotor or p e r c e p t u a l s k i l l s except f o r f o u r t h year O r t h o d o n t i c s (ORTH 449), which c o r r e l a t e d -.30 w i t h 3D and .42 w i t h 2D which was the second v a r i a b l e t o e n t e r the r e g r e s s i o n . Chalk c a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d .20 w i t h Anatomy (ANAT 425) as the second v a r i a b l e i n the r e g r e s s i o n and .31 w i t h the now p r e r e q u i s i t e B i o c h e m i s t r y (BIOC 300). More s i g n i f i c a n t was the c o r r e l a t i o n o f .29 w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y O c c l u s i o n (ORBI 420), .40 with p r e c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 422) and .20 w i t h c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 431). Inorganic Chemistry c o r r e l a t e d -.20 w i t h second year P u b l i c and Community Dental H e a l t h (PCDH 427) and .27 w i t h t h i r d year O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 430). I t was the second v a r i a b l e t o e n t e r the r e g r e s s i o n c o r r e l a t i n g .18 wi t h second year Anatomy (ANAT 425) and .21 w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 420) . C o r r e l a t i o n s o f Year Averages w i t h P r e d i c t o r s T a b l e s IX - X I I I p r e s e n t the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between the weighted t o t a l averages and the independent v a r i a b l e s . T a b l e XIV p r e s e n t s the means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r the v a r i a b l e s presented i n T a b l e s IX t o X I I I . The r e s u l t s o f the second f o u r r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s (Bl t o B4) as l i s t e d i n Table I I I are presented i n T a b l e XV. B. 1. Weighted year average grades O v e r a l l average DAT average 2. Weighted year average grades O v e r a l l average DAT s u b t e s t s 3. Weighted year average grades DAT averages 4. Weighted year average grades DAT s u b t e s t s Four r e g r e s s i o n analyses were performed f o r each s e t of year averages. As with p r e v i o u s a n a l y s e s , each e n t r y i s the v a l u e of the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t a t the time the 52 a s s o c i a t e d v a r i a b l e entered the r e g r e s s i o n equation as a p r e d i c t o r . From Tab l e XV, the f i r s t year average showed a zero o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f .36 w i t h o v e r a l l average and .20 w i t h DAT Academic Average. The c o r r e l a t i o n of .20 f o r f i r s t year averages w i t h Reading Comprehension accounts f o r much of the c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h DAT Academic Average. From Tab l e IX the c o r r e l a t i o n between the two subscores was .73, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t f i f t y - t h r e e per c e n t o f v a r i a n c e of the two s e t s of scores i s common v a r i a n c e . F u r t h e r examination of the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between f i r s t year averages and a l l the p r e d i c t o r s i n d i c a t e s t h a t a l l the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s are v e r y low. The second year average c o r r e l a t e d .29 w i t h o v e r a l l average and .20 w i t h Manual Average. C o n t r a r y t o e x p e c t a t i o n , no s i n g l e s u b t e s t of the DAT which c o n t r i b u t e d to the Manual Average entered i n t o the m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n . As w i t h f i r s t year, the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r second year were q u i t e low. The t h i r d year average c o r r e l a t e d .30 w i t h Manual Average and .24 w i t h Chalk C a r v i n g . From T a b l e XI, the c o r r e l a t i o n between the two subscores was .73. The remaining simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between t h i r d year averages and the p r e d i c t o r s showed low c o r r e l a t i o n s . T A B L E IX S I M P L E C O R R E L A T I O N BETWEEN WEIGHTED 1ST YEAR AVERAGES AND P R E R E Q U I S I T E A V E R A G E , O V E R A L L AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR Y E A R S E N T E R I N G 1 9 7 2 - 7 6 1STYR OVA DAT DAT GRDE AV AC MAN QR RDG I N ORG TOT V R Q & V COM B I ° CHEM .CHEM S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE OVAAV DATAC DATMAN Q'RP V R Q&'Si V RDGCOM B I O INCHEM ORGCHEM T O T S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMATAV 1.00 0.36 0.20 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.20 0.11 -0,11 0.11 0.12 0.02 0.04 .0.05 0.06 \,"D3 1 . 0 0 0 . 2 1 1. •0121 0. 0 . 0 3 0. 0 . 0 0 0. 0 . 0 0 0. 0 . 1 3 0. 0 . 0 7 0. 0 . 2 0 0. - 0 . 2 3 0. 0 .12 0, - 0 . 0 1 0, - 0 . 0 8 0. - 0 . 0 4 - 0 , - 0 . 0 4 0 00 02 1 . 0 0 52 0 . 2 6 62 0 . 3 3 79 0 . 4 0 73 0 . 1 1 53 - 0 . 1 6 47 0 . 1 7 31 0 . 0 1 6 7 - 0 . 1 5 24 0 . 5 3 15 0 . 6 3 14 0 .84 20 0 . 5 8 1.00 0.04 1. 00 0.60 0. 78 1. 00 0.32 0. 39 0. 51 1.00?) 0.19 0. 24 0. 30 0027.71. 00 0.26 0. 30 0. 36 0£18«0. 30 1. 00 0.03 0. 14 0. 09 0016 £.0. 06 0. 04 1. 00 0.27 0. 33 0. 38 0$3"0->0. 73 0. 65 0. 50 1. 00 0.27 0. 28 0. 33 0016 "0. 03 0. 11 0. 21 0. 13 1. 00 0.12 0. 38 0. 34 0C07 y0. 09 0. 06 0. 21 0. 12 0. 54 1. 00 0.00 0. 15 0. 14 -0.02.rO. 15 -0. 25 -0. 00-0. 16 0. 25 0. 37 0 . 3S-9 0. 34 0. 34 0.09 0. 05 0. 08 0. 24-0. 11 0. 85 0. 84 TABLE X SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED 2ND YEAR AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 2ND YEAR OVA DAT DAT GRDE-'AV AC MAN T m _„„ RDG _ „ IN ORG TOT QR VR QfiV C 0 M BIO C R E M C H E M S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1.00 OVAAV 0.29 1. 00 DATAC 0.18 0. 18 1. 00 DATMAN 0.20 0, 01 0. 34 1.00 QR 0.01 0. 01 0. 52 0.22 1. 00 VR 0.15 0. 02 0. 63 0.33 0. 05 1 .00 Q & V 0.13-0. 01 0. 79 0.37 0. 60 0 .79 1. 00 RDGCOM 0.18 0. 10 0. 73 0.38 0. 32 0 .38 0. 49 1. 00 BIO 0.05 0. 08 0. 54 0.05 0. 21 0 .23 0. 30 0. 25 1. 00 INCHEM 0.06 0. 21 0. 53 0.01 0. 26 0 .34 0. 38 0. 29 0. 44 1. 00 . ORGCHE -0.15 -0. 29 0. 31 0.02 0. 06 0 .13 0. 10 0. 12 0. 09-0. 01 1. 00 TOTSCI 0.06 0. 10 0. 66 0.18 0. 29 0 .32 0. 38 0. 31 0. 75 0. 69 0. 52 1. 00 2D -0.01 0. 00 0. 27^0.61 0. 24 0 .29 0. 31 0. 18-0. 03 0. 09 0. 19 0. 13 1. 00 3D -0.01-0. 07 0. 24 4 0?01 0. 15 0 .34 0. 34 0. 11 0. 10 0. 12 0. 28 0. 17 o. 52 CHALK 0.12 0. 10 0. 03 0.65-0. 04 0 .17 0. 13 0. 12 -0. 02 0. 16 -0. 01 0. 03 0. 34 PMATAV 0.08-0. 01 0. 22 0.09 0. 18 0 .31 0. 32 0. 10 0. 01 0. 11 0. 27 0. 11 0. 71 TABLE XI SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED 3RD YEAR AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 3RD YEAR OVA DAT DAT GRDE AV AC MAN QR VR Q&V RDG COM BIO •mt. ORG TOT CHEM CHEM SCI 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1.00 OVAAV 0.19 1. 00 DATAC 0.14 0. 21 1. 00 DATMAN 0.30 0. 00 0. 36 i . 00 QR 0.01 0. 09 0. 50 0. 23 1. 00 VR 0.12 0. 02 0. 70 0. 33 0. 09 1. 00 Q&V 0.11 0. 04 0. 81 0. 38 0. 59 0. 81 1. 00 RDGCOM 0.20 0. 11 0. 74 0. 40 0. 31 0. 45 0. 52 1. 00 BIO -0.04 0. 18 0. 55 0. 05 0. 18 0. 26 0. 30 0. 29 1. 00 INCHEM 0.03 0. 20 0. 57 0. 02 0. 33 0. 41 0. 45 0. 34 0. 44 1. 00 ORGCHE 0.00-0. 20 0. 22 0. 02 -0. 11 0. 25 0. 09 0. 04 -0. 04 0. 00 01. 00 TOTSCI 0.04 0. 16 0. 68 0. 18 0. 29 0. 38 0. 41 0. 36 0: 74 0. 69 0. 45 1. 00 2D 0.01 0. 00 o. 34 0. 63 0. 27 0. 29 0. 32 0. 23 0. 03 0. 09 0. 27 0. 22 1. 00 3D -0.03-0. 12 0. 33 0. 01 0. 07 0. 41 0. 34 0. 10 0. 16 0. 16 0. 40 0. 25 0. 61 CHALK 0.24 0. 00 0. 16 0. 73-0. 05 0. 17 0. 13 0. 30 0. 12 0. 00 0. 00 0. 21 0. 32 PMATAV -0.07-0. 05 0. 32 0. 07 0. 18 o. 33 0. 32 0. 12 0. 09 0. 16 0. 37 0. 22 0. 77 uv TABLE XII SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED 4TH YEAR AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 4TH YEAR OVA DAT DAT GRDE AV AC MAN I M _ / » T T RDG IN ORG TOT QR VR _ Q&V C Q M BIO C H E M C H E M S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1. 00 OVAAV 0. 36 1.00 DATAC 0. 20 0.21 1. 00 DATMAN 0. 08-0.12 0. 02 1. 00 QR 0. 07 0.03 0. 52 0. 26 1. 00 VR 0. 05 0.00 0. 62 0. 33 0. 04 1. 00 Q & V 0. 04 0.00 0. 79 0. 40 0. 60 0. 78 1. 00 RDGCOM 0. 20 0.13 0. 73 0. 11 0. 32 0. 39 0. 51 1. 00 0. 11 0.07 0. 53 -0. 16 0. 19 0. 24 0. 30 0. 27 1 .00 INCHEM -0. 11 0.20 0. 47 0. 17 0. 26 0. 30 0. 36 0. 18 0 .30 1. 00 ORGCHE 0. 11 40.23 0. 31 0. 01 0. 03 0. 14 0. 09 0. 16 0 .06 0. 04 1. 00 TOTSCI 0. 12 0.12 0. 67 -0. 15 0. 27 0. 33 0. 38 0. 30 0 .73 0. 65 0. 50 1. 00 2D 0. 02-0.01 0. 24 0. 53 0. 27 0. 28 0. 33 0. 16 0 .03 0. 11 0. 21 0. 13 1. 00 3D 0. 04--0.08 0. 15 0. 63 0. 12 0. 38 0. 34 0. 07 0 .09 0. 06 0, 21 0. 12 0. 54 CHALK 0. 05-0.04--0. 14 0. 84 0. 00 0. 15 0. 14 -0. 02 -0 .15--0. 25--0. 00- 0. 16 0. 25 PMATAV 0. 06-0.04 0. 20 0. 58 0. 19 0. 34 0. 34 0. 09 0 .05 0. 08 0. 24-•0. 11 0. 85 oS TABLE XIII SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED TOTAL AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 OVA DAT DAT TOTAL A V A C ^ QR T T O « C T 7 R D G T > ™ I N 0 R G T 0 T V R Q S V COM B I ° CHEM CHEM SCI 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1.0!) OVAAV 0109 1. 00 DATAC 0.02 0. 17 1. 00 DATMAN 0.11-0. 01 0. 37 1. 00 QR -0.12 0. 25 0. 60 0. 23 1. 00 VR 0.19 -0. 06 0. 69 0. 35 0. 14 1. 00 Q & V 0.10 0. 06 0. 84 0. 39 0. 58 0. 86 1. 00 RDGCOM 0.09 0. 05 0. 78 0. 38 0. 41 0. 52 0. 65 1. 00 BIO -0.07 0. 13 0. 62 0. 05 0. 16 0. 29 0. 29 0. 36 1. 00 INCHEM -0.02 0. 25 0. 75 0, 01 0. 42 0. 32 0. 44 0. 62 0. 54 1. 00 ORGCHE 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1 .00 TOTSCI -0.06 0. 17 0. 76 0. 21 0. 32 0. 38 0. 43 0. 45 0. 83 0. 82 0 .00 1. 00 2D 0.00 -0. 01 0. 34 0. 65 0. 37 0. 25 0. 35 0. 31-0. 05 0. 15 0 .00 0. 18 1. 00 3D -0.06-0. 24 0. 17 0. 00 0. 17 0. 31 0. 32 0. 25-0. 19-0. 01 0 .00 -0. 06 0. 52 CHALK 0.12 0. 01 0. 15 0. 73 -0. 05 0. 17 0. 13 0. 30 0. 12 0. 00 0 100 0. 21 0. 32 PMATAV -0.06 -0. 07 0. 11 0. 06 0. 25 0. 12 0. 19 0. 13-0. 22 0. 08 0 .00 -0. 02 0. 74 Ui <3 TABLE XIV MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS (S.D.) FOR YEAR AVERAGES, PREREQUISITE AVERAGES, OVERALL AVERAGES AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year T o t a l Mean S. D. Mean S. D. Mean S. D. Mean S. D. Mean S. D. GRDE 50 .26 7. 28 50 .30 6. 08 50 .21 6. 33 50 .13 6. 65 49 .95 5. 40 OVAAV 77 .69 4. 62 77 .55 4. 84 77 .13 4. 82 76 .52 4. 77 76 .50 4. 67 DATAC 5 .42 1. 50 5 .32 1. 52 5 .49 1. 44 5 .26 1. 42 5 .24 1. 39 DATMAN 4 .78 1. 80 4 .56 1. 51 4 .56 1. 51 4 .56 1. 51 4 .52 1. 51 RDGCOM 4 .80 1. 92 4 .67 1. 99 4 .98 1. 96 4 .92 2. 00 4 .97 2. 00 BIOL 5 .26 1. 67 5 .34 1. 63 5 .48 1. 68 5 .31 1. 78 5 .36 1. 75 INCHEM 5 .61 1. 72 5 .82 1. 59 6 .11 1. 48 6 .03 1. 58 5 .96 1. 54 TOTSCI 5 .89 1. 59 6 .00 1. 59 6 .13 1. 59 6 .04 1. 76 6 .05 1. 74 2D 4 .51 1. 91 4 .61 2. 02 4 .54 2. 06 4 .40 1. 98 4 .32 1. 96 3D 4 .62 1. 75 4 .76 1. 87 4 .68 1. 89 3 .69 1. 61 3 .79 1. 67 CHALK 4 .60 1. 94 4 .52 1. 78 4 .02 1. 77 4 .02 1. 77 3 .97 1. 78 PMATAV 4 .75 1. 76 4 .84 1. 89 4 .73 1. 95 4 .10 1. 61 4 .09 1. 59 n = 19 5 n = 15 7 . n = 10 9 n = 71 n = 76 TABLE XV SUM>S\RY OF RESULTS OF REGFESSION ANALYSES Bl TO 4 FOR YEAR AVERAGES AND TOTAL AVERACH 1st Year Average 1 2 3 4 ,36 .36 .20 .20 .13 .13 .04 .04 2nd Year Aw rage 1 2 3 4 ,2T .29 .2r .20 .12 .08 .04 3rd Year Average 1 2 3 4 30 .30 .24 .24 .09 .06 .09 .06 4th Year Average 1 2 3 4 Total Average 1 2 3 4 60 There was no s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t i n g v a r i a b l e w i t h f o u r t h year average o r w i t h the t o t a l average f o r a l l y e a r s . From Ta b l e X I I , the simple c o r r e l a t i o n of .25 between f o u r t h year average and Manual Average was not s i g n i f i c a n t but hi g h e r than most of the o t h e r s . 3D a t -.27, o v e r a l l average a t .21 and Inorganic Chemistry a t .20 were o t h e r s t o note. From Table X I I I , simple c o r r e l a - t i o n s f o r t o t a l average were v e r y low. C o r r e l a t i o n s Between Year Averages The r e s u l t s of the t h i r d s e t of r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s ( C l to C6) l i s t e d i n T a b l e I I I are presented i n T a b l e XVI. The c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s presented r e p r e s e n t zero order c o r r e l a t i o n s . C. 1. Second year average grades F i r s t year average grades 2. T h i r d year averagesgradess F i r s t year average grades 3. F o u r t h year average grades F i r s t year average grades 4. T h i r d year average grades Second year average grade 5. F o u r t h year average grades Second year average grade 6. F o u r t h year average grades T h i r d year average grades When f i r s t year o v e r a l l weighted average was taken as the independent v a r i a b l e and c o r r e l a t e d w i t h second, t h i r d TABLE XVI SUMMARY OF FEGRESSION ANALYSES CI TO C6 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN YEAR AVERAGES AND PREVIOUS YEAR AVERAGES Independent Variable De 2nd Year Average Grades n = 145 pendent Variables 3rd Year Average Grades n = 106 4th Year Average Grades n = 70 Lst Year average grades .79 .45 .25 2nd Year awrage grades .60 .54 3rd year average grades .79 62 and f o u r t h years as the dependent v a r i a b l e s , the c o r r e l a - t i o n s were .78, .45 and .25 r e s p e c t i v e l y . With second year as the p r e d i c t o r and t h i r d and f o u r t h years as the c r i t e r i o n , the c o r r e l a t i o n s were .60 and .54 r e s p e c t i v e l y . With t h i r d year as the p r e d i c t o r and f o u r t h year as the c r i t e r i o n , the c o r r e l a t i o n was .79. C o r r e l a t i o n s Between Technique Scores and P r e d i c t o r s The r e s u l t s of the l a s t s e t r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s as l i s t e d i n Table I I I are presented i n Table XVIII. Two ana l y s e s were performed f o r each dependent v a r i a b l e . D. 1. F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique PMAT, Manual average 2. F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique 2D, 3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g grades grades 3. O p e r a t i v e technique grades PMAT, Manual average 4. Ope r a t i v e technique grades 2D, 3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g 5. Combined Ope r a t i v e and P r o s t h o d o n t i c s grades PMAT, Manual average 6. Combined O p e r a t i v e and P r o s t h o d o n t i c s grades 2D, 3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g Each e n t r y r e p r e s e n t s a zero order c o r r e l a t i o n . The simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between these v a r i a b l e s i s presented i n Table XVII. From Table XVIII, when the manual s u b t e s t s TABLE XVII SIMPLE CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PSYCHOMOTOR AND PERCEPTUAL SCORES OF DAT AND TECHNIQUE COURSE GRADES IN FIXED PROSTHODONTICS, OPERATIVE DENTISTRY AND A COMBINATION OF BOTH MANUAL AV 2D 3D CHALK PMAT FIXED PROSTH ° P E R COMB MANUAL AV 1.00 2D .42 1.00 3D .70 .53 1.00 CHALK .92 .27 .39 1.00 PMAT .62 .85 .85 .36 1.00 nIXED PROSTH .38 .06 .15 .31 .09 1.00 OPER .32 .11 .18 .33 .14 .67 1.00 COMB . 39 .09 .18 .35 .13 1.00 TABLE XVIII SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF REGRESSION ANALYSES DI TO 6 MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PSYCHOMOTOR AND PERCEPTUAL SCORES OF DAT AND TECHNIQUE COURSE GRADES IN FIXED PROSTHODOHTICS, OPERATIVE DENTISTRY AND A COMBINATION OF BOTH Mean Standard Deviation Fixed Prosths. 1 2 Operative 1 2 Corrbined Prosths & Op 1 2 DAT AVERAGES PMAT AV 4.94 1.80 MANUAL AV 5.07 2.08 .38 .32 .39 DAT SUBTESTS 2D 4.64 1.89 3D 4.84 1.75 CHALK 4.97 1.90 .31 .33 .35 Note: Means and standard deviations for dependent variables were standardized to 50 and 10 respectively. 65 and averages o f the DAT were the p r e d i c t o r s and F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique was the c r i t e r i o n , the c o r r e l a - t i o n s were .38 wit h the Manual Average and .31 w i t h Chalk C a r v i n g . The c o r r e l a t i o n s between F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and 2D, 3D and PMAT were not s i g n i f i c a n t (r = .06, .15 and .09 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g accounted f o r most of the v a r i a n c e o f F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a t t r i b u t e d t o the DAT s u b t e s t s . S i m i l a r l y f o r O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y , the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t was .32 with Manual Average and .33 w i t h Chalk C a r v i n g . The c o r r e l a t i o n s between O p e r a t i v e and 2D, 3D and PMAT average were not s i g n i f i c a n t (r = .11, .18 and .14 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) i n d i c a t i n g a g a i n t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g accounted f o r most o f the v a r i a n c e of Oper a t i v e a t t r i b u t e d to the DAT t e s t s . For the combination of O p e r a t i v e and F i x e d P r o s t h o - d o n t i c s , the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s were .39 w i t h Manual Average and .35 with Chalk C a r v i n g . The c o r r e l a - t i o n s between the combination of Oper a t i v e and F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and 2D, 3D and PMAT average were not s i g n i f i c a n t (.09, .18 and .13 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g accounted f o r most of the v a r i a n c e o f the combined O p e r a t i v e and F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a t t r i b u t e d t o the DAT t e s t s . CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS There i s a c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f o v e r a l l average with i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e s , e s p e c i a l l y i n the f i r s t two y e a r s . L i k e w i s e , the c o r r e l a t i o n o f o v e r a l l average w i t h f i r s t year average was .36 and second year average was .29. D e s p i t e the obvious r e s t r i c t i o n o f range by l i m i t i n g the a p p l i c a n t s t o those w i t h o v e r a l l average o f more than s i x t y - f i v e per cent leads one to the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t success i n the f i r s t two years o f d e n t i s t r y i s , i n p a r t , p r e d i c t e d by o v e r a l l average. These r e s u l t s were s i m i l a r to those of P a r k i n (1958) , Manhold and Manhold (1965), Dworkin (1970) and Phipps e t a l (1968), although Dworkin's c o r r e l a t i o n s were lower. The c o n c l u s i o n t h a t academic grades when averaged p r e d i c t academic grades i s not d i f f i c u l t to b e l i e v e . I t i s r a t h e r s u r p r i s i n g , however, to see c o r r e l a t i o n s as low as .36 and .29 although they are common i n the l i t e r a t u r e . The reason f o r t h i s i s u n c l e a r but s u s p i c i o n would l i e w i t h u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f both v a r i a b l e s . P r e r e q u i s i t e average on the oth e r hand d i d not 67 c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y with i n d i v i d u a l course grades. T h i s may be e x p l a i n e d by the t i m i n g o f these p r e r e q u i s i t e s . Commonly, students take these courses i n t h e i r f i r s t year of u n i v e r s i t y which f i x e s t h e i r p r e r e q u i s i t e average t o a c o n s t a n t f i g u r e . The o v e r a l l average, however, may a l t e r by the a d d i t i o n of subsequent courses be they h i g h or low grades. Hence, a student may improve h i s o v e r a l l average but cannot improve h i s p r e r e q u i s i t e average. The c o r r e l a t i o n s between DAT academic average and i n d i v i d u a l f i r s t and second year courses and a l s o f i r s t year averages are s i g n i f i c a n t . The c o r r e l a t i o n o f .20 with f i r s t year average i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t o b tained by P a r k i n (1958) of .28, Manhold and Manhold (1965) of .32 and Dworkin (1970) of .25. The T o t a l Science component of DAT adds l i t t l e t o the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the DAT. Reading Comprehension l i k e w i s e c o r r e l a t e s w i t h f i r s t year average .20 but i s not s i g n i f i c a n t w i t h i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e s . T h i s r e s u l t i s d i f f i c u l t t o i n t e r p r e t . Thompson (1977) suggests t h a t Reading Comprehension i s a v e r y important p r e d i c t o r i n f i r s t and second year f o r Canadian students but no oth e r i n v e s t i g a t o r s p l a c e much emphasis on i t . B i o l o g y c o r r e l a t e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h some f i r s t year courses and l i k e DAT Academic Average, i s bes t used t o 681 complement knowledge of course grades from p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l years and o v e r a l l average. Inorganic Chemistry may be t r e a t e d i n the same way. The academic e x c e l l e n c e o f an a p p l i c a n t may be assessed then f a i r l y w e l l by t h r e e or more years of p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l u n i v e r s i t y e d u c a t i o n , the o v e r a l l average a t t a i n e d i n t h i s time and complemented by the DAT Academic Average. The r e s u l t s presented i n Tab l e XVI r e v e a l t h a t f i r s t and second years are to some extent s i m i l a r and t h i r d and f o u r t h y ears are s i m i l a r , but t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between the f i r s t two years and the second two y e a r s . The nature of many of the f i r s t two years courses i s more academic than t h a t o f the t h i r d and f o u r t h y e a r s , which are more c l i n i c a l . T h i s i s born out by f i r s t year average c o r r e l a t i n g w i t h second year average .79, the t h i r d year w i t h f o u r t h year .79 but second year w i t h t h i r d year .60. I t should be noted t h a t these a n a l y s e s were performed on st a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e s . A l s o t h e r e was no sy s t e m a t i c drop out d u r i n g these y e a r s . These c o r r e l a t i o n s between years e x p l a i n why o v e r a l l average i s a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r i n f i r s t and second years but not i n t h i r d and f o u r t h y e a r s . Looking at the manual portions of the DAT, the correlations with in d i v i d u a l courses, e s p e c i a l l y the second year courses of Oral Biology (ORBI 420) and p r e c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry (REST 422) are high for Chalk Carving and consequently for Manual Average. These r e s u l t s are i n agreement with DeRevere (1961), Manhold and Manhold (1967), Chebib (1974) and Thompson (1977). The fact that Chalk Carving correlated .24 with t h i r d year average which i s based heavily on c l i n i c a l courses requiring psychomotor s k i l l s strengthens the view that Chalk Carving i s the best predictor of psychomotor oriented courses that i s offered i n the DAT battery. The c o r r e l a t i o n for Chalk Carving with Oral Biology Occlusion (ORBI 420) of .29, a three-unit heavily psycho- motor and perceptual oriented course, with p r e c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry (REST 422) of .42, a three-unit (subsequently upgraded to a six-unit) course heavily oriented to psychomotor s k i l l s , supports t h i s . S i m i l a r l y , the c o r r e l a t i o n for Chalk Carving with c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry (REST 431) of .20 which i s a twelve-unit course heavily oriented to psychomotor s k i l l s also supports t h i s view. The consistently high correlations between Manual Average and psychomotor oriented courses of Oral Biology 70 O c c l u s i o n (ORBI 420) .31, p r e c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 422) .36, O r t h o d o n t i c s (ORTH 439) .23, c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 431) .21 and c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 441) .20 (which i s a tw e l v e - u n i t c o u r s e ) , almost m i r r o r e d the c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r Chalk C a r v i n g . T h i s subscore a l s o c o r r e l a t e d w i t h second year averages .20 and t h i r d year averages .30, making t h i s an important p r e d i c t o r of success i n the Dental F a c u l t y . The v a r i a b l e nature o f 2D, 3D and PMAT average i n c o r r e l a t i o n s with i n d i v i d u a l courses l e a d s t o the c o n c l u - s i o n t h a t these s c o r e s are not p a r t i c u l a r l y h e l p f u l . Four of the s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s were p o s i t i v e and t e n were n e g a t i v e . Graham (1972) showed PMAT and Chalk t o be e q u a l l y p r e d i c t i v e i n f i v e separate s t u d i e s i n the U.S.A., however, the r e s u l t s of t h i s study are a t v a r i a n c e with h i s . The c o r r e l a t i o n o f .31 f o r Chalk C a r v i n g w i t h the technique p o r t i o n o f p r e c l i n i c a l F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s was i n c l o s e agreement wi t h t h a t found by B e l l a n t i e t a l (1972) of .37. T h i s f i n d i n g i s strengthened by the c o r r e l a t i o n of .33 found between Chalk C a r v i n g a n d i p r e c l i n i c a l O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y , which resembles t h a t found by DeRevere (1961) of .37. The l a c k o f s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f any of the PMAT scores i n t h i s study u s i n g 71 dependent v a r i a b l e s such as P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and O p e r a t i v e technique grades strengthens the view t h a t PMAT i s not a v a l u a b l e t e s t . DeRevere, however, found a c o r r e l a t i o n of .39 between space v i s u a l i z a t i o n (an o l d form o f 2D) and p r e c l i n i c a l O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y . The PMAT c o r r e l a t i o n s , however, are v a r i a b l e from study to study whereas the Chalk C a r v i n g c o r r e l a t i o n s are very s t a b l e . S e l e c t i o n of students f o r admission t o the d e n t a l f a c u l t y was based h e a v i l y on o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades w i t h very l i t t l e emphasis p l a c e d on the DAT s c o r e s . Because academic i n f o r m a t i o n , a l b e i t d o u b t f u l l y r e l i a b l e undergraduate grades, i s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e , much emphasis i s p l a c e d upon i t . L i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e c o n cerning the p e r c e p t u a l or psychomotor a b i l i t i e s of a p p l i c a n t s , although a t l e a s t h a l f of the program of d e n t i s t r y demands e x p e r t i s e i n these a b i l i t i e s . Chalk c a r v i n g was shown t o be a c o n s i s t e n t l y r e l i a b l e p r e d i c t o r of psychomotor a b i l i t y , y e t i s l i t t l e used. S i m i l a r l y , Manual Average was a good p r e d i c t o r . However, Manual Average was made up of 2D, 3D and Chalk C a r v i n g , w i t h a b i a s h e a v i l y to Chalk C a r v i n g . The Chalk C a r v i n g was a •rcTl'eTa'ffe'rt score u n t a r n i s h e d by the v e r y v a r i a b l e 2D and 3D s c o r e s . From the r e s u l t s of t h i s study, the c o n c l u s i o n was drawn t h a t equal emphasis should be p l a c e d on the Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t and the p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l o v e r a l l average. I f t h i s i s done to exclude students w i t h low a b i l i t y i n these a r e a s , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t students w i l l be admitted w i t h h i g h e r o v e r a l l competence. The Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t , even though i t i s the b e s t p r e d i c t o r a v a i l a b l e a t p r e s e n t , s t i l l e x p l a i n s o n l y a s m a l l amount of the v a r i a n c e of technique grades. L i k e w i s e , o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l average p r e d i c t s o n l y a s m a l l p r o p o r t i o n of the v a r i a n c e of d i d a c t i c grades, however, both o f these p r e d i c t o r s are important to m a i n t a i n u n t i l b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r s may be v a l i d a t e d . I t i s recommended t h a t p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l averages and DAT Chalk C a r v i n g should be used to s e l e c t students f o r admission to the Dental F a c u l t y . G r a i n g e r ' s s u g g e s t i o n tooexclude a p p l i c a n t s with a c a r v i n g score o f l e s s than f o u r i s sound on the b a s i s t h a t f a l s e p o s i t i v e s are almost n o n - e x i s t e n t i n t h i s t e s t . Admissions committees can a f f o r d t o exclude the f a l s e n e g a t i v e s and cannot a f f o r d the time and e f f o r t o f t r a i n i n g students w i t h l e s s e r psychomotor s k i l l s . I t i s t r u e t h a t the f a l s e n e g a t i v e s (students who perform p o o r l y on the Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t but would have performed w e l l i n d e n t a l school) w i l l be r e j e c t e d . They have the c h o i c e of r e t e s t f o r the f o l l o w i n g year to t r y t o improve t h e i r s c o r e . As long as the number of e l i g i b l e a p p l i c a n t s i s h i g h e r i n r e l a t i o n t o p l a c e s a v a i l a b l e , t h i s p h i l o s o p h y can be f o l l o w e d . The sequelae t o t h i s p h i l o s o p h y i s t h a t the g e n e r a l standard of performance i n d e n t a l s c h o o l w i l l improve. V a l i d a t i o n o f t h i s should be c a r r i e d out a n n u a l l y . I t i s recommended t h a t p r e r e q u i s i t e average not be used as c r i t e r i o n f o r s e l e c t i o n as the academic average i s a s t r o n g e r p r e d i c t o r . S i m i l a r l y , a l l o t h e r s u b t e s t s o f the DAT o t h e r than Chalk C a r v i n g shouiLdclnot be used i n the s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Academic Average i s b e s t used o n l y when o v e r a l l average i s not a v a i l a b l e and Manual Average may be d i s r e g a r d e d i f Chalk C a r v i n g i s a v a i l a b l e . High hopes are h e l d f o r the 16PE p e r s o n a l i t y t e s t c u r r e n t l y being v a l i d a t e d by the Canadian DAT Committee. However, s i m i l a r e f f o r t s should be d i r e c t e d to the development of a b e t t e r t e s t to p r e d i c t psychomotor s k i l l t o be used i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t or r e p l a c e i t g i v e n the e x t e n s i v e .psychomotor demands of d e n t i s t r y . 74, BIBLIOGRAPHY American Dental A s s o c i a t i o n , D i v i s i o n o f E d u c a t i o n Measurements: Report on the Dental Admissions T e s t i n g Program Survey, 1974-75. B e l l a n t i , N.D., Mayberry, W.E., T i r a , D.E.: " R e l a t i o n Between S e l e c t e d P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s and Grades i n F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s Laboratory." J . Dent. Educ. 36(12), 16-21, December 1972. B r i g a n t e , R.F., Lamb, R.E.: " P e r c e p t i o n and C o n t r o l T e s t : The Dental T e c h n i c a l A p t i t u d e T e s t o f the Future?" J . Dent. E d u c , 32 (3), 340-54, September 1968. C i a n f l o n e , D., Z u l l o , T.: " R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Dental School Performance and P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l Major Courses of Study." J . Dent. Educ., 39(2), 78-81, February 1975. Chambers, D.W.,: " D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Indexes f o r Improving Dental School Admissions." J . Dent. Educ., 36(1), 32-41, January 1972. Chebib, F.S.: " I n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s Between DAT Scores, P r e - d e n t a l Grades and Performance i n Dental School." U n i v e r s i t y o f Manitoba, 19 74. Chen, M.K., Podshadley, D.W. Shrock, J . : A F a c t o r i a l Study o f Some P s y c h o l o g i c a l , V o c a t i o n a l I n t e r e s t , and Mental A b i l i t y V a r i a b l e s as P r e d i c t o r s o f Success i n Dental School." J . Appl. P s y c h o l . , 51(3), 236-41, 1967. Cowling, R.: " S e l e c t i n g a Freshman C l a s s . " J . Dent..Educ. 7, 250-252, 1943. DeRevere, R.E. "Comparison o f Dental A p t i t u d e Tests with Achievement i n O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y . " J . Dent. Educ.. 25, 50-56, 1961. Deubert, L.W., Smith, M.C., J e n k i n s , C. B. , B e r r y , D.C: "The S e l e c t i o n of Dental Students. A P i l o t Study of an Assessment o f P o t e n t i a l Manual A b i l i t y by Psychometric T e s t s . " B r i t . Dent. J . , 139(5), 167-70, September 1975. Deubert, L.W., Smith, M.C., Downs, S., J e n k i n s , C.B., B e r r y , D.C.: "The S e l e c t i o n of Dental Students. A P i l o t Study o f an Assessment o f Manual A b i l i t y by P r a c t i c a l T e s t s . " B r i t . Dent. J . , 139(9), 357-61, November 1975. 75 12. Dworkin, S.F.: "Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t as Performance P r e d i c t o r Oyer Four Years o f Dental School: Analyses and In te rp re t a t i o n s." J . Dent. Educ., 34 CD , 28-38, March 19 70. 13. Dworkin, S.F.: " F u r t h e r C o r r e l a t i o n a l and F a c t o r Analyses of the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t as a P r e d i c t o r o f Performance: Conclusions and Summary." J . Dent. Educ., 34 (4) , 358-64, December 1970. 14. Fernandez-Pabon, J . J . : " P r e d i c t i o n of Success i n Dental School on the B a s i s o f Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t Scores and Other V a r i a b l e s . " J . Dent. Educ.. 32(3), 261-71, September 196 8. 15. F r e d e r i c k s , M.A., Mundy, P.: " R e l a t i o n s Between S o c i a l C l a s s , Average Grades i n C o l l e g e , Dental A p t i t u d e Test Scores and Academic Achievement o f Students." J . Dent. E d u c , 32, 26-36, 1968. 16. F u l l , C.A., F o l e y , W.J.: " S e l e c t i o n and Performance: A F a c t o r i a l Study o f Dental Students." J . Dent. Educ., 35(9), 563-6, September 1971. 17. Graham, J.W.: " S u b s t i t u t i o n o f Perceptual-Motor A b i l i t y T e s t f o r Chalk C a r v i n g i n Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program." J . Dent. E d u c , 36(11), 9-14, November 1972. 18. Graham, J.W.: " F a c t o r A n a l y s i s of the Perceptual-Motor A b i l i t y T e s t . " J . Dent. E d u c , 38(1), 16-19, January 1974. 19. Graham, J.W.: "Comparison o f Males and Females i n the Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program." J . Dent. E d u c , 40(12), 783-6, December 1976. 20. Grainger, R.M.: " V a l i d i t y Study of DAT." DAT T e s t Committee o f the CDA, February 19 72. 21. Grainger, R.M.: "Report on V a l i d i t y o f Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t Used i n Canadian Dental Schools." CDA T e s t Committee o f the C o u n c i l on Dental E d u c a t i o n , February 19 73. 22. Grainger, R.M.: "Notes on S t a t u s of DAT." Unpublished. August, 19 74. 23. G u i l f o r d , J.P.: Psychometric Measurement. McGraw-Hill, 1964, 24. G u l l i c k s e n , H.: Theory o f Mental T e s t s . Wiley, 1950. 76 25. H e l l e r , B.D. , Carson, R..L. , Douglas, B.L.: " S e l e c t i o n of Students f o r Dental School." J . Dent, E d u c , 29, 202-7, 1965. 26. Hood, A.B. : " P r e d i c t i n g Achievement i n Dental School." J . Dent. E d u c , 27, 148-55, 1963. 27. Houston, J.B., Merish, I.N.: " M u l t i p l e Regression o f P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a o f Dental School Performance." J . Dent.. Res. , 54 (3) , 515-21, May-June, 19 75. 28. K r e i t , L.H.: "The P r e d i c t i o n o f Student Success i n Dental Schools." U. S. Department o f Health, E d u c a t i o n and Welfare, 1971. 29. K r e i t , L.H.> McDonald, R.E.: " P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l Grades and the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t as P r e d i c t o r s o f Student Performance i n Dental School." J . Dent. E d u c , 32(4), 4 52-5 7, December 196 8. 30. Lewis, D.W.: "DAT - Report to F a c u l t y C o u n c i l . " Report on a Four Year Study. U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto, November 19 71. 31. Manhold, J.H., Manhold, B.S.: " F i n a l Report o f an 8-Year Study of the E f f i c a c y o f the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t i n P r e d i c t i n g 4-Year Performance i n a New School." J . Dent. Educ., 29(1), 41-44, 1965. 32. Manhold, J.H., Manhold, B.S.: " P r e d i c t i v e Value f o r Four Year Performance of I n d i v i d u a l P a r t s of the Dental A p t i t u d e Test." J . Dent. E d u c , 31(1), 62-70, March 196 7. 33. McGrath, E . J . : " P r e d i c t i v e Values of Grades i n V a r i o u s Types of P r e d e n t a l Courses." J . Dent. Educ., 7, 46-55, 1942. 34. P a r k i n , G.L.: "Report o f the R e s u l t s of the A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g Program." J . Dent. Educ., 22, 9-32, 1958. 35. Peterson, S.: The ADA Chalk C a r v i n g T e s t . " J . Dent. Educ., 11-15, January 19 74. 36. P h i l l i p , P.J., R e i t z , W.: " S t a t i s t i c a l Models f o r the S e l e c t i o n o f A p p l i c a n t s f o r the DDS Program." J . Dent. Educ., 150-58, March 1971. 37. Phipps, G.T., Fishman, R., S c o t t , R.H.: " P r e d i c t i o n of Success i n Dental School." J . Dent. Educ., 32(2), 161-70, June 1968. 77 38. Podshadley, D.W., Chen, M.K., Shrock, J.G.: "A F a c t o r A n a l y t i c Approach to the P r e d i c t i o n o f Student Performance." J . Dent. Educ., 33(1), 105-11, March- 1969. 39. Prout, R.E., Hoy, T.G.: " U n i v e r s i t y Examination Performance o f C o r r e l a t i o n Between E n t r y Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and N o n - C l i n i c a l Examinations." B r i t . Dent. J . , 141(5), 141-45, September 1976. 40. Pyskacek, R.A. : "Development o f the Perceptual-Motor A b i l i t y T e s t to Replace the C a r v i n g D e x t e r i t y Examination o f the Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program." J . Dent. Educ., 35(2), 51, February 1971. 41. Pyskacek, R.A.: "The Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program and Proposed Changes." J . Dent. E d u c , 35 (4), 237-42, A p r i l 1971. 42. Ross, N.M.: "Dental A p t i t u d e Test R e s u l t s and C o l l e g e Grades as P r e d i c t o r s o f Success i n a School o f D e n t i s t r y . " J . Dent. E d u c , 31(1).,, 84-88, March 1967. 43. S h i p , I . I . , L a s t e r , L.L.: "Aptitude and Achievement i n Dental E d u c a t i o n . " J . Dent. E d u c , 31(1), 44-5 7, March 196 7. 44. Smith, B.G.: "The Value o f Tests o f S p a t i a l and Psycho- Motor A b i l i t y i n S e l e c t i n g Dental Students." B r i t . Dent. J . , 141(5), 150-54, September 1976. 45. Smith, T.: " P r e d i c t i n g Grade P o i n t Averages from A p p l i c a t i o n Data." U n i v e r s i t y o f Kentucky. 46. Tatsuoka, M.M.: " V a l i d a t i o n S t u d i e s ; The Use of M u l t i p l e Regression Equations." I n s t i t u t e o f P e r s o n a l i t y and A b i l i t y T e s t i n g , 1969. 47. Thompson, G.W.: "Dental A p t i t u d e Test R e s u l t s , January and A p r i l 19 75: S t a t i s t i c a l Summary." Canadian Dental A s s o c i a t i o n Report, .November 1975. 48. Thompson, G.W.: "Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t R e s u l t s , January and A p r i l 1976: S t a t i s t i c a l Summary." Canadian D e n t a l A s s o c i a t i o n Report, November 1976. 49. Thompson, G.W.: " V a l i d a t i o n Study o f 1975-76: F i r s t Year D e n t i s t r y Admissions." Canadian Dental A s s o c i a t i o n Report, February 1977. 7 8 50,. T o c c h i n i , J . J . , Endy, M.W., Thomas sen, P.R,, Reinke, B.C.: " C o r r e l a t i o n Study Between A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g and Dental Student Performance." J . Dent, Educ., 25, 269-73, 1961. 51. Z u l l o , T.G.: " P r i n c i p l e Components A n a l y s i s o f the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t B a t t e r y . " J . Dent. Educ., 35(3), 144-48, March 19 71. • 52. Z u l l o , T.G.: "A F a c t o r A n a l y s i s o f P e r c e p t u a l and Motor A b i l i t i e s of Dental Students." J . Dent. Educ., 35(6), 356-61, June 1971. APPENDIX A 79 Standard D e v i a t i o n +2.5 +2.0 +1.5 +1.0 +0.5 0 -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 -2.0 -2.5 SCORING SYSTEM USED IN THE DENTAL ADMISSION TESTING PROGRAM Coded Score 7 6 3 2 1 0 -1 1.1% 2.8% 6.6% 12.1% 17.5% 19.8% 17.5? 12.1? 6.6% 2.8% P e r c e n t i a l Band E q u i v a l e n t s 98.9 - 99.9 97.0 - 98.8 90.0 - 96.0 78.0 - 89.0 61.0 - 77.0 40.0 - 60.0 1.1% 23.0 11.0 4.0 1.2 0.0 39.0 22.0 10.0 3.0 1.1 The percentage f i g u r e s i n c l u d e d i n the diagram i n d i c a t e the p o r t i o n o f the a p p l i c a n t s who would r e c e i v e each coded score i f there were a normal or p e r f e c t d i s t r i b u t i o n o f raw s c o r e s . A l l o f the t e s t s i n c l u d e d i n the admission program produce f a i r l y normal d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f raw scores so the percentages i n d i c a t e d above would apply f o r each p a r t o f the t e s t b a t t e r y . A coded score o f nine would always mean t h a t the a p p l i c a n t ranked, on the t e s t i n q u e s t i o n , w i t h the top one per cent of a l l a p p l i c a n t s . A coded score o f minus one would always mean t h a t the a p p l i c a n t ranked w i t h the lowest one per cent of a l l a p p l i c a n t s i Coded scores o f thr e e , f o u r , and f i v e would always r e p r e s e n t the middle group o f about f i f t y - f i v e p er cent. 80 APPENDIX B CONVERSION TABLE FOR GRADE POINT SCALES TO PERCENTAGES FOR ADMISSION TO UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 4 POINT SCALE Where i t i s necessary t o determine an approximate percentage e q u i v a l e n t t o a grade p o i n t average (G.P.A.) on the 4 p o i n t s c a l e the f o l l o w i n g t a b l e should be used. (A=4.0 - B=3.0 - C=2.0 D=1.0) GPA on Approximate 4 p o i n t s c a l e % e q u i v a l e n t 4 - ° 90+ 3.9 88 3.8 gg F i r s t 3.7 84 C l a s s 3 - 6 82 3.5 80 3.4 78 3*2 11 Upper i'* 76 Second i't 75 C l a s s 3-0 73 Lower 2.9 7 1 2.8 70 l'l 69 Second I'l 67 C l a s s 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 64 63 62 61 2.0 60 Pass 1.9 59 C l a s s 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 81 9 POINT SCALE ( U n i v e r s i t y of V i c t o r i a ) Where i t i s necessary to determine an approximate percentage e q u i v a l e n t to a grade p o i n t average (G.P.A.) on the 9 p o i n t s c a l e used by the U n i v e r s i t y of V i c t o r i a the f o l l o w i n g t a b l e should be used. GPA on Approximate (To convert to 9 p o i n t s c a l e % E q u i v a l e n t 4 p o i n t scale) 9.0 95+ 8.5 90 4.0 8.0 88 F i r s t 7.5 85 C l a s s 7.0 83 6 . 5 80 3 .5 6.0 78 Upper 5.5 75 Second 5.0 7 3 3.0 C l a s s 4.5 70 Lower 4.0 6 8 Second 3.5 65 2.5 C l a s s 3.0 63 Pass 2.5 62 C l a s s 2.0 60 2.0 1.5 55 1.0 50 1.0 9 POINT SCALE ( U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a ) 9.0 90+ 8.5 90 - F i r s t 8.0 85 C l a s s 7.5 80 3.5 7 0 75 ° P p e r S.l 73 • 3.0 ^ 6.5 70 6.0 65 2.5 Lower Second C l a s s 5.5 63 5.0 60 2.0 Pass 4.5 57 C l a s s 4.0 53 3.5 50 1.0 82 APPENDIX C PREREQUISITE SUBJECTS FOR ADMISSION INTO THE FACULTY OF DENTISTRY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA E n g l i s h 100 ( L i t e r a t u r e and C o m p o s i t i o n ) M a t h e m a t i c s 100 ( C a l c u l u s I) M a t h e m a t i c s 101 ( C a l c u l u s I I ) o r M a t h e m a t i c s 130 ( F i n i t e C o m b i n a t i o n M a t h e m a t i c s ) . C h e m i s t r y 103 (Gene ra l C h e m i s t r y ) o r C h e m i s t r y 120 o r 110 ( P r i n c i p l e s o f C h e m i s t r y ) . C h e m i s t r y 203 (O rgan i c C h e m i s t r y ) o r C h e m i s t r y 230 (O rgan i c C h e m i s t r y ) . B i o c h e m i s t r y 300 P h y s i c s 145 ( E l emen ta r y P h y s i c s ) o r P h y s i c s 110 ( M e c h a n i c s , E l e c t r i c i t y and A t o m i c S t r u c t u r e ) , o r P h y s i c s 115 (Wave M o t i o n , M e c h a n i c s and E l e c t r i c i t y ) o r P h y s i c s 120 ( M a t t e r and M e c h a n i c s ) . B i o l o g y 101 o r 102 ( P r i n c i p l e s o f B i o l o g y ) . 83 APPENDIX D COURSE WEIGHTING ACCORDING TO UNIT VALUES ASSIGNED. ABBREVIATIONS OF COURSES FOR COMPUTER USE ARE SHOWN U n i t Course Name Computer E n t r y Weight 1st year Anatomy ANAT 400 8.0 Anatomy ANAT 401 6.0 Bio c h e m i s t r y BIOC 300 3.0 Or a l B i o l o g y (Dental Morphology) ORBI 410 2.0 Phy s i o l o g y PHYL 400 8.0 2nd year Anatomy (Neuroanatomy) ANAT 425 2.0 M i c r o b i o l o g y MICR 425 5.0 O r a l B i o l o g y (Occlusion) ORBI 420 3.0 Or a l B i o l o g y (Oral Pathology) ORBI 423 8.0 Or a l Medicine (Diagnosis) ORME 425 2.0 Ort h o d o n t i c s ORTH 429 1.0 P u b l i c & Community Dental H e a l t h PCDH 427 1.0 Pharmacology PCOL 425 5.0 Ph y s i o l o g y (neurophysiology) PHYL 425 2.0 Or a l Surgery (anaesthesiology) ORSU 426 1.0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y REST 422 3.0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y ( M a t e r i a l s ) REST 421 3.0 3rd year O r a l B i o l o g y ORBI 430 3.0 O r a l Medicine (Periodontology) ORME 434 4.0 O r a l Medicine (Oral Diagnosis) ORME 435 4*0 O r a l Surgery ORSU 436 3*0 Or t h o d o n t i c s ORTH 439 3.0 P u b l i c & Community Dental Health PCDH 437 3*0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y REST 431 12.0 Course Name Computer E n t r y 84 U n i t Weight 4th year O r a l B i o l o g y ORBI 440 3.0 O r a l Medicine (Periodontology) ORME 444 4.0 O r a l Medicine (Oral Diagnosis) ORME 445 4.0 O r a l Surgery ORSU.446 3.0 Ort h o d o n t i c s ORTH 449 3.0 P u b l i c & Community Dental H e a l t h PCDH 447 3.0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y REST 441 12.0

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 36 25
United States 5 0
Japan 2 0
City Views Downloads
Putian 34 0
Unknown 2 5
Tokyo 2 0
Beijing 2 0
Mountain View 1 0
Redmond 1 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items