Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A validation of some predictive criteria used by dental faculty admissions Wood, William Winston 1978

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1978_A8 W66.pdf [ 4.4MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
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
Original Record: 1.0055788 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0055788.txt
Citation
1.0055788.ris

Full Text

A VALIDATION OF SOME PREDICTIVE  CRITERIA  USED BY DENTAL FACULTY ADMISSIONS by WILLIAM WINSTON WOOD B . D . S c , 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 T o r o n t o , 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 to  THE  thesis  the required  as c o n f o r m i n g standard  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA SEPTEMBER 197 8 ©  William Winston Wood, 1978  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  an advanced degree at the L i b r a r y I  in p a r t i a l  the U n i v e r s i t y  s h a l l make i t  freely  f u l f i l m e n t o f the of B r i t i s h  available  for  requirements f o r  Columbia,  I agree  that  reference and study.  f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s  thesis  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s of  this  representatives.  It  thesis for financial  i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n g a i n shal1 not be allowed without my  written permission.  Department o f The U n i v e r s i t y  of B r i t i s h  2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Date  Columbia  ABSTRACT  Admission on o v e r a l l and  into  Faculties  preprofessional  Dental Aptitude Test  The p u r p o s e validity  grades  s t u d y was  to investigate  and y e a r averages for unit  of B r i t i s h  average  criteria. the  predictive  Columbia.  grades  of  This  for individual  w h i c h w e r e t h e sum o f c o u r s e  value.  i n psychomotor s k i l l s f o r second  heavily  on success i n t h e F a c u l t y  measured by s t a n d a r d i z e d  grades weighted success  s c o r e s amongst o t h e r  at the University  s u c c e s s was  i s based  average, prerequisite  of these variables  Dentistry  courses,  of this  of Dentistry  year Fixed  A  was  further dentoform  measure o f technique  P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and O p e r a t i v e  Dentistry. Data were c o l l e c t e d Faculty  of Dentistry  b e t w e e n 1969  The r e s u l t s preprofessional with  eight  Overall first  The  students admitted to the of British  a n a l y s e s were  also  year average  significantly  first  and second  significantly  and  .29  with  overall  correlated  .17  year course  correlated,.36  second  year  files  performed.  o f t h e s e a n a l y s e s showed t h a t average  Columbia  d a t a were o r g a n i z e d i n t o  regression  individual  average  312  a t The U n i v e r s i t y  a n d 1976.  on which m u l t i p l e  from  to  .29  grades. with  average.  i i i  Prerequisite any  of  the  Of  average d i d not  criteria  the  DAT  correlate significantly  studied.  scores,  the  consistently  c o r r e l a t i o n s w e r e b e t w e e n DAT individual fourth  course  year  300  at  grades.  .27.  Oral  DAT  second year  a v e r a g e and  preclinical .32  correlations  .21 .31  and  and  with  third  year  significant  grades,  .38  .20 Biochemistry with  average  with  Fixed  Prosthodontics  from  ;20  to  .40  These were second  significant  with  and  five  third  individual  year  Restorative  Dentistry, Oral  Biology  Occlusion,  and  (Neuro).  Carving  c o r r e l a t e d .24  third .33  year  average,  with  Operative  DAT  academic  Chalk .31  with  technique  individual  course  also  c o r r e l a t e d .2 0 w i t h remaining  Fixed  Biochemistry  Prosthodontics  DAT  with and  grades.  average c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y  five  The  grades.  correlations with  showed c o n s i s t e n t l y  ranging  grades.  Anatomy  and  Operative.  Chalk Carving  course  showed  technique  with  (.36,  Occlusion  .30  five  second, t h i r d  M a n u a l A v e r a g e c o r r e l a t e d .20  Manual Average a l s o  and  These were  Biology  significant  M a n u a l A v e r a g e and  Restorative Dentistry  respectively),  with  grades first  i n the year  subscores  first  two  with  years,  i t  average.  showed few  significant  c o r r e l a t i o n s w h i c h c o u l d be u s e d students It  i n the s e l e c t i o n of  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 s recommended  that overall  carving  should  process  and t h a t Manual A v e r a g e may  the  be g i v e n e q u a l  chalk carving score  a v e r a g e and c h a l k  emphasis i n t h e s e l e c t i o n be d i s r e g a r d e d i f  i s available.  T A B L E OF  CONTENTS  ABSTRACT LIST  OF T A B L E S  CHAPTER I :  INTRODUCTION  CHAPTER I I :  R E V I E W OF T H E L I T E R A T U R E  Dental Aptitude Factor  Analysis  Predictive CHAPTER I I I :  Analysis  Battery  Studies  Studies  D E S I G N OF T H E  Preparation  CHAPTER I V :  Test  STUDY  o f t h e Data  File  o f t h e Data  RESULTS  Restriction  o f Range  Correlations of Individual Grades with P r e d i c t o r s  Course  C o r r e l a t i o n s of Year Averages Predictors Correlations  Between Year  with  Averages  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 CHAPTER V:  D I S C U S S I O N AND  CHAPTER V I :  BIBLIOGRAPHY  CHAPTER V I I :  APPENDICES  RECOMMENDATIONS  vi  L I S T OF TABLES page TABLE I  Factor Analysis  Summary o f L i t e r a t u r e  TABLE I I  P r e d i c t i o n S t u d i e s Summary o f Literature  18-22  TABLE I I I  Summary o f R e g r e s s i o n  37  TABLE I V  Means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f o v e r a l l a v e r a g e s a n d DAT s u b s c o r e s f o r t o t a l a p p l i c a n t s g r o u p and admitted group f o r e n t e r i n g years 1972 t o 1976  42  TABLE V  Summary o f 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 t o A :4 f o r f i r s t y e a r course grades  45  TABLE V I  Summary o f 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 t o A 4 f o r second year course grades.  46-47  TABLE V I I  Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n analyses A 1 t o A 4 f o r t h i r d year course grades  48  TABLE 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 analyses A 1 t o A 4 f o r f o u r t h year course grades  49  TABLE IX  S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n between w e i g h t e d 1 s t y e a r a v e r a g e s 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 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  53  TABLE X  S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n between w e i g h t e d 2nd y e a r a v e r a g e s 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 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  54  TABLE X I  Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between w e i g h t e d 3rd y e a r 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 a v e r a g e and 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  55  Analyses  15  -  vii  TABLE X I I  Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted 4 t h 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 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  56  TABLE  Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted t o t a l 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 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  57  TABLE X I V  Means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s f o r year average, p r e r e q u i s i t e average, 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  58  TABLE XV  Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n analyses B 1 t o B 4 f o r year average and t o t a l average  59  TABLE XVI  Summary o f 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 C 1 t o C 5. Correlations between year averages and p r e v i o u s year averages  61  TABLE  Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between psychom 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 prosthodontics, operative dentistry and a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b o t h  63  XIII  XVII  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 a n a l y s e s D 1 t o D 6. Correlations between psychomotor and 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 grades 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 and a combination of both  64  1  CHAPTER  1  INTRODUCTION  The and  high  the high  early  cost of professional education attrition  rate i n professional schools  part of the twentieth century  demand f o r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y administrators*,  Dental  schools  expensive  pressure  on d e n t a l admissions'  predicting  success  to  develop  aptitude tests  in  1927  skepticism reflected this it the  seems.  procedures  schools.  Executives  The f i r s t  This attitude  own j u d g m e n t . "  with  some  was  that  "...in  q u a l i t y must be measured; so  frequently are forced t o assent  pronouncements o f standardized t e s t s  their  schools  i n 1929.  and were regarded  (1943), who c o m p l a i n e d  age e v e r y  and t h e  l e dto the  a n d New Y o r k U n i v e r s i t i e s  by d e n t a l educators*/ by Cowling  a r e among  were t h e U n i v e r s i t y o o f Iowa  were e x p e r i m e n t a l  statistical  America  o f a p t i t u d e e t e s t s aimed a t  i n dental  and Columbia  These t e s t s  i n North  university  of the professional faculties  of batteries  i nthe  l e d t o an i n c r e a s i n g  by government and  the most  introduction  i n universities  to  i n preference to  2  A l t h o u g h most d e n t a l predental  grades as  s t u d i e s of t h e i r prior  t o 1940.  data a t the f r o m 1932  schools  a basis  predictive validity An  exception  was  been  .54  grade p o i n t  average i n d e n t a l  between p r e d e n t a l  than t y p i c a l  school  r e s u l t s reported  i n current  studies  undertaken analyzed  in alternate  McGrath's f i n d i n g of  of  t i o n s found  had  a  significant  today.  reflect  abilities  restriction and  r e j e c t i o n of  ability,  of the  the  total  the  be  between t h a t  the  ability  sample i s t h e After  Aptitude  s e l e c t i o n of  greater  psychomotor.  occurs,  Lower c o r r e l a impact the  better  range  standard  a measure of  standard  any  w h e t h e r i t be by  correlation coefficients  c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e where  s e l e c t e d group  P r o g r a m was  range  deviation  T h u s , t h e more s e l e c t i o n be  This  students  The  same a b i l i t y ,  lower w i l l and  of  schools.  students.  than the  that  s e v e r a l years of  Testing  to dental  group, t a k e n as  s e l e c t e d g r o u p on  ability  apply  l e s s competent  will  academic or  the  t h o s e who  occurs through  d e v i a t i o n of of  of  total  considerably  improved a d m i s s i o n s p r o c e d u r e s which r e s t r i c t of  classes  g r a d e s and is  on  statistical  M c G r a t h , who  U n i v e r s i t y of Buffalo  t o 1940.  heavily  f o r s e l e c t i o n , few  correlation  higher  relied  ( G u l l i k s e n , 1950).  t e s t i n g , the instituted  nationwide i n 1951,  and  Dental since  3  that  time  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  applicants  t o take  Subsequently, took the  t h e Dental Aptitude Test  i n 1966, t h e Canadian Dental A s s o c i a t i o n  the responsibility DAT p r o g r a m The  years  nature  f o ra d m i n i s t e r i n g and e v a l u a t i n g  f o r Canada. 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  as r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y  more d e t a i l e d  information.  standardized  t e s t s were used  scores were d e r i v e d Chapter  there  tests  used  factors basis  s t u d i e s have  I n t h e U.S.A. i n 1 9 7 7 , f i v e from  which  of tests  eleven  and s c o r e s ) .  i s the chalk carving test i n t h e U.S.A.  test  produced  coded  (seeAppendix A f o r c o d i n g  I I f o rnature  1977,  (DAT).  I n Canada i n  i n addition  A l s o , t h e 16PF, a  has been a d m i n i s t e r e d on an  s i n c e 1974; t h e r e s u l t s  of this  method,  tothe  personality  experimental  test  are, as y e t ,  unpublished. The  American Dental A s s o c i a t i o n D i v i s i o n  Measurements how t h e y  used  i n 1975, surveyed  of Education  dental schools t o  information i n admissions.  Ninety-three per  cent o f schools r a t e d t h e p r e d e n t a l grade p o i n t as  "very  per four  important",  t h e DAT w a s s e c o n d  cent o f schools rating per cent  i t "very  rated personal  determine  average  with seventy-five  important".  interviews very  Fifty-  highly.  4  Rating  o r recommendations  considered schools. At  very No  important  other  i n dental  present  being  yet  for  Additionally,  the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y g r a d u a t e work  and r e s e a r c h . has a broad summarized 1.  2.  main  criterion  o n e may This  at  look  latter  aim of d e n t a l  dental  schools  further  area  i s as  schools i s  are  charged  f o r the preparation of  leading to specialized  I t i s obvious  individuals  practice,  that the dental  spectrum of o b j e c t i v e s .  teaching  curriculum  T h e s e may  be  as f o l l o w s :  Academic  excellence i n basic biological  and d e n t a l  sciences.  Excellence  i n surgical  soft  techniques  t i s s u e s and m a n i p u l a t i o n  3.  Excellence  4.  Professionalism.  In Canada, lesser  importance.  and 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  community. with  The  of  p r e d i c t o r s aiming?  although  of graduates.  were  per cent  of universal  i s the only  considered,  not researched.  to t r a i n  was  are these  school  p r e d i c t success  advisors  by t h i r t y - n i n e  measure  what c r i t e r i a  Success  to  by p r e d e n t a l  with  sciences  hard  and  of dental materials.  i n p a t i e n t management.  these  o b j e c t i v e s a r e met  degree i n a four-year  to a greater  program o f s t u d i e s a f t e r  or a  5  three-year The in  p r e d i c t i o n o f academic the s u r g i c a l areas  point made and  preprofessional  and manual  scores,  while  to predict  views. gated  success  i n this  entering  Admissions Committee  preprofessional Test  i n the  scores,  as c r i t e r i a  Committee  i s asked score  letters  t o assign to overall  t o deal  f o rletters  f o rthe Faculty  with inter-  of Dentistry  Columbia has used  of reference  overall Dental  and p l a c e  of a  average and p r e r e q u i s i t e  of reference study  of  The  seventy per cent  and place  of  twenty residence.  to investigate the predictive  a v e r a g e , a n d DAT o n " s u c c e s s  i n the Faculty  a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  Columbia"  recommendations regarding  predictors.  Somee  technique were n o t i n v e s t i -  t o DAT, a n d t h e r e m a i n i n g  I t was t h e a i m o f t h i s  specific  16PF.  f o rselecting studies.  average, t e n per cent cent  be  behavioural  average, p r e r e q u i s i t e average,  residence  candidate's  grade  study.  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  Aptitude  dexterity  and p r o f e s s i o n a l problems by t h e use o f  The 16PF and i n t e r v i e w  The  program.  an attempt w i l l  i n Canada a r e making an attempt  behavioural  per  excellence  and a r t s  p r o f e s s i o n a l areas by t h e newly employed  faculties  at  science  i s aimed a t by both  a v e r a g e a n d DAT i n the future  basic  of Dentistry  a n d t o make  the use of these  6  T h e s e 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,  w i t h an o v e r a l l school.  average  Selected  t i o n with purely perceptual The admitted 1976.  and  f o r the  four years of  and  dental  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 e c h n i c a l grades  psychomotor  s t u d y was  conducted  as measures o f  abilities. on  a total  of  312  students  t o t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y between 1969  and  7  CHAPTER I I  REVIEW OF  The material Test DAT  literature  The  battery  studies  test battery  predictive grade p o i n t  to  DAT  DAT  encompasses  Dental  Aptitud^e  and  other  academic  criteria.  and  some o f t h e form.  a v e r a g e and  DAT  The  DAT in  order  measured.  The  o v e r a l l approach c o r r e l a t i n g with success i n dental  i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o the subtests  history  factor analysis  j u s t what i s b e i n g  s t u d i e s c o v e r an  of  battery,  traces  to  the  of the  i t s present  been s u b j e c t e d  predictability this  of the  nature of the  has  study  f a c t o r a n a l y s i s s t u d i e s p e r f o r m e d on  to better describe  Closer  nature of the  a whole, c e r t a i n s u b t e s t s  predictive  of the  LITERATURE  reviewed i n t h i s  r e l a t e d to the  battery, as  THE  perceptual  of the  DAT  and  school.  manual  battery  i s done i n  section. It  i s g e n e r a l l y the  case that p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l  c o r r e l a t e more h i g h l y w i t h school  t h a n do  preprofessional  DAT  scores.  grade p o i n t  student performance i n This  happens because  average represents  a  grades dental  the composite  8  of many t e s t scores and several years. average may  grades r e c e i v e d over a p e r i o d  Moreover, the p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grade p o i n t  r e f l e c t motivational  f a c t o r s which i n f l u e n c e  the academic performance o f students i n d e n t a l In c o n t r a s t , DAT  of  school.  academic scores c o n s t i t u t e a more  u n i t a r y measure of achievement and  scholastic aptitude  than p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades. P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades have l i m i t a t i o n s which can minimized by e x p r e s s i n g scores. grading  them i n terms of  standardized  There are v a r i a t i o n s between i n s t i t u t i o n s i n procedures.  There are even v a r i a t i o n s i n  procedures w i t h i n i n s t i t u t i o n s , and  between the  o r l e v e l o f courses w i t h i n an i n s t i t u t i o n . t a k i n g p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades, DAT  grading  difficulty  Thus, by  academic average,  other r e l e v a n t v a r i a b l e s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n ,  better  predictions result.  The  Dental A p t i t u d e The  be  Test  Battery  D i v i s i o n of Educational  Measurement o f  American Dental A s s o c i a t i o n i n 1951,  the  designed the  b a t t e r y to i n c l u d e f i v e types of p r e d i c t i v e t e s t s : 1.  Mental l e v e l  2.  Reading comprehension  DAT  and  3.  Science  comprehension  4.  V i s u a l i z a t i o n or  5.  Carving  space  dexterity  I n t h e U.S.A. i n 1977, s u b t e s t s were u s e d . the  A.  test.  eleven  Carving  Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t  Abilities  conception  The  coded s c o r e s  d e x t e r i t y was  became t h e  eleven  coded  from  dropped  Perceptual  eight  and  Motor  s c o r e s were a s  QUANTITATIVE REASONING - p r e s e n t l y t h e  follows: DAQVT  (Dental Admission Q u a n t i t a t i v e - V e r b a l Test) used t o y i e l d Verbal  the  "Quantitative  R e a s o n i n g " , and  Quantitative reasoning is  the  ability  manipulate numerical intelligently B.  or numerical with  i s the  t h e meaning o f  ability  numbers,  to  ability  t o use  deal  and  or  verbal  understand  words. score  i s a combination of  " Q u a n t i t a t i v e R e a s o n i n g " and  the  "Verbal  I t i s sometimes r e f e r r e d t o a s  "intelligence"  to  quantitative materials.  ability  TOTAL Q + V - t h i s  scores.  scores.  r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and  VERBAL REASONING - l i n g u i s t i c reasoning  C.  with  Reasoning",  " T o t a l Q + V"  to reason  is  score.  This test  has  the  Reasoning" an  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  with college populations  i n general.  The  c o m p a r i s o n s a r e r o u t i n e l y made b y t h e  Admissions  T e s t i n g Committee a n d a n y t r e n d s , e i t h e r able or unfavourable, to D.  the dental  are reported  - a reading test  better predictor of scholastic i n t e l l i g e n c e o r mental  instrument  information.  E.  success  level  test.  and comprehend  T h i s i s an  new  and i s n o t a s p e e d  compre-  test.  BIOLOGY - t h i s s c o r e i s a m e a s u r e o f t h e  of  b i o l o g y and a b i l i t y  t o apply  INORGANIC CHEMISTRY - t h i s  these  score  principles apply these ORGANIC  of inorganic chemistry  principles.  elementary  and a b i l i t y t o  principles.  CHEMISTRY - t h i s s c o r e  i s a measure o f t h e  a p p l i c a n t ' s k n o w l e d g e o f t h e most principles  principles  i s a measure o f  t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f t h e most  G.  than i s  I t i s a measure o f r e a d i n g  a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f t h e e l e m e n t a r y  F.  i s often a  t o measure t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s a b i l i t y t o  read, organize, analyze  hension  immediately  schools.  READING COMPREHENSION  an  favour-  o f organic chemistry  elementary  and a b i l i t y t o  11  apply H.  these  principles.  TOTAL SCIENCE - t h e t o t a l of  chemistry  information  and a b i l i t y  PMAT/2D - t h i s  t o apply  perceptual  this  information.  a n d s o l v e two  of the  dimensional  problems.  PMAT/3D - t h i s ability  i n b i o l o g y and  score r e f l e c t s the a b i l i t y  applicant t o deal with  J.  combination  E , P and G above and r e f l e c t s t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s  knowledge o f f a c t u a l  I.  science i s a  s c o r e measures t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s  t o deal with  p e r c e p t u a l problems. Relations test  and s o l v e t h r e e  dimensional  P a r t s o f t h e Space  formerly  included i n the Dental  Admission Test a r e a l s o included i n t h i s K.  MANUAL AVERAGE - i s a PMAT a v e r a g e o f 2D a n d 3D.  I n C a n a d a i n 1977, t h e c o d e d A.  subtest.  ACADEMIC AVERAGE - t h i s  scores derived a r e : i s a combination  o f B, C,  D, E b e l o w . B.  READING COMPREHENSION - a s f o r t h e U.S.A.  C.  BIOLOGY - a s f o r t h e U.S.A.  D.  INORGANIC CHEMISTRY - a s f o r t h e U.S.A.  E.  TOTAL SCIENCE - a s f o r t h e U.S.A. u s i n g b i o l o g y and i n o r g a n i c  chemistry.  only  12  F.  2D - a s f o r t h e U.S.A.  G.  3D - a s f o r t h e U.S.A.  H.  PMAT AVERAGE - a v e r a g e o f 2D and 3D  I.  CHALK CARVING - c a r v i n g t e s t u s i n g r u l e and a p i e c e  K.  are  lengths,  and  similarity  of chalk.  sharp angles,  The c r i t e r i a flat  t o the plan  planes,  c a r v i n g weighted by c h a l k  c a r v i n g t e s t was r e p l a c e d  carving.  years  of use, the  b y t h e PMAT i n 1972.  However, i n C a n a d a , t h e c a r v i n g t e s t was d r o p p e d s h o r t p e r i o d between A p r i l was t h e n r e - i n t r o d u c e d  1972, a n d J a n u a r y 1975. I t  was a c c e p t e d  test  carving  should  be d r o p p e d .  finger d e x t e r i t y as a construct c o n c e r n e d many.  Peterson  o f the chalk  responsible  o f t h e PMAT a n d c h a l k  a r e s i m i l a r , many p e o p l e a r e n o t c o n v i n c e d  the chalk  favour  w i t h mixed f e e l i n g s  schools.  Althoughhthe p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y  that  for a  f o r further validation studies  since i t s discontinuance  carving  symmetry  given.  I n t h e U.S.A., a f t e r t w e n t y - f i v e  by many  measured  MANUAL AVERAGE - a c o m b i n a t i o n o f 2D, 3D, a n d chalk  chalk  a knife, a  The l a c k o f  i n t h e DAT b a t t e r y h a s  (1974) s p e a k s s t r o n g l y i n  carving test  f o rthe a t t r i t i o n  and c l a i m s  i t i spartly  r a t e d r o p p i n g f r o m a s much  13  as  fifty  per  average of simple  fact  battery truly  cent  i n the  middle  s i x per  cent  i n 1973.  that  tested  Graham in  in  in digital  years,  in five  the  t e c h n i c a l performance i n a The  administer,  chalk  carving  e s p e c i a l l y on  whose c a r v i n g s  PMAT  h a v e t o be  predictive validity  of  b).  t e s t i s an  mailed  discontinue  the  chalk  Much e m p h a s i s  i s placed  motor t e s t s m a i n l y because o f about these c o n s t r u c t s school.  to evaluation  skills.  perceptual  the  paucity  f o r candidates  school  is directly  centres  same, t h e y  shown by  t e s t i n the  to  the  Zullo to  U.S.A. and of  related to  psychoinformation  entering  A d d i t i o n a l l y , approximately h a l f of  spent i n d e n t a l  dental  applicants  t e s t s i s the  on  studies  expensive t e s t  Committee d e c i d e d  carving  is  success  U.S.A.  Even though  two  DAT  he  DAT  chalk  in predicting  l a r g e numbers o f  the  However, t h e  that  (2-3D) and  m e a s u r e d i f f e r e n t fcon's'ttu'cts^, a s  (1971  the  separate  sample o f  w i t h t h e po;s;s:3jbil]3i.%y o f damage.  do  that  dexterity.  t e s t s performed e q u a l l y  schools.  claims  applicant's conception  (1972) showed t h a t  four consecutive  carving  He  national  a manual d e x t e r i t y t e s t i s i n t h e  adds t o the  being  1940's t o t h e  dental  the  time  these  14  Factor Analysis Several the nature  Studies  s t u d i e s have shown s i m i l a r  of the Dental  summary o f t h e s e  Aptitude  results  Test battery.  that the carving  t e s t o f t h e DAT m e a s u r e d a f a c t o r r e l a t e d digital  battery with  A  i s shown i n T a b l e I .  Chen, .<ret ffatl. (1967) f o u n d  r a t h e r than  regarding  skill  t o temperament  and t h a t t h e e n t i r e  the exception  ability  DAT  o f q u a n t i t a t i v e and v e r b a l  reasoning  a n d c a r v i n g a b i l i t y m e a s u r e s one common  suggested  t o be c o g n i t i v e f a c i l i t y .  Dworkin  (1970) f o u n d  analysis of the thirteen data  obtained  sity  yielded three 1.  that the r e s u l t s of a  f r o m t h e c l a s s o f 1966, a t New York«;Univer-  Science  factors:  factor with  l o a d i n g s by academic  science application, Manual f a c t o r w i t h spatial 3.  relations  total  These r e s u l t s  Test  science,  s c i e n c e and r e a d i n g . average*;  and c a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y .  I n t e l l i g e n c e factor with  Aptitude  factual  l o a d i n g s by manual  average, i n d i v i d u a l :/.  factor  s c o r e s o f t h e DAT b a s e d on t h e  average, b i o l o g y , chemistry,  2.  factor  l o a d i n g s by a c a d e m i c  S c h o l a s t i c and C o l l e g e  (SCAT) a n d r e a d i n g .  do n o t v a r y  g r e a t l y from those  of the  TABLE I FACTOR ANALYSIS - SUMMARY A u t h o r s and Year o f Study  Sample Studied  Variables  1. P a d s h a d l e y , Chen 72 j u n i o r s DAT and S h r o c k , 1967 U n i v e r s i t y o f California 196 5-66  subtests  OF  LITERATURE  Extraction/ T r an s f o rma t i on  Results  principle componeht/na*  1. Temperament f a c t o r l o a d e d 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 l o a d e d by r e m a i n d e r o f DAT.  2. D w o r k i n , 19 70  123 s t u d e n t s 13 s c o r e s o f 1966 c l a s s o f DAT New Y o r k School o f Dentistry  na/varimax  1 . S c i e n c e f a c t o r , l o a d i n g s by biology, chemistry, factual science, science application, t o t a l science, reading. 2.Manual f a c t o r , l o a d i n g s by manual a v e r a g e , s p a t i a l relations, carving dexterity.  3. Z u l l o , 1971  111 s t u d e n t s 7 subtests o f 196 8 Freshmen DAT University of Pittsburgh  principle component/ varimax  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 .  4. Z u l l o ,  100 s t u d e n t s P e r c e p t u a l 1968-69 and m o t o r University of abilities  principle component/ varimax  1 . S p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s l o a d e d on d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r y f r o m PMAT and PMAT d i d n o t l o a d on dexterity factors.  5. F u l l 1971  19 71  and F o l e y ,  6. Graham, 19 74  119 F r e s h m e n University of Iowa, 196 7, 1968  DAT a v e r a g e s principle D e n t a l Anatomy component/ P r e d e n t a l GPA varimax 1 s t y e a r GPA  1163 PMAT randomly sampled from 19 73 U.S. DAT Program.  * n/a - i n f o r m a t i o n n o t s t a t e d  items  operator choice/ varimax  1. A c a d e m i c p o t e n t i a l 2. D e x t e r i t y a n d s p a c e 3. Anatomy s u r v i v a l 1. B l o c k d e s i g n 2. L e n g t h o f l i n e s 3.3D d r a w i n g 4.Space r e l a t i o n s 5.Sequence o f i d e a s 6.Passing o b j e c t through  hole.  16  test  designers.  Reading comprehension  i s not a  separate  f a c t o r b u t does l o a d on b o t h s c i e n c e and i n t e l l i g e n c e . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e manual f a c t o r a p p e a r s t o r e p r e s e n t visualization  and space c o n c e p t i o n  Dworkin suggested Zullo the  and c a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y .  f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f these  (1971 a) l o o k e d  f a c t o r s emerged.  He l a b e l l e d  1.  Verbal  2.  Abstract  3.  Carving d e x t e r i t y .  Zullo abilities conflict  similarly  that  science reasoning  i n dental  students  Chen, e t a l .  He s u g g e s t e d t h a t h i s  o f Chen whose t e s t s f o r m a n u a l s k i l l s  Spatial  Z u l l o observed  (PMAT).  that  from h i s a n a l y s i s t h a t t h e  R e l a t i o n s t e s t o f t h e DAT l o a d e d  Test  from  a r e more g e n e r a l l y  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 t h e P e r c e p t u a l Ability  and motor  and produced f i n d i n g s i n  d e f i n i t i o n o f manual d e x t e r i t y may be d i f f e r e n t  accepted.  only  these:  (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  with  findings.  a t o n l y t h e seven s u b t e s t s o f  DAT u s e d a t t h a t t i m e a n d f o u n d  three  both  Further,  Motor  t h e PMAT l o a d e d  on t h e  s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s f a c t o r b u t n o t on any o f t h e d e x t e r i t y factors extracted. not  Further  evidence  measure a n y m o t o r a b i l i t y  t h a t t h e PMAT d o e s  i n a positive fashion i s  17  o f f e r e d by the t e s t s t h a t loaded on t h e B i p o l a r  Factor.  T h i s f a c t o r i s so named because o f t h e o p p o s i t e p o l a r i t y of t h e f a c t o r s l o a d i n g on i t . The f i n g e r d e x t e r i t y t e s t and  t o a l e s s e r degree t h e c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t loaded  p o s i t i v e l y on t h i s f a c t o r , whereas the PMAT loaded negatively. F u l l and F o l e y  (1971) performed a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s on  nine v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d i n g t h r e e DAT averages, anatomy grades, p r e d e n t a l , averages  (GPA).  dental  and f i r s t year grade p o i n t  They found t h r e e f a c t o r s emerging which  they l a b e l l e d academic p o t e n t i a l , d e x t e r i t y 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, r e l a t e s h i g h l y t o f i r s t year grade p o i n t average, but not t o academic p o t e n t i a l .  This  indicates  t h a t performance i n f i r s t year i s r e l a t e d t o anatomy but not t o the p r e d i c t i v e t e s t s . Graham (1974) performed a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s o f t h e items o f t h e PMAT (which now i n c l u d e d as p a r t o f t h e t e s t ) and observed t h a t f a c t o r s emerged: 1.  Block d e s i g n  2.  Length o f l i n e s  3.  3D drawing  space r e l a t i o n s s i x separate  . TABLE  II  PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF A u t h o r s and Year o f Study 1958  Sample Studied  Predictor Variables  LITERATURE  Criterion Variables  . M  a  i  n  . F  i  n  . d  i  n  9  s  1.  Parkin,  2.  T o c c h i n i , Endy, Thomassen and Reinke, 1961  148 s t u d e n t s Age, f r o m g r a d u a t - GPA, ing classes GPA 1955-57 a t University of the P a c i f i c  3.  DeRevere,  U n i v e r s i t y o f Space 1st year Pennsylvania relations, operative class of 1959 c h a l k c a r v i n g . t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s , 4th year c l i n i c a l operative grades  .37 and .39 between 1 s t y e a r o p e r a t i v e and c h a l k c a r v i n g and s p a c e r e l a t i o n s r e s p e c t ively. .26 between 4 t h y e a r c l i n i c and chalk carving. Same f o r s p a c e relations.  4.  Hood,  30 0 f r e s h m e n dental students admitted from 1957-60 a t U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota  .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 t h e o r y 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 a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e and o v e r a l l and t h e o r y GPA i n dental school.  1963.  1961  Nationwide population freshmen dental students  Preprof. GPA, Freshmen C o r r e l a t i o n o f .34 between o f DAT a c a d e m i c technique GPA, p r e p r o f . g r a d e s and f r e s h m e n and technique theory GPA theory grades; c o r r e l a t i o n o f average, other .28 between DAT a c a d e m i c DAT subtest a v e r a g e and f r e s h m e n t h e o r y scores grades. prereq. preprof.  Four-year dental school GPA  Preprof. GPA, Freshmen o v e r DAT a c a d e m i c a l l theory average, other grades, DAT s u b t e s t s , technique preprof. grade p o i n t college average. attended. Years of preprof. educatior age, m a r i t a l status.  C o r r e l a t i o n not reported; p r e p r o f . GPA b e s t p r e d i c t o r , t h e n DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e and marital status.  TABLE I I  -  continued  PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF Authors Year o f  6.  and Study  Sample Studied  Predictor Variables  LITERATURE  Criterion Variables  Main  Findings  M a n h o l d and Manhold, 1965  1960-64 graduating class at Seton H a l l . T o t a l number of students ranged from 134 t o 140.  DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e , DAT manual a v e r a g e preprof. science GPA, preprof. nonscience GPA, preprof. overall GPA  C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .32 between Four-year DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e and dental school basic science i n dental overall GPA, school, preprof. science basic science and GPA, p r e c l i n i c , g r a d e s c o r r e l a t e d .22 .40 w i t h b a s i c s c i e n c e GPA GPA, clinic. in dental school. GPA.  H e l l e r , Carson and D o u g l a s , 1965  88 s t u d e n t s in 1961, 87 s t u d e n t s in 1962, 79 s t u d e n t s i n 1963 a t University of Illinois.  DAT manual a v e r a g e , DAT academic average, preprof. science GPA, preprof. nonscience GPA, preprof. total hours, t o t a l s c i e n c e hours, t o t a l nonscience hours.  l s t year overa l l grades, 1st year theory grades, 1st year technique grades.  DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e c o r r e l a t i o n s r a n g e d f r o m .22 t o .27 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 ; DAT a c a d e m i c average 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 g r a d e s i n o n l y one o f t h r e e classes. Correlations high between a l l c a t e g o r i e s o f p r e p r o f . g r a d e s 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 g r a d e s and theory grades i n d e n t a l s c h o o l .  Ginley,  500 s e n i o r dental students chosen randomly from a national population i n 1962 and 19 64  DAT manual average, DAT a c a d e m i c average, DAT subtest scores.  Theory grades of seniors, technique grades o f seniors.  C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .21 f o r 1962 and 1964 between DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e and t h e o r y g r a d e s . A l l DAT s c o r e s e x c e p t f o r s p a c e 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 f r o m .06 to .23  1966  '. TABLE II, -  continued  PREDICTION STUDIES - SUMMARY OF Authors Year o f  and Study  Sample Studied  8.  M a n h o l d and M a n h o l d , 196 7  9.  Fernandez-Pabon, 3 c l a s s e s 1968. University Carolina, 1955, N = 1965, N = 1966, N =  10.  P h i p p s , F i shman, Scott, 1968  Predictor Variables  Seton H a l l 8-year study  LITERATURE  Criterion Variables  Main F i n d i n g s  DAT a c a d e m i c DAT manual General s c i e n c e grades o v e r a l l av.  Basic sciences, Preclinical dental sciences, 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 relations.  at Overall o f c o l l e g e av, overall 40 college s c i e n c e av, 49 total college 47 c r e d i t hours, college science credit hours, DAT manual, a c a d e m i c av. DAT s u b t e s t .  1st year t o t a l GPA, 4 t h y e a r t o t a l GPA, basic science GPA, laboratory t e c h n i q u e 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 . g r a d e s o r a c a d e m i c DAT w i t h f o u r y e a r GPA; overall c o l l e g e grade was b e s t predictor of basic science 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 .  1960-1963 graduating classes of University of Buffalo (361 students  Preprof. Freshmen d e n t a l required GPA, s c h o o l DAT. elective GPA,. t o t a l GPA, DAT a c a d e m i c av, DAT manual av, DAT s u b t e s t scores.  C o r r e l a t i o n s o f DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e w i t h 1 s t and 4 t h y e a r d e n t a l s t u d e n t s .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 1 s t and 4 t h y e a r g r a d e s . R e q u i r e d and e l e c t i v e p r e p r o f GPA n o t as e f f e c t i v e i n p r e d i c t i n g s u c c e s s 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 Year o f Study  Sample Studied  Predictor Variables  Criterion Variables  11.  510 students K r e i t and M a c D o n a l d , 1968 f r o m e i g h t graduating classes a t Indiana University School o f Dentistry (1956-6 3)  Preprof. g r a d e s , 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, Part II.  C o r r e l a t i o n o f .38 between p r e p r o f . grades and o v e r a l l d e n t a l s c h o o l GPA. C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .24 between DAT academic a v e r a g e a n d dental school grades.  12.  D w o r k i n , 19 70  134 students f r o m 19 66 c l a s s o f New York University School o f Dentistry  P r e p r o f . GPA, years o f prep r o f . educa t i o n , DAT m a n u a l a v , DAT academic av, o t h e r DAT subtest scores.  Freshman, sophomore, j u n i o r , senior theory and technique grades, freshman GPA i n d e n t a l school, o v e r a l l class standing.  Significant correlations of .25 a n d .43 b e t w e e n DAT academic average and freshman and sophomore t h e o r y g r a d e s . C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .19 a n d .24 between p r e p r o f . g r a d e s a n d f r e s h m a n and sophomore theory grades.  13.  G r a i n g e r , 1972  Canadian National  A l l DAT scores  14.  Bellanti, Mayberry, 1972.  UMKC 3 y e a r s students T i r a , 344  DAT c a r v i n g , DAT s p a c e visualization, DAT general achievement, GPA (predent.)  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 positives. Preclinical Fixed Prosthodontics 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 PREDICTION Authors and Year o f Study  Sample . Studied  continued  STUDIES - SUMMARY Predictor Variables  15. C h e b i b , 19 74  U n i v e r s i t y o f 11 DAT s c o r e s , chemistry, Manitoba, five classes. physics, biology, predentistry GPA.  16. Thompson,  19 75  Canadian National  A l l DAT scores.  17. Thompson, 1977  Canadian National  DAT s c o r e s 16PF s c o r e s  OF LITERATURE  Criterion Variables D i d a c t i c average laboratory average, c l i n i c average f o r each y e a r and f o r a l years.  Main  Findings  Manual a v e r a g e a n d l i s t y e a r l a b o r a t o r y .46. S e c o n d y e a r l a b o r a t o r y .42. C h a l k c a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d .36 t o l.45 w i t h l a b o r a t o r y o r c l i n i c for a l l four years. PMAT a n d c h a l k c a r v i n g .36 w i t h each o t h e r .  D i d a c t i c a v e r a g e C h a l k a n d 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. Preclinical average.  NJ  23  4.  Space  5.  Sequence o f i d e a s  6.  P a s s i n g an o b j e c t t h r o u g h  He s u g g e s t e d  relations  that  a hole.  stepwise m u l t i p l e  regression  analysis  s h o u l d be a p p l i e d t o t h e s e 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 on  w h e t h e r s u b s c o r e s o f t h e PMAT  t h e s e 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  than the t o t a l  test  score.  validity  To d a t e t h i s h a s n o t b e e n  published.  Predictive  Studies i  A summary o f t h e p r e d i c t i v e Table I I . the f a c t  Many o f t h e s t u d i e s  studies i s presented i n  i n the literature  that p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades a r e the best  p r e d i c t o r s o f academic performance that  reflect  the p r e d i c t a b i l i t y  w i t h DAT a c a d e m i c Parkin  i n d e n t a l s c h o o l , and  i n c r e a s e s when u s e d  i n combination  average.  (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 o f .35 between p r e d e n t a l g r a d e s and  first  year theory grades  DAT a c a d e m i c and f i r s t  a n d a c o r r e l a t i o n o f .28 between  year theory  grades.  T o c c h i n i e t a l (1961) f o u n d t h a t t h e b e s t of  s u c c e s s were g r a d e  and m a r i t a l performed  status.  p o i n t average, They found  b e t t e r than unmarried  predictors  DAT a c a d e m i c  that married students.  average  students  24  Hood and  (1963) employed  twenty-two p r e d i c t o r  three c r i t e r i o n variables  freshmen s t u d e n t s admitted Minnesota that  grade  point  only  average  significantly with  two  predictor and  DAT  from  and  predictors.  254  and  students of the entering  1963,  to the U n i v e r s i t y  regression  techniques  F o r each o f the  contributed  (R) o f  of I l l i n o i s ,  involving  o f 1961,  1962  Rs  Rs  year t o t a l that  for predicting grades  i t was  performance  ranged  more d i f f i c u l t  study.  * 22-,*?": 1'9 .and  to  .60.  The  t o p r e d i c t motor  to predict  Scott  reported  clinical  (1968), grades,  first  finding  skills  w i t h t h e r e s u l t s o f Hood's  P h i p p s , F i s h m a n and  not p o s s i b l e  .40  than academic performance,  et a l , i s consistent  variables.  f i r s t y e a r t h e o r y and  from  and  in predicting  freshmen technique grades w e r e p d i s a p p o i n t i n g , Multiple  from  multiple  predictor  three classes, multiple  .60  data  utilizing  eight  for  were  (1965) s t u d i e d  classes  .50  R's  freshman grades  Douglas  He  preprofessional  In c o n t r a s t ,  overall  H e l l e r , Carson  t o 1960.  correlation  p r e d i c t i n g t h e o r y and  300  of  manual a v e r a g e ,  to the m u l t i p l e  w i t h t h e same  1957  variables,  freshman t e c h n i q u e grades.  .61  involving  to the U n i v e r s i t y  School of D e n t i s t r y  found  i n a study  variables  found  by  Heller  (1963) i t was  although  they  .29.  25  obtained  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  criteria  i n v o l v i n g academic performance.  variables  employed by  preprofessional GPA,  total  derived their  required  GPA,  preprofessional  from the  study,  restricted  P h i p p s and  the  range of  The  predictor  his colleagues  preprofessional  GPA,  and  Dental Aptitude  f a i l u r e s and  various  the  were  elective  thirteen  Test.  However, i n  d r o p o u t s were o m i t t e d  the  criterion  scores  which  variable  considerably. M a n h o l d and a v e r a g e was 1967,  the  best  suggested that  t e c h n i q u e and r e l a t i o n s or Kreit .38  Manhold  predictor of basic chalk  clinical  a combination of the  and  MacDonald  grade p o i n t  eight year period b e t w e e n DAT g r a d e s was  carving  predicted  and  in  preclinical space  (1968) f o u n d a c o r r e l a t i o n o f g r a d e s and  final  final  academic average to p r e d i c t f i n a l  The  school  grades  dental  an  correlation  dental  Combining p r e d e n t a l  g r a d e s y i e l d e d a modest i n c r e a s e  dental  students over  Indiana U n i v e r s i t y .  a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e and fonllyj .25.  sciences  two.  a v e r a g e f o r 509 at  academic  performance b e t t e r than  between p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l  school  DAT  (1965) f o u n d DAT  with  school  to a m u l t i p l e  R of  .44  2 R  of  .19.  Interestingly, in this  study, the  reading  and  26  comprehension effective dental  subtest  school  grades.  chalk carving  This survey  gives  was f o u n d a l s o b y G r a i n e r i n Canada.  the chalk carving  measurement o f c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n  Later,  Grainger  test yielded  and d i g i t a l  I n a s t u d y done a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y  correlated  of Missouri a t carving  .39 t o .51 w i t 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 t e c h n i q u e Thompson  (1975) f o u n d PMAT a v e r a g e a n d c h a l k  correlated results national  .36 w i t h e a c h o t h e r and o b t a i n e d  i n 1976.  His studies  results.  a  deftness.  K a n s a s C i t y , B e l l a n t i e t a l (1972) f o u n d t h a t dexterity  found  o r dropped o u t o f t h e  i n v o l v i n g manual d e x t e r i t y .  (1974) added t h a t  He a l s o  t h o s e s t u d e n t s who s c o r e 4 o r  on t h e t e s t n e v e r f a i l e d  courses  s c o r e were a s  some f a l s e n e g a t i v e s b u t no  f a l s e p o s i t i v e s and t h a t better  science  a s t h e DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e i n p r e d i c t i n g  (1972) i n a n a t i o n a l that  and t h e t o t a l  grades.  carving similar  were o n t h e C a n a d i a n  I n 1977, he f o u n d a c o r r e l a t i o n o f  .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  g r a d e s and .15 between PMAT a v e r a g e a n d p r e c l i n i c a l In Dworkin's study of  (1970) i n v o l v i n g  134  t h e c l a s s o f 1966 a t New Y o r k U n i v e r s i t y ,  found that m u l t i p l e  c o r r e l a t i o n s between  grades.  students i t was  predictor  27  variables were of  .45 and  .36, u t i l i z i n g  the stepwise a n a l y s i s .  initial and  and sophomore and s e n i o r  the f i r s t This  academic average interesting  contrasts  manual p o r t i o n  that  and -.17  variables with the  f o r senior  technique  with technique grades  o f DAT  (1974) a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y  He a l s o  correlated  the f i r s t  more  t h a n was .the  found  and f i r s t  year  year  technique  t h e academic  s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h GPA  average  throughout  t h r e e y e a r s and showed no c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h  c a n t l y with technique  Chalk c a r v i n g and c l i n i c  y e a r s r a n g i n g from  Most s t u d i e s significant  typically  performance  .36 t o found  correlated  signifi-  throughout  .45. low b u t  statistically  c o r r e l a t i o n s between t h e m a n u a l p o r t i o n  the Dental Aptitude Test school.  grade  o f Manitoba  .46 and s e c o n d  found t h a t  technique performance.  the four  It i s  o f t h e DAT.  t e c h n i q u e c o u r s e s t o be .42.  DAT  o f t h e DAT was  t h e c o r r e l a t i o n between t h e manual a v e r a g e  courses  average  between  technique grades.  the academic p o r t i o n  correlated  Chebib  and s e n i o r  t o note  average,  highly  five  averages  c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .37 b e t w e e n DAT m a n u a l  sophomore t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s ,  point  technique  and p e r f o r m a n c e  of  i n dental  I n some c a s e s , t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s may  have b e e n  28  spuriously  low b e c a u s e t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e  contaminated case  with non-technique  i n the study conducted  An a v e r a g e  courses.  by K r e i t  c o r r e l a t i o n o f .26 was  was  T h i s was  and M a c D o n a l d  found  p o i n t average  (1968).  between t h e  manual p o r t i o n o f t h e D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t and grade  the  total  i n d e n t a l s c h o o l f o r t h e 502  s t u d e n t s on whom d a t a were a v a i l a b l e d u r i n g t h e e i g h t year p e r i o d . in  C o r r e l a t i o n s were  four of the eight classes;  obtained refined first  f o r any c l a s s was criteria  the highest  .38.  DeRevere  i n his prediction  correlation (1961) u s e d  study; grades  C o r r e l a t i o n s o f .37 and  relations tests  I n c o n t r a s t , c o r r e l a t i o n s o f .26 and between f o u r t h y e a r c l i n i c spatial  relations  validity  were and  respectively. found  The d i s c r e p a n c y  f o r the fourth year versus the  reflect  greater r e l i a b i l i t y  o f freshmen o p e r a t i v e t e c h n i q u e grades  c r i t e r i o n measure o f p e r c e p t u a l m o t o r s k i l l s study.  .39  i n the  and t h e c h a l k c a r v i n g  tests respectively.  between t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s f r e s h m e n g r a d e s may  grades  .26 were  more  i n the  between f r e s h m e n o p e r a t i v e t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s  t h e c h a l k c a r v i n g and s p a t i a l  and  significant  y e a r o p e r a t i v e t e c h n i q u e s c o u r s e and g r a d e s  f o u r t h year c l i n i c s . found  statistically  and asaa  i n DeRevere's  29  S e v e r a l w o r k e r s have i n v e s t i g a t e d o t h e r predict  psychomotor a b i l i t y .  These i n c l u d e Smith  D e u b e r t , e t a l , '(1975) and B r i g a n t e Brigante devices School  they  tests to  and Lamb d e s c r i b e d  a n d Lamb  (1976) ,  (1968).  a s e r i e s of mechanical  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  o f D e n t i s t r y , w h i c h were d e s i g n e d  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 able t o p r e d i c t the technique  performance o f  dental  d e v e l o p e d t h a n by  students  using  the t e s t s they  the manual p o r t i o n o f t h e D e n t a l perception  Aptitude  and c o n t r o l t e s t s t h e y  t o measure e l e v e n  u s e d were  abilities:  1.  Tactile  2.  Purposeful  3.  Depth  4.  Visual  5.  Tactile discrimination  6.  Hard/soft  7.  Surface  8.  Finger pressure  9.  Finger  palpation hand  direction  perception acuity  sensitivity  contour  tension  matching co-ordination co-ordination  10.  Hand s t e a d i n e s s w i t h  11.  Texture  sensitivity.  Test.  support  The  designed  30  They found t h a t c o r r e l a t i o n s between t h e i r t e s t b a t t e r y and  technique course grades ranged between .42  and  over a three year p e r i o d f o r f o r t y to s i x t y - f i v e i n each y e a r .  students  By c o n t r a s t , the c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t  c o r r e l a t e d between .21 and Since then, no  .26  f o r the same  students.  f u r t h e r r e p o r t s on t h i s s u b j e c t have  appeared i n the  literature.  In a Canadian survey, Grainger  (1973) found t h a t  females performed b e t t e r than males i n d e n t a l and  .58  school  t h a t younger students performed b e t t e r than o l d e r .  Graham  (1976) on a s i m i l a r group found t h a t e i g h t  cent of a p p l i c a n t s were female but e l e v e n per were accepted.  per  cent  He concluded, however, t h a t t h e r e  was  not a l a r g e enough d i s c r i m i n a t i o n on which t o base admissions p o l i c y . Some work has been done w i t h regard and  personality.  to a t t i t u d e s  An unpublished r e p o r t to the Canadian  Dental A s s o c i a t i o n by Thompson (1977), compared admitted a p p l i c a n t s w i t h r e j e c t e d a p p l i c a n t s on the b a s i s o f 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 s c a l e of the 16PF. was  No  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was  a wide range of d u l l and  each group.  found.  There  b r i g h t students throughout  31  To  summarize, t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f  overall  average w i t h f i r s t  by D w o r k i n t o  .60  by H e l l e r  preprofessional  year t h e o r y ranged et a l .  P.hip.pjs.i a l l o b s e r v e d c o r r e l a t i o n s  Hood, P a r k i n ,  in this  DAT  academic  .25  a c c o r d i n g t o D w o r k i n and w i t h o v e r a l l  school  .22  overall school Kreit in  average c o r r e l a t e d  by H e l l e r  average c o r r e l a t e d from  0.0  and M c D o n a l d , and  this  year theory GPA  by Hood.  with o v e r a l l to  by Thompson t o  .37.  GPA  Preprofessional i n dental  correlations  Bellanti  correlated .42  with technique grades  e t a l , DeRevere o b t a i n i n g  Manual average a l s o c o r r e l a t e d .36  to  correlations  strongly  .46 b y  m e a s u r e d c o r r e l a t i n g w i t h any c r i t e r i a  a v e r a g e , DAT  i s interesting  battery  i s , generally  a l t h o u g h t h e two value.  m a n u a l a v e r a g e and  t h a t o n l y t h e one  Chebib. being  average,  DAT  chalk carving.  subtest of the  s p e a k i n g , o f any  averages - academic  with  of success i n  school are preprofessional o v e r a l l  academic  from  by C h e b i b w i t h most o t h e r s  Generally, the only predictors currently  It  i n dental  .49 by Hood w i t h  Phipps obtaining  t e c h n i q u e grades r a n g i n g from  dental  and  range.  including of  .36  .19  range.  with f i r s t  by F e r a n d e z - P a b o n  Chalk carving .19  e t a l and  from  DAT  predictive value,  and m a n u a l - a r e o f  32  CHAPTER I I I  DESIGN OF THE STUDY  The  purpose  of t h i s  predictive validity  of the o v e r a l l  p r e r e q u i s i t e average, on  s t u d y was t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e preprofessional  and D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t  average,  battery  " 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  of B r i t i s h ways.  Columbia".  Firstly,  grades  " S u c c e s s " was m e a s u r e d  i n several  f o r i n d i v i d u a l courses  throughout  t h e f o u r y e a r d e n t a l p r o g r a m were u s e d . averages  Secondly,  w h i c h were t h e a v e r a g e s  of the grades f o r  courses a c r o s s t h e year weighted  according to unit  a s a s s i g n e d b y t h e i n s t i t u t i o n were u s e d .  year  value  T h i r d l y , as  a m e a s u r e o f p s y c h o m o t o r and p e r c e p t u a l " s u c c e s s " , technique grades and  from  t h e second  year Fixed Prosthodontics  O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y c o u r s e s were u s e d .  Finally,  a  c o r r e l a t i o n between y e a r s t o e s t i m a t e t h e p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f one y e a r b y a n o t h e r was d o n e .  P r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e Data D a t a were c o l l e c t e d students admitted  File from t h e f i l e s  o f 312 d e n t a l  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  33  University of B r i t i s h The  C o l u m b i a between 1969  and  1976.  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: representing the the  Student  of V i c t o r i a ,  grades from the U n i v e r s i t y  t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f A l b e r t a , and  score according t o the  table presented  i n A p p e n d i x B.  Student  since transformation t o the  by The  U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  to  a  conversion  f r o m o t h e r u n i v e r s i t i e s were t a k e n value  over  of p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l  Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y were c o n v e r t e d percentage  score  average of a l l courses  three or four years  education.  A percentage  at  scores  face  s c a l e used  C o l u m b i a was  not  possible. 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  Dentistry. 3.  The  i n t o the F a c u l t y o f  courses  are  i n Appendix  C.  Subscores of the Dental Aptitude Test b a t t e r y : T h e s e were n o r m - r e f e r e n c e d presented  4.  listed  s c o r e s coded  i n A p p e n d i x A and  and  a v e r a g e s as p r e s e n t e d  The  course  ase  representing  i n Chapter  grades f o r each student  subtests  II.  i n the  dental  34  program.  A grade expressed  standard  score.  c o u r s e was  The  +  purpose o f  r  m  and  c o u l d be  across  years  pooled  f o r the  As  t h e DAT  s u b t e s t compo-  c h a n g e d somewhat a r o u n d t h e y e a r s  stabilized  i n 1973,  analyze only the data average  i t was  from  Appendix D).  (The u n i t  course  One  time.  r e p r e s e n t s 3.0 average  value  the  was standard (see  i s a measure o f and  a three  hour  s e s s i o n e a c h week f o r t h e units.)  Subsequently,  f o r each o f the  d e n t a l p r o g r a m was  student.  Thus, f i v e c l a s s e s o f from  An  value of the course  the t o t a l  entering  to  i n each year  hour l e c t u r e  laboratory or c l i n i c  1970-72  onwards.  f o r each student w e i g h t i n g  scores according to unit  overall  decided  1972  grade f o r a l l courses  calculated  year  10  e  analysis.  Weighted Year Averages: sition  formula:  ( f f ? ) x 'standard d e v i a t i o n  course  T  score f o r each  done so t h a t a l l g r a d e s  for a particular  5.  standard  d e r i v e d a c c o r d i n g t o the  S c o r e = 50  T h i s was  as a M c C a l l ' s  f o u r y e a r s and  calculated  1972-76 t o t a l l i n g  an  first 195  for  f o r each  year  students  students,  four  35  c l a s s e s o f second  year  1972-75 t o t a l l i n g  157 s t u d e n t s , t h r e e c l a s s e s o f  third  year  totalling year  s t u d e n t s e n t e r i n g from  s t u d e n t s e n t e r i n g from  1972-74  109 s t u d e n t s , two c l a s s e s o f f o u r t h  s t u d e n t s e n t e r i n g from  1972-73 t o t a l l i n g  71  s t u d e n t s , and 76 s t u d e n t s . o v e r a l l f o u r y e a r s were e x a m i n e d .  Hence, a new  set of five  dependent  v a r i a b l e s was c r e a t e d . 6.  Standardized Technique  Grades:  technique course grades and of  dentoform  year  i n Fixed Prosthodontics  Operative D e n t i s t r y developed  direct of  Second  from e v a l u a t i o n  t e c h n i q u e work u n t a r n i s h e d by any  didactic  grades.  The s e c o n d  1976, 1977 and 1978 were u s e d .  year  classes  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 e a c h o f t h e s e  two  c o u r s e s was c o n s t a n t o v e r t h i s p e r i o d a s were t h e f a c u l t y members who  taught the courses. s  During  t h i s time,  grading procedure  the i n s t r u c t o r s developed  w h i c h 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 g r a d e s were d e v e l o p e d first  by each  established.  was u n m e a s u r e d . on a 1 0 - p o i n t  individual  discussed u n t i l  a  and  The  system a t  subsequently  a mutually agreeable grade  was  36  For  Operative  Dentistry,  t e c h n i q u e 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 class For  the dentoform  and r e s t o r a t i o n s and  I I I , IV and V c o m p o s i t e crown  Fixed  Prosthodontics,  preparations including  classical  were r e q u i r e d  full  gold,  3/4 g o l d , o n l a y ,  f  these years,  years completed  completed t h e  t h e 1975-76 a n d 1976-77  the chalk  carving,  1976-77 y e a r h a d a manual a v e r a g e  Analysis  required.  a l l subjects  3D a n d PMAT t e s t s ,  ceramo  Gold c a s t i n g s and  t e m p o r a r y r e s t o r a t i o n s were a l s o  2D  crown  o f the students  m e t a l and p o r c e l a i n j a c k e t .  For  preparations.  and o n l y t h e recorded.  o f t h e Data  Computer f i l e s were c o n s t r u c t e d  w i t h t h e s e d a t a and  a n a l y s i s p e r f o r m e d by a p a c k a g e d p r o g r a m TRP  (Triangular  R e g r e s s i o n P a c k a g e ) on t h e AMDAHL 470 M o d e l V6 c o m p u t e r . This  program c o n s i s t e d  analysis. and  The l e v e l  o f a step-wise m u l t i p l e  o f s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r both  d e l e t i n g v a r i a b l e s was .05.  regression  analyses  i s presented  regression entering  A summary o f t h e i n Table I I I .  37 "•TABLE I I I  Dependent  SUMMARY OF REGRESSION  ANALYSES  Variable  Independent  Variable  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 a v e r a g e s  2.  Individual  course grades  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  3.  Individual  course  grades  DAT a v e r a g e s  4.  Individual  course grades  DAT s u b t e s t s  A. l . .  B. 1.  Weighted  y e a r average  grades  O v e r a l l average DAT a v e r a g e  2.  Weighted  year average  grades  O v e r a l l average DAT s u b t e s t s  3.  Weighted  y e a r average  grades  DAT a v e r a g e s  4.  Weighted  year average  grades  DAT s u b t e s t s  C. 1.  Second y e a r average  2.  T h i r d y e a r average  3.  F o u r t h y e a r average  4.  T h i r d year average  5.  F o u r t h y e a r average  6.  F o u r t h y e a r average  grades grades grades  First  year average  grades  First  y e a r average  grades  First  y e a r average  grades  Second y e a r average  grades  grades  Second y e a r average  grades  grades  T h i r d y e a r average  grades  D. 1.  Fixed Prosthodontics technique grades  2.  Fixed Prosthodontics technique  PMAT, M a n u a l 2D, 3D, c h a l k  grades  average carving  grades PMAT, M a n u a l 3.  O p e r a t i v e technique grades  4.  O p e r a t i v e technique grades  5.  Combined O p e r a t i v e a n d Prosthodontics Combined O p e r a t i v e a n d Prosthodontics  2D, 3D, c h a l k  6.  PMAT, M a n u a l  average carving  average  grades grades  2D, 3D, c h a l k  carving  38  Tatsuoka regression  (1969) wrote "Use o f t h i s t o o l  (multiple  equation) i s i n d i c a t e d whenever one wishes  to make q u a n t i t a t i v e p r e d i c t i o n s on some c r i t e r i o n variable  (such as success on a j o b o r i n c o l l e g e ) on the  b a s i s o f scores on s e v e r a l p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s - such as t e s t s of general traits,  ability,  i n t e r e s t patterns  indispensable  s p e c i f i c aptitudes, and t h e l i k e .  personality  I t i s therefore  when one undertakes t o v a l i d a t e a b a t t e r y  o f t e s t s being used f o r s c r e e n i n g admission.'..."  c a n d i d a t e s f o r school  Houston and Mensh (1975) support t h i s  stand, but Chambers (1972) i s v e r y c r i t i c a l o f t h e r e g r e s s i o n model.  H i s reasons a r e t h a t :  1.  there  i s a s e l e c t i o n o f redundant p r e d i c t o r s .  2.  there  i s an i n t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t o f some p r e d i c t o r s .  3.  the p r e d i c t o r s may be n o n - l i n e a r .  4.  t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s a r e heterogeneous.  However, these reasons a r e , a t l e a s t i n p a r t , fallacious.  Stepwise methods do not s e l e c t redundant  p r e d i c t o r s and, i f d i v i d e d c a r e f u l l y i n t o groups o f subt e s t s and averages, do not have much i n t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t . The  n o n - l i n e a r i t y o f p r e d i c t o r s has not been  previously.  reported  Fernandez-Pabon (1968) was i n agreement w i t h  Chambers and suggested a d d i t i o n a l l y the problems o f  39  r e s t r i c t i o n o f range o f t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e , t h e unreliability the  of the criterion,  f a i l u r e to cross  small  sample  validate.  Since each a n a l y s i s  was b a s e d o n l i n e a r i t y o f t h e  r e l a t i o n s h i p s between t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e the  predictor  s i z e s , and  variables,  and each o f  a scattergram o f each  independent  v a r i a b l e w i t h e a c h d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e was made a n d inspected tions  v i s u a l l y t o ensure that  correla-  existed. Selection  of  no n o n - l i n e a r  o f t h e students by the Admissions  the Dental Faculty  o f The U n i v e r s i t y  C o l u m b i a was made m a i n l y o n t h e b a s i s  of British  o f o v e r a l l academic  a v e r a g e , t a k i n g i i n t o a c c o u n t t h e improvement made the  Committee  during  t h r e e q u a l i f y i n g y e a r s and t h e t y p e s o f c o u r s e s  m a k i n g up t h e a v e r a g e .  Lesser  i m p o r t a n c e was p l a c e d  DAT s c o r e s a n d l e t t e r s o f r e f e r e n c e p r o v i d e d by t h e a p p l i c a n t .  applicants  Since  v e r y few o t h e r C a n a d i a n o r  admission.  s e l e c t i o n i s based h e a v i l y  a correction explicit  gained  and a p p l i c a t i o n "  P r i o r i t y was g i v e n t o B r i t i s h  C o l u m b i a n s - s o much s o t h a t foreign  on  on o v e r a l l  average,  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  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 t h e i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s  and t h e  40  dependent v a r i a b l e s formula  (R) f o r the u n r e s t r i c t e d group.  The  was:  S  r  R  =  s  •  —  x  - •• •  1 - r n  *  X  •  (Gullicksen,  2 ^ 2 + r  1950)  , X.2 (—) x S  where r i s the c o r r e l a t i o n between the v a r i a b l e s  for  r e s t r i c t e d group, S  x  i s the  standard d e v i a t i o n of the t o t a l group  including e l i g i b l e unsuccessful s x i s the  applicants,  and  standard d e v i a t i o n o f the r e s t r i c t e d  group, i . e . the admitted  students.  I t should be noted t h a t the above c o r r e c t i o n may a p p l i e d o n l y t o the a p p l i c a n t group.  be  I t i s noted t h a t  there  i s an a d d i t i o n a l R e s t r i c t i o n o f range i n the form t h a t s i x t y - f i v e per cent o v e r a l l average i s r e q u i r e d  before  the  Admissions Committee w i l l accept an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r review. 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 was  also investigated  f o r a l l the  subscores of the  selection DAT.  41  CHAPTER IV  RESULTS  The  r e s u l t s of the a n a l y s i s of the data are  i n the following investigation  order.  There  of r e s t r i c t i o n  i s a discussion  o f range  presented  of  the  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 with predictors, averages  with predictors,  averages  and  s c o r e s and  finally  c o r r e l a t i o n s between  seen  technique  Range  i n Gullicksen's  formula  (see C h a p t e 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 resulting  from  explicit  standard deviations applicants  s e l e c t i o n , a comparison  of the grades  to the admitted  the  standard deviations  groups are  s i m i l a r and  of the t o t a l  group i s necessary.  o f T a b l e IV f o r t h e y e a r s e n t e r i n g that  year  predictors.  R e s t r i c t i o n of As  c o r r e l a t i o n s between  year  1972  of the grades  i n some c a s e s t h e  deviation  f o r the admitted  the t o t a l  applicants.  t o 1975  g r o u p was  III) for  range of  the  group of Inspection reveals  of the  two  standard  g r e a t e r than  Thus, t o c o r r e c t the  that  of  correlations  TABLE I V : 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  Total 1972-73 n=163  1973-74 n=164  1974-75 n=116  5.24 1.50  4.53 1.57  4.92 2.17  5.50 1.61  6.29 1.66  73. 4 5.0 8  4. 75 1.33  no test  4.66 2.04  4.82 1.85  5.24 1.77  4.02 2.08  4.01 1.99  4.25 1.84  4.00 1.70  77.6 4.62  5.29 1.29  5.0 8 1.91  5.21 1. 85  6.13 1.63  5. 89 1.80  5.00 1.87  3.74 1. 71  4.06 1.60  4.57 1.27  74.3 5.47 s'  5.20 1.76  4. 75 2.08  5.51 1.46  5.44 1.70  6.55 1.60  4.63 2.04  4.26 1. 79  4.94 1.81  no test  78. 8 4.88  5.92 1.46  5.05 1.83  5.67 1.53  6.15 1.41  6.18 1.32  4.90 2.19  5.28 1. 76  5.23 2.02  74.9 5.93  4.64 1.69  4.76 1.60  4.67 1.92  5.04 1.70  4.13 2.13  4.54 1.90  4.61 1. 85  4.79 1.71  78.4 4.56  4.95 1.72  3.80 1.86  5.15 1.44  5.40 1. 78  5.78 1.58  4.55 2.12  4.85 1.78  4.81 1. 80  5.28 1.53  X  X  X  X  s X  s 1976-77 n=201  X  n/a*  no test  no test  X  s  78. 3 3.89  no test  5.54 1.95  4.16 2.26  n/a  4.43 2.07  n/a  n/a  n/a  n/a  4.23 1.84  4.24 1.75  4.42 1.77  4.14 2.06  5. 73 1. 38  5.13 2.09  5.2 8 1.63  4.83 1.81  5.05 1.91  5.35 1.55  4.35 1.53  4. 38 1.53  4.63 1.48  4.81 2.21  s Admit  4.15 1.76  75.1 4.36  X  Admit  Total  no test  4.98 1.91  X  Admit  no test  4.4 8 2.07  s 1975-76 n=104  no test  4.40 1.45  Total  Total  CHALK  4. 74 1.39  s •  PMAT  72.6 4. 96  X  s Admit  3D  RC  s Total  2D  MA  s Admit  BIOL INCHEM TOTSCI  AA  OVAV  Year  *n/a - D a t a n o t u s e d i n t h i s  study.  for  r e s t r i c t i o n o f r a n g e by  explicit  s e l e c t i o n was  of  no  value.  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 w i t h P r e d i c t o r s The (Al  r e s u l t s of the  t o A4)  as l i s t e d  first  i n Table  four regression analyses I I I are presented  Tables V - VIII according to years. a n a l y s e s were p e r f o r m e d which are entered  A.  in  Four r e g r e s s i o n  f o r each course, the r e s u l t s  i n columns 1 - 4  f o r each  of  course.  1.  Individual 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  2.  Individual  course  grades  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  3.  Individual  course  grades  DAT  averages  4.  I n d i v i d u a l course  grades  DAT  subtests  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 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  e q u a t i o n as a p r e d i c t o r . average thus  .24  average .24  1  at  was  F o r e x a m p l e , f o r ANAT 401,  the only v a r i a b l e to enter the f i r s t  r e p r e s e n t s the entered the  equation,  zero order c o r r e l a t i o n .  second  overall  Overall  e q u a t i o n b e f o r e BIOL, h e n c e  represents a zero order c o r r e l a t i o n  and  .17  2  represents  44  a first  order p a r t i a l  r e f e r s t o the Pearson variable  partialled  correlation. Product  Zero o r d e r  Moment c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h  generally  average  with  significant  e s p e c i a l l y those (ANAT 400,  401,  425),  individual  for first  courses  and  second  (PHYL 400,  (PCOL 425) , O r a l B i o l o g y  Microbiology  (MICR 425)  but  less  .08  to DAT  ranging  from  to support  Total  .17  to  and  and  .29.  The  .36,  and  .20  respectively.  f o r second,  DAT  second  year  third  (REST 422,  and  (ORBI 42 0)  .31  with Biochemistry  (BIOC 300)  w h i c h has  with grades  course.  and  PMAT a v e r a g e  and  431,  441)  with  Oral  also correlated now  .27  become a  correlated negatively  f o r s i x c o u r s e s , o n l y one  psychomotor or p e r c e p t u a l s k i l l s  preclinical  from  fourth years  Manual Average c o r r e l a t e d  Biology Occlusion  prerequisite  DAT  correlations,  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 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y grades  any  425),  S c i e n c e e x h i b i t e d weak c o r r e l a t i o n s .  clinical .21  were  courses,  (ORBI 423)  these  strongly, ranging f o r f i r s t  .22.  year  of  i n b a s i c s c i e n c e s , i . e . Anatomy  Physiology  tended  coefficients  course grades  Pharmacology  academic average  no  out.  From T a b l e s V - V I I I , c o r r e l a t i o n the o v e r a l l  correlation  of which i n v o l v e s and  positively  R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 422)  grades  with at  .21  TARTfl V SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF REGRESSION ANALYSES AlTO4 FOR FIRST YEAR COURSE GRACES  Mean  S.D.  ANAT 400 1 2  OVAAV  76.81 5.00 .23 .23  PREAV  76.04 6.71  3  ANAT 401 4  1 2  3  4  BICC 300 2 3  1  ORBI 410 4  1 2  .24 .24  1  PHYL 400  3  4  .16  2  1 2  3  .23 .23 1  1  EAT AVERAGES DATAC  5.26  1.47  DftOJftN  4.73  1.70  TOTSCI  5.82  1.71  PMAT AV  4.75  1.77  RDQOOM  4.70  1.93  BIOL  5.29  1.81  INCHEM  5.61  1.72  2D  4.41  1.97  3D  4.63  1.75  CHALK  4.62  1.95  .27  .27  1  1  .22  1  .22  .16  2  .16  1  2  .15  .18  .22  2  -.34  -.34  2  2  DAT SUBTESTS  R  2  .17  2  .05 .05  .06  .09 .02  .18  .23  2  .23  .31  1  .31  2  • 20  1  .20.  .20  2  1  .03 .18 .14 .18 .14 .08 .06 .08  .04 .08 .09 .05  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.  .21  TO RTF. V I  SUMftlg OF RESULTS OF REGRESSION ANALYSES A l TO 4 FOR SECOND YEAR COURSE GRADES  MT.CR  ANAT 425 Mean  S.D.  OVAAV  75.98  5.27  PREAV  75.13  6.72  DATAC  5.11  1.46  DATMAN  4.60  1.58  TOISCI  5.85  1.71  PMAT AV  4.79  1.87  RDGCOM  4.57  1.97  BTOT,  5.43  1.77  INCHED  5.83  1.60  2D  4.42  2.04  3D  4.72  1.84  -.2r2  1 -.20^  CHALK  4.52  1.86  .20  3  2 .20*  1 .29  2 1  4  3 .29  1  2  3  4  1  2  3  4  1 .26  .18  1  2 1  ORTH 429  ORMS 425  ORBI 423  ORBI 420  425  3  4  1  2  3  4  .26  1  2  .19  .19  .04  .04  DAT AVERAGES  .20 .19  .18  1  2  -.2r  -.20  1  -.16  2  .19  2  .19  2  -.18  1  -.30  1  -.30  1  .31  .31  3  .19  -.19  2  2  DAT SUBTESTS  R  2  .j  .16  .16  J  .08  .11  .21  .21  2  2  -.28 .29  .03  .06  .10  .12  .29  1  .10  -.28  1  ]  1  .10  .07  .07  .12  .12,  .12  .12  3  4  TABLE V I  -  ccmtiiiued  SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF REGreSSION ANALYSES A l TP 4 FOR SECOND YEAR COURSE GRACES PCDH Mean  S.D.  OVAAV  75.98  5.27  PIEAV  75.13  6.72  DATAC  5.11  1.46  DATMAN  4.60  1.58  TOTSCI  5.85  1.71  PfftT AV  4.79  1.87  HDGCOM  4.57  1.97  BIOL  5.43  1.77  DKHEM  5.83  1.60  2D  4.42  2.04  3D  4.72  1.84  CHALK  4.52  1.86  1 2  427  POOL 1 2  3  .27  3  .27  PHYL  425 4  1 2  425 3  REST 1 2  421 3  REST 1 2  422  ORSU  3  1 2  .17  DAT AVERAGES!  .36  1  .36  1  .21  2  .21  2  DAT SUBTESTS!  ^20  ^20  .40  .40  .04  .04  .07  .07  .03  .17  .16'  .17  .16  426 3  TABLE V I I SUMMARY OF g S U L T S OF REGIESSICM ANALYSES A l TO 4 FOR THIRD YEAR COUISE GRADES OPBI 430 Mean  OPME 434  OWE 435  ORSU 436  S.D. 1  OVAAV  75.42  5.27  praav  74.54  6.75  DATAC  4.98  1.35  DATMAN  4.54  1.56  TOTSCI  5.80  1.82  PMAT AV  4.03  1.64  RDGCOM  4.66  1.98  2  3  1  .16  2  3  1  .17  2  3  1  .30  2  1  3  ORTH 439 1  2  3  PCDH 437 1  2  REST 431 3  1  2  3  .30  .19  DAT AVERAGES  .22  .23  .21  .21  DAT SUBTESTS  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  .27  .07  .27  .07  .03  .06  14  .09  .05  .20  .20  .05 .04  .05 .04  00?  TABLE  VIII  SUMMARY OF K S U L T S OF REGRESSION ANALYSES A l TO 4 FOR FOURTH YEAR COURSE GRADES Of*E 444  ORBI 440 Mean  S.D.  OVAAV  74.84  5.17  PREAV  73.79  6.46  DATAC  5.14  1.40  DATMAN  4.51  1.59  TOTSCI  5^88  1.74  PMAT AV  4.70  1.97  RDQCCM  4.48  2.02  BIOL  5.45  1.85  INCHEM  6.04  1.56  2D  4.28  1.98  3D  3.63  1.62  CHALK  4.25  1.95  1  2  3  .22  4  1  2  3  ORSU 446  OF*E 445 1  2  3  1  2  3  2  FEST 441  PCDH 447  ORTH 449 1  1  3  2  3  1  3  DAT AVERAGES  .20  .24  .24  r>24  .24  DAT SUBTESTS  R  2  ,34  .29  .06  -,34  2  .23  2  .29  1  .06  .19  1  .06  .42  .42'  -.30  ->30  .25  .06  .25  J  .04  2  3  5b  w h i c h was  the  second v a r i a b l e e n t e r i n g  a f t e r the  DAT  Manual Average.  .24  with Oral The  Biology  correlate  (ORBI 44 0)  however, c o r r e l a t e d w i t h Anatomy and  from  Oral  .18  to  regression  and  regression  equation  The and  2D  and  was  3D  Biology .21 also  as  subtests  the  not  (ANAT 401) ,  first  Biology,  Physiol'ogyy  in first  year  variable entering  second v a r i a b l e to e n t e r  f o r t h e s e same showed no  trend  no  psychomotor or  fourth year Orthodontics w i t h 3D enter  and  the  .42  w i t h 2D  (ORTH 4 4 9 ) ,  correlated  second v a r i a b l e i n the  now  p r e r e q u i s i t e Biochemistry  was  the  c o r r e l a t i o n of  (ORBI 4 2 0 ) , (REST 422) (REST  the  skills  except  which for  which c o r r e l a t e d  -.30  second v a r i a b l e  to  regression.  Chalk carving the  the  correlating negatively  perceptual  w h i c h was  the  courses.  p o s i t i v e l y with grades i n a v a r i e t y of courses  require  as  DAT  course grades.  (ORBI 410) the  correlated  grades.  Reading Comprehension d i d  s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h any  (PHYL 400)  regression  PMAT a v e r a g e a l s o  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  showed some t r e n d s .  ranging  the  431).  .40 and  .29  .20  regression (BIOC 3 0 0 ) .  with Oral  with p r e c l i n i c a l .20  w i t h Anatomy  with c l i n i c a l  and  .31  More  (ANAT  425)  with  the  significant  Biology  Occlusion  Restorative  Dentistry  Restorative  Dentistry  Inorganic Chemistry Public third  and Community D e n t a l H e a l t h year O r a l B i o l o g y  variable second  correlated  -.20 w i t h  second  (PCDH 427) a n d .27 w i t h  (ORBI 4 3 0 ) .  I t was t h e s e c o n d  to enter the regression c o r r e l a t i n g  y e a r Anatomy  year  .18 w i t h  (ANAT 425) a n d .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 t h e s i m p l e between t h e w e i g h t e d variables.  total  averages  and t h e  T a b l e X I V p r e s e n t s t h e means and  deviations f o r the v a r i a b l e s presented The  r e s u l t s o f t h e second  ( B l t o B4) a s l i s t e d  B.  correlations  i n Table  average  independent standard  i n Tables  IX t o X I I I .  four regression analyses I I I are presented  grades  i n Table  1.  Weighted year  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  subtests  Four  r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s were p e r f o r m e d  year  averages.  O v e r a l l average DAT a v e r a g e  f o r each s e t o f  As w i t h p r e v i o u s a n a l y s e s , e a c h e n t r y i s  the value o f 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  XV.  52  associated variable  entered  t h e r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n as  a  predictor. From T a b l e XV,  the  order c o r r e l a t i o n of w i t h DAT first for  of  .36  year averages  The  .73,  indicating s e t s of  averages  of the  and  that fifty-three  average  second and  .20  first  and  subscores  per cent of v a r i a n c e  correlated  w i t h Manual Average. single  third .24  the  .29  Further  simple  with  Contrary  s u b t e s t o f t h e DAT  year  overall  to  which c o n t r i b u t e d  i n t o the m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n . correlations  for  second  with  Manual  low. year average  correlated  with Chalk C a r v i n g .  c o r r e l a t i o n between t h e two remaining  Average.  low.  year average  year,  y e a r were q u i t e  A v e r a g e and  accounts  s i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s between f i r s t  the Manual Average e n t e r e d  The  two  for  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  e x p e c t a t i o n , no  As w i t h  Academic  zero  .20  .20  s c o r e s i s common v a r i a n c e .  simple c o r r e l a t i o n s are very The  and  w i t h Reading Comprehension  IX t h e c o r r e l a t i o n between t h e  t h e two  showed a  c o r r e l a t i o n of  much o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h DAT  examination  to  year average  w i t h o v e r a l l average  Academic Average.  From T a b l e was  first  subscores  .30  From T a b l e X I , was  .73.  s i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n s between t h i r d  t h e p r e d i c t o r s showed low  correlations.  year  the  The averages  TABLE IX AND  S I M P L E C O R R E L A T I O N BETWEEN WEIGHTED 1 S T Y E A R A V E R A G E S 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 AND D A T SUBSCORES FOR Y E A R S E N T E R I N G 1972-76 RDG COM  IN ORG T O T CHEM .CHEM S C I  1STYR GRDE  OVA DAT DAT AV A C MAN  GRDE  1.00  \,"D3  OVAAV  0.36  1.00  DATAC  0.20  0.21  1 . 00  DATMAN  0.08  •0121  0 . 02  1.00  Q'RP  0.07  0.03  0 . 52  0.26  1.00  VR  0.05  0.00  0. 62  0.33  0.04 1. 00  Q&'Si 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?)  BIO  0.11  0.07  0. 53 - 0 . 1 6  0.19 0. 24 0. 30 0027.71.00  0.20  0. 4 7  0.17  0.26 0. 30 0.36 0£18«0. 30 1. 00  0. 31  0.01  0.03 0.14 0. 09 0016 £.0. 06 0. 04 1. 00  INCHEM  -0,11  ORGCHEM  0.11  -0.23  TOTSCI  0.12  0.12  2D  0.02  3D  QR  V  R  Q  &  V  B  I  °  2D  3D  0, 6 7 - 0 . 1 5  0.27 0. 33 0. 38 0$3"0->0.73 0. 65 0. 50 1. 00  -0.01  0, 24  0.53  0.27 0. 28 0. 33 0016 "0. 03 0. 11 0. 21 0. 13  0.04  -0.08  0. 15  0.63  0.12 0. 38 0. 34 0C07 0 . 09 0. 06 0. 21 0.12 0. 54 1. 00  CHALK  .0.05  - 0 . 0 4 - 0 , 14  0.84  0.00 0. 15 0.14 -0.02.rO. 15 -0.25 -0.00-0. 16 0.25 0. 37  PMATAV  0.06  -0.04  0 20  0.58  0 . 3S-90. 34 0. 34 0.09 0. 05 0. 08 0. 24-0. 11  1. 00  y  0.85 0. 84  CHALK  PMAT AV  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 GRDE-'AV GRDE  DAT AC  QR  VR  T  m  0.29 1. 00  DATAC  0.18 0. 18 1. 00  0.01 0. 01 0. 52 0.22 1. 00  VR  0.15 0. 02 0. 63 0.33 0. 05 1 .00  RDGCOM BIO INCHEM ORGCHE TOTSCI  RDG C  0  M  _ „ BIO  IN C  R  E  M  ORG C  H  E  M  TOT S  C  I  2D  0.20 0, 01 0. 34 1.00  QR  Q & V  _„„  QfiV  1.00  OVAAV  DATMAN  DAT MAN  0.13-0. 01 0. 79 0.37 0. 60 0 .79 1. 00 0.18 0. 10 0. 73 0.38 0. 32 0 .38 0. 49 1. 00 0.05 0. 08 0. 54 0.05 0. 21 0 .23 0. 30 0. 25 1. 00 0.06 0. 21 0. 53 0.01 0. 26 0 .34 0. 38 0. 29 0. 44 1. 00  .  -0.15 -0. 29 0. 31 0.02 0. 06 0 .13 0. 10 0. 12 0. 09-0. 01 1. 00 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 0?01 0. 15 0 .34 0. 34 0. 11 0. 10 0. 12 0. 28 0. 17 4  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  3D  CHALK  PMAT AV  TABLE  XI  S I M P L E C O R R E L A T I O N BETWEEN WEIGHTED 3RD Y E A R 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 1972-76  3RD Y E A R OVA GRDE A V  GRDE  DAT AC  QR  VR  0.19 1. 00  DATAC  0.14 0. 21 1. 00  0.01 0. 09 0. 50 0. 23 1. 00  VR  0.12 0. 02 0. 70 0. 33 0. 09 1. 00  RDGCOM BIO  RDG COM  BIO  •mt. ORG  TOT  CHEM CHEM S C I  CHALK  PMAT AV  0.20 0. 11 0. 74 0. 40 0. 31 0. 45 0. 52 1. 00 -0.04  0. 18 0. 55 0. 05 0. 18 0. 26 0. 30 0. 29 1. 00  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 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  3D  0.11 0. 04 0. 81 0. 38 0. 59 0. 81 1. 00  INCHEM  2D  2D  0.30 0. 00 0. 36 i . 00  QR  Q&V  Q&V  1.00  OVAAV  DATMAN  DAT MAN  -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 X I I SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED 4TH YEAR AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 4TH YEAR OVA GRDE AV GRDE  DAT MAN  QR  _  M  0. 36 1.00  DATAC  0. 20  C  Q  M  BIO  0. 08-0.12  0.03 0. 52 0. 26  VR  0. 05 0.00 0. 62 0. 33  E  M  ORG C  H  E  M  TOT S  C  I  2D  3D  CHALK  PMAT AV  1. 00 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. 11 0.07 0. 53 -0. 16 - 0 . 11 0.20 0. 47  0. 17  0. 32 0. 39 0. 51 1. 00 0. 19 0. 24 0. 30 0. 27 1 .00 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  TOTSCI  0. 12 0.12 0. 67 -0. 15  0. 27 0. 33 0. 38 0. 30 0 .73  2D  0. 02-0.01 0. 24 0. 53 0. 27 0. 28  3D  0. 04--0.08  PMATAV  H  0. 02 1. 00  0. 07  CHALK  IN C  0.21 1. 00  QR  INCHEM  RDG  / » T T  VR _ Q&V  I  1. 00  OVAAV  DATMAN  DAT AC  0. 33 0. 16 0 .03  0. 04 1. 00 0. 65 0. 50 1. 00 0. 11 0. 21 0. 13 1. 00  0. 63 0. 12 0. 38  0. 34 0. 07 0 .09 0. 06 0, 21 0. 12 0. 54  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  0. 15  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 X I I I SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED TOTAL AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 TOTAL GRDE  OVA A  V  DAT A  C  ^  0109 1. 00  DATAC  0.02 0. 17 1. 00  QR VR Q&V RDGCOM BIO INCHEM ORGCHE TOTSCI  QR  TTO V  R  « C T 7 Q  S  V  R  D  T > ™  G  COM  B  I  °  I  N  0  R  G  T  0  T  CHEM CHEM SCI  2D  3D  CHALK  PMAT AV  1.0!)  OVAAV  DATMAN  DAT  0.11-0. 01 0. 37 1. 00 -0.12 0. 25 0. 60 0. 23 1. 00 0.19 -0. 06 0. 69 0. 35 0. 14 1. 00 0.10 0. 06 0. 84 0. 39 0. 58 0. 86 1. 00 0.09 0. 05 0. 78 0. 38 0. 41 0. 52 0. 65 1. 00 -0.07 0. 13 0. 62 0. 05 0. 16 0. 29 0. 29 0. 36 1. 00 -0.02 0. 25 0. 75 0, 01 0. 42 0. 32 0. 44 0. 62 0. 54 1. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1 .00 -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 X I V MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS (S.D.) FOR YEAR AVERAGES, PREREQUISITE AVERAGES, OVERALL AVERAGES AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76  1st Year Mean S. D.  2nd Y e a r S. D. Mean  3rd Year S. D. Mean  4 t h Year Mean S. D.  Total Mean S. D.  49 .95  6. 65  5. 40  GRDE  50 .26  7. 28  50 .30 6. 08  50 .21  6. 33  50 .13  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  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  CHALK  4 .60 1. 94  4 .52 1. 78  4 .02 1. 77  4 .02 1. 77  3 .97 1. 78  PMATAV  4 .75  4 .84 1. 89  4 .73  1. 95  4 .10 1. 61  4 .09 1. 59  1. 76  n = 19 5  1. 51  n = 15 7 .  n = 10 9  1. 61  n = 71  3 .79  1. 67  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  ,36  3  4  2nd Year Aw rage  3rd Year Average  4th Year Average  1 2  1 2  1 2  3  4  3  4  ,2T .29  .36  .20  .2r  .20  .30  30  .20  .24 .13  .13 .04 .04  .12 .08 .04  .09  .24  .06 .09 .06  3  4  Total Average 1 2  3  4  60  T h e r e was fourth years.  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  From T a b l e X I I , t h e s i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n  significant  .25  b u t h i g h e r t h a n most o f t h e o t h e r s .  3D a t  o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a t .21 and I n o r g a n i c C h e m i s t r y a t  tions  From T a b l e X I I I ,  simple c o r r e l a -  f o r t o t a l a v e r a g e were v e r y l o w .  Correlations  Between Y e a r  The r e s u l t s ( C l t o C6)  order  Averages  of the t h i r d set of regression  listed  The c o r r e l a t i o n  analyses  i n T a b l e I I I a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e XVI.  c o e f f i c i e n t s presented represent  zero  correlations.  1.  Second y e a r a v e r a g e g r a d e s  First  year average  grades  2.  Third  year averagesgradess  First  year average  grades  3.  F o u r t h year average grades  First  year average  grades  4.  Third  Second y e a r a v e r a g e  grade  5.  F o u r t h year average grades  Second y e a r a v e r a g e  grade  6.  F o u r t h year average grades  Third  year average grades  When f i r s t the  of  y e a r a v e r a g e and M a n u a l A v e r a g e was n o t  .20 were o t h e r s t o n o t e .  C.  with  year average o r w i t h the t o t a l average f o r a l l  between f o u r t h  -.27,  variable  year o v e r a l l weighted  independent v a r i a b l e  year average  a v e r a g e was  and c o r r e l a t e d  grades  taken as  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  Dependent Variables Independent Variable  2nd Year Average Grades n = 145  3rd Year Average Grades n = 106  4th Year Average Grades n = 70  Lst Year  .79  .45  .25  .60  .54  average grades  2nd Year awrage grades  3rd year average grades  .79  62  and  f o u r t h y e a r s as t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s ,  t i o n s were  .78, .45 and .25 r e s p e c t i v e l y .  year a s t h e p r e d i c t o r and t h i r d criterion,  With t h i r d  year as the c r i t e r i o n ,  listed  D.  S c o r e s and P r e d i c t o r s  s e t regression analyses as  I I Iare presented  a n a l y s e s were p e r f o r m e d  and f o u r t h  t h e c o r r e l a t i o n was .79.  results of the last  i n Table  second  .60 and .54  year as the p r e d i c t o r  C o r r e l a t i o n s Between T e c h n i q u e The  With  and f o u r t h y e a r s a s t h e  t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s were  respectively.  the c o r r e l a -  f o r each  i n Table XVIII. dependent  Two  variable.  1.  Fixed Prosthodontics technique grades  PMAT, M a n u a l  2.  Fixed Prosthodontics technique grades  2D, 3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g  3.  Operative technique  grades  PMAT, M a n u a l  4.  Operative technique  grades  2D,  5.  Combined O p e r a t i v e a n d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s grades  PMAT, M a n u a l  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,  Table XVII.  average  3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g average  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 . c o r r e l a t i o n s between t h e s e v a r i a b l e s  average  The s i m p l e  i s presented i n  From T a b l e X V I I I , when t h e m a n u a l 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  n  2D  3D  CHALK  PMAT  FIXED PROSTH  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  IXED PROSTH  .38  .06  .15  .31  .09  1.00  OPER  .32  .11  .18  .33  .14  .67  COMB  . 39  .09  .18  .35  .13  °  P  E  R  COMB  1.00 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  Operative  Prosths. 1  2  1  Corrbined Prosths & Op  2  1  2  DAT AVERAGES PMAT AV  4.94  1.80  MANUAL AV  5.07  2.08  2D  4.64  1.89  3D  4.84  1.75  CHALK  4.97  1.90  .38  .32  .39  DAT SUBTESTS  Note:  .31  .33  Means and standard deviations for dependent variables were standardized to 50 and 10 r e s p e c t i v e l y .  .35  65  and  a v e r a g e s o f t h e DAT were t h e p r e d i c t o r s a n d F i x e d  Prosthodontics t i o n s were  technique  .38 w i t h  Chalk Carving. Prosthodontics  was t h e c r i t e r i o n ,  t h e M a n u a l A v e r a g e and .31 w i t h  The c o r r e l a t i o n s between F i x e d and 2D, 3D a n d PMAT were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t  (r = .06, .15 a n d .09 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , Chalk Carving Prosthodontics Similarly  the correla-  accounted  indicating  that  f o r most o f t h e v a r i a n c e o f F i x e d  attributed  t o t h e DAT s u b t e s t s .  f o r Operative  Dentistry, the correlation  c o e f f i c i e n t was .32 w i t h M a n u a l A v e r a g e and .33 w i t h Carving. and  The c o r r e l a t i o n s between O p e r a t i v e  PMAT a v e r a g e were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t  .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 accounted  a n d 2D, 3D  ( r = .11, .18 and  that Chalk  Carving  f o r most o f t h e v a r i a n c e o f O p e r a t i v e  attributed  t o t h e DAT t e s t s .  For t h e combination dontics, the correlation  of Operative  significant  of Operative  Prostho-  .39 w i t h  Chalk Carving.  t i o n s between t h e c o m b i n a t i o n Prosthodontics  and F i x e d  c o e f f i c i e n t s were  M a n u a l A v e r a g e and .35 w i t h  that  Chalk  The c o r r e l a and F i x e d  a n d 2D, 3D a n d PMAT a v e r a g e were n o t  (.09, .18 and .13 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) ,  Chalk Carving  accounted  the combined O p e r a t i v e t o t h e DAT t e s t s .  indicating  f o r most o f t h e v a r i a n c e o f  and F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s  attributed  CHAPTER V  DISCUSSION AND  There overall the  i s a consistently  average  first  two y e a r s .  with f i r s t  average  was  .29.  dentistry  that  year average  sixty-five  of overall  .36 a n d s e c o n d  per cent  success i n the f i r s t  two y e a r s o f average.  t o those of P a r k i n  (1965), D w o r k i n  overall  (1958) ,  (1970) a n d P h i p p s e t  (1968), a l t h o u g h D w o r k i n ' s c o r r e l a t i o n s were conclusion that  academic grades surprising,  academic grades  i s not d i f f i c u l t  lower.  when a v e r a g e d  to believe.  predict  I t i s rather  however, t o s e e c o r r e l a t i o n s a s low a s .36 and  .29 a l t h o u g h t h e y a r e common i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e . reason  year  l e a d s one t o t h e  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  Manhold and Manhold  The  was  the a p p l i c a n t s t o those with  T h e s e r e s u l t s were s i m i l a r  al  courses, e s p e c i a l l y i n  Likewise, the c o r r e l a t i o n  o f more t h a n  conclusion  correlation of  Despite the obvious r e s t r i c t i o n o f  by l i m i t i n g  average  significant  with i n d i v i d u a l  average  range  RECOMMENDATIONS  forthis  unreliability  i s u n c l e a r b u t s u s p i c i o n would  of both  The l i e with  variables.  P r e r e q u i s i t e average  o n t h e o t h e r hand d i d n o t  67  correlate  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  T h i s may be e x p l a i n e d b y t h e t i m i n g o f t h e s e Commonly, s t u d e n t s t a k e t h e s e c o u r s e s of  alter or  low g r a d e s .  average  first  year averages  and  first  c o u r s e s be t h e y  improve h i s p r e r e q u i s i t e  and s e c o n d  Total  likewise  The c o r r e l a t i o n o f .20  i s similar t o that  o b t a i n e d by (1965) o f .32  S c i e n c e component o f DAT a d d s l i t t l e o f t h e DAT.  correlates with f i r s t  s i g n i f i c a n t with  difficult  first  (1970) o f .25.  predictive validity  Reading  high  average.  y e a r c o u r s e s and a l s o  are significant.  year average  Dworkin  first  however, may  (1958) o f .28, M a n h o l d and M a n h o l d  The  not  average t o  c o r r e l a t i o n s between DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e and  individual  Parkin  o f subsequent  year  Hence, a s t u d e n t may i m p r o v e h i s o v e r a l l  but cannot  The  with  The o v e r a l l a v e r a g e ,  by t h e a d d i t i o n  prerequisites.  i n their first  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  a constant figure.  grades.  and s e c o n d  investigators  year  Comprehension  year average  individual courses.  to interpret.  Comprehension  Reading  Thompson  .20 b u t i s  This result i s  (1977) s u g g e s t s  i s a very important f o r Canadian  to the  that  predictor i n  s t u d e n t s b u t no o t h e r  p l a c e much e m p h a s i s on i t .  Biology correlates c o u r s e s and l i k e  s i g n i f i c a n t l y with  DAT A c a d e m i c A v e r a g e ,  some f i r s t  i s b e s t used t o  year  68  1  complement k n o w l e d g e o f c o u r s e g r a d e s y e a r s and o v e r a l l treated The  average.  Inorganic Chemistry  a c a d e m i c e x c e l l e n c e o f an a p p l i c a n t may be w e l l by t h r e e o r more y e a r s o f  preprofessional university i n this  Academic The and  time  education, the o v e r a l l  Average. r e s u l t s presented  second  i n T a b l e XVI r e v e a l  y e a r s a r e t o some e x t e n t s i m i l a r  between t h e f i r s t  two y e a r s and t h e s e c o n d  n a t u r e o f many o f t h e f i r s t  a r e more c l i n i c a l . correlating  with f o u r t h year  standardized  that  scores.  and f o u r t h y e a r s , w h i c h  year with t h i r d  average year  year  .60.  t h e s e a n a l y s e s were p e r f o r m e d  T h e s e c o r r e l a t i o n s between  average  in  years but not i n t h i r d  years.  year  .79, t h e t h i r d  e x p l a i n why o v e r a l l and s e c o n d  i s more  A l s o t h e r e was no s y s t e m a t i c  out during these years.  first  two y e a r s .  two y e a r s c o u r s e s  year average  .79 b u t s e c o n d  s h o u l d be n o t e d  first  and t h i r d a n d  T h i s i s born o u t by f i r s t  w i t h second  that  but there i s a d i f f e r e n c e  academic than t h a t o f t h e t h i r d  It  average  and complemented b y t h e DAT  fourth years are s i m i l a r ,  The  may be  i n t h e same way.  assessed then f a i r l y  attained  from p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l  i s a significant  on  drop years  predictor  and f o u r t h  Looking a t the manual p o r t i o n s of the DAT,  the  c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h 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 the second year courses of O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 420) p r e c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry for  (REST 422)  and  are h i g h  Chalk C a r v i n g and consequently f o r Manual  These r e s u l t s are i n agreement w i t h DeRevere Manhold and Manhold (1977).  The  (1967), Chebib  Average. (1961),  (1974) and Thompson  f a c t t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d  t h i r d year average which i s based h e a v i l y on courses r e q u i r i n g psychomotor s k i l l s  .24  with  clinical  strengthens the view  t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g i s the b e s t p r e d i c t o r of psychomotor o r i e n t e d courses t h a t i s o f f e r e d i n the DAT b a t t e r y . The c o r r e l a t i o n f o r Chalk C a r v i n g w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y Occlusion  (ORBI 420)  of .29, a t h r e e - u n i t h e a v i l y  psycho-  motor and p e r c e p t u a l o r i e n t e d c o u r s e , w i t h p r e c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry  (REST 422)  of .42, a t h r e e - u n i t  (subsequently upgraded to a s i x - u n i t ) course h e a v i l y o r i e n t e d to psychomotor s k i l l s , supports t h i s .  Similarly,  the c o r r e l a t i o n f o r Chalk C a r v i n g w i t h c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e Dentistry  (REST 431)  of .20 which i s a t w e l v e - u n i t course  h e a v i l y o r i e n t e d t o psychomotor s k i l l s a l s o supports t h i s view. The c o n s i s t e n t l y high c o r r e l a t i o n s between Manual Average and psychomotor o r i e n t e d courses of O r a l B i o l o g y  70  Occlusion  (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  Dentistry  (REST 422) .36, O r t h o d o n t i c s  (ORTH 439) .23,  clinical  Restorative Dentistry  (REST 431) .21 and  clinical  Restorative Dentistry  (REST 441) .20 (which  twelve-unit f o r Chalk second  course), almost m i r r o r e d t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s  Carving.  T h i s subscore  year averages  making t h i s  i sa  also correlated  .20 and t h i r d  an important  predictor  year averages of success  with .30,  i n the  Dental Faculty. The v a r i a b l e c o r r e l a t i o n s with sion that  these  n a t u r e o f 2D, 3D and PMAT a v e r a g e i n i n d i v i d u a l courses  leads t o the conclu-  scores are not p a r t i c u l a r l y  helpful.  o f t h e 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 were n e g a t i v e .  Graham  equally predictive  (1972) showed  i n five  and t e n  PMAT a n d C h a l k  t o be  s e p a r a t e s t u d i e s i n t h e U.S.A.,  however, t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s his.  Four  study a r e a t v a r i a n c e with  T h e c o r r e l a t i o n o f .31 f o r C h a l k C a r v i n g w i t h t h e  technique portion o f p r e c l i n i c a l  Fixed Prosthodontics  was  found  i n c l o s e agreement w i t h t h a t  (1972) o f .37.  This finding  c o r r e l a t i o n o f .33 f o u n d  by B e l l a n t i  i s strengthened  between C h a l k  et a l  by t h e  Carving  andi  preclinical  Operative D e n t i s t r y , which resembles  by D e R e v e r e  (1961) o f .37.  that  found  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 a n y o f t h e PMAT s c o r e s i n t h i s  study u s i n g  71  dependent v a r i a b l e s such technique  grades strengthens  valuable test. of and  .39  a s P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and  between s p a c e v i s u a l i z a t i o n Operative  Carving  The  students  little  undergraduate grades, p l a c e d upon i t .  f o r admission  i s readily  dental  t h e DAT  scores.  doubtfully reliable  a v a i l a b l e , much  emphasis  information i s available  at least  half  of the  demands e x p e r t i s e i n t h e s e shown t o be  psychomotor a b i l i t y ,  M a n u a l A v e r a g e was A v e r a g e was  made up  of  program  abilities.  of Chalk  a consistently reliable predictor yet  is little  a good p r e d i c t o r . o f 2D,  b i a s h e a v i l y to Chalk  3D  Carving.  •rcTl'eTa'ffe'rt s c o r e u n t a r n i s h e d scores.  the  the p e r c e p t u a l o r psychomotor a b i l i t i e s  c a r v i n g was of  t o the  e m p h a s i s p l a c e d on  Little  applicants, although dentistry  correlations,  stable.  Because academic i n f o r m a t i o n , a l b e i t  concerning  PMAT  2D)  b a s e d 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 with very  is  a  correlation  t o study whereas  c o r r e l a t i o n s are very  Selection of f a c u l t y was  study  a  (an o l d f o r m o f  Dentistry.  however, a r e v a r i a b l e f r o m Chalk  t h e v i e w t h a t PMAT i s n o t  D e R e v e r e , however, f o u n d  preclinical  Operative  by  and  used.  However, M a n u a l  Chalk  The  Similarly,  Carving, with  Chalk  C a r v i n g was  t h e v e r y v a r i a b l e 2D  and  a a 3D  From t h e r e s u l t s  of t h i s  study,  the c o n c l u s i o n  drawn t h a t e q u a l  e m p h a s i s s h o u l d be  Carving test  the p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l o v e r a l l  If  this  these  and  i s done t o e x c l u d e  areas, i t i s l i k e l y  with higher o v e r a l l  p l a c e d on  students with  that students w i l l  competence.  The  even though i t i s the b e s t p r e d i c t o r still  average  grades.  average. ability be  in  admitted  Carving  available at  test, present,  Likewise, overall preprofessional  p r e d i c t s o n l y a small p r o p o r t i o n of the  didactic  are  Chalk  Chalk  e x p l a i n s o n l y a s m a l l amount o f t h e v a r i a n c e o f  technique  of  low  the  was  grades,  important  variance  however, b o t h o f t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s  to maintain u n t i l  b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r s may  be  validated. It DAT  i s recommended t h a t p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l a v e r a g e s  Chalk  admission tooexclude four  a p p l i c a n t s with  afford  the time  lesser  psychomotor  negatives Carving  and  the  test.  false  n e g a t i v e s and  skills.  less  b u t w o u l d have p e r f o r m e d  the  are  cannot  students  p o o r l y on  than  committees  I t i s t r u e t h a t the  perform  for  suggestion  positives  Admissions  e f f o r t of training  ( s t u d e n t s who  test  Grainger's  the b a s i s t h a t f a l s e  to exclude  students  a c a r v i n g score of  non-existent i n this  afford  to s e l e c t  to the Dental F a c u l t y .  i s sound on  almost can  C a r v i n g s h o u l d be u s e d  and  with false  Chalk  well i n dental  school)  will  for  f o l l o w i n g year  the  be  As  l o n g as the  in  relation  followed. general  rejected.  t o t r y t o improve t h e i r  number o f e l i g i b l e  to places available, The  sequelae  standard  improve.  T h e y have t h e c h o i c e o f  to t h i s  score.  applicants i s higher this  philosophy  philosophy  of performance i n d e n t a l  V a l i d a t i o n of this  retest  should  be  can  i s that school  carried  be  the  will  out  annually. It  i s recommended t h a t p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e n o t  used as c r i t e r i o n is  a stronger p r e d i c t o r .  o f t h e DAT in  f o r s e l e c t i o n as  the  other  than  selection  A v e r a g e may  be  Similarly,  Chalk Carving  process.  o n l y when o v e r a l l  disregarded  c u r r e n t l y being However, s i m i l a r  held  f o r the  replace  used  a v a i l a b l e and  16PE  i s available.  personality test  C a n a d i a n DAT be  used  Manual  d i r e c t e d to  Committee. the  to p r e d i c t psychomotor  i n conjunction with  i t g i v e n the  dentistry.  the  should  development of a b e t t e r t e s t t o be u s e d  subtests  shouiLdclnot be  i f Chalk Carving  v a l i d a t e d by efforts  a l l other  average  Academic Average i s b e s t  average i s not  H i g h hopes are  the academic  be  the Chalk Carving  skill  test  e x t e n s i v e .psychomotor demands o f  or  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 Education Measurements: R e p o r t on t h e D e n t a l A d m i s s i o n s P r o g r a m S u r v e y , 1974-75.  Testing  B e l l a n t i , N.D., M a y b e r r y , W.E., T i r a , D.E.: "Relation 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 G r a d e s i n Fixed Prosthodontics Laboratory." J . Dent. Educ. 3 6 ( 1 2 ) , 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 D e n t a l T e c h n i c a l A p t i t u d e T e s t o f t h e F u t u r e ? " J . D e n t . 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 D e n t a l S c h o o l P e r f o r m a n c e and P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l M a j o r C o u r s e s of Study." J . D e n t . E d u c . , 3 9 ( 2 ) , 78-81, F e b r u a r y 1975. Chambers, D.W.,: " D i s c r i m i n a t i o n I n d e x e s f o r I m p r o v i n g Dental School Admissions." J . Dent. Educ., 36(1), 32-41, J a n u a r y 1972. C h e b i b , F.S.: " I n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s Between DAT S c o r e s , P r e - d e n t a l G r a d e s and P e r f o r m a n c e i n D e n t a l S c h o o l . " U n i v e r s i t y o f M a n i t o b a , 19 74. Chen, M.K., P o d s h a d l e y , 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 M e n t a l 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 S u c c e s s i n D e n t a l School." J . A p p l . P s y c h o l . , 5 1 ( 3 ) , 236-41, 1967. C o w l i n g , R.: " S e l e c t i n g a Freshman C l a s s . " 7, 250-252, 1943.  J.  Dent..Educ.  D e R e v e r e , R.E. "Comparison o f D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t s w i t h 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. D e u b e r t , L.W., S m i t h , 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 o f D e n t a l S t u d e n t s . A P i l o t S t u d y o f an A s s e s s m e n t o f P o t e n t i a l M a n u a l A b i l i t y by P s y c h o m e t r i c Tests." B r i t . D e n t . J . , 1 3 9 ( 5 ) , 167-70, S e p t e m b e r 1975. D e u b e r t , L.W., S m i t h , 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 o f D e n t a l S t u d e n t s . A Pilot S t u d y o f an A s s e s s m e n t o f M a n u a l A b i l i t y by P r a c t i c a l Tests." B r i t . D e n t . J . , 1 3 9 ( 9 ) , 357-61, November 1975.  75 12.  D w o r k i n , S.F.: " D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t as P e r f o r m a n c e P r e d i c t o r Oyer Four Years o f D e n t a l S c h o o l : Analyses and I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s." J . D e n t . E d u c . , 34 C D , 28-38, M a r c h 19 70.  13.  D w o r k i n , 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 A n a l y s e s o f t h e D e n t a l 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: C o n c l u s i o n s 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 S c h o o l on t h e B a s i s o f D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t S c o r e s and O t h e r V a r i a b l e s . " J . D e n t . E d u c . . 3 2 ( 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 , D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t S c o r e s and A c a d e m i c A c h i e v e m e n t o f S t u d e n t s . " J . D e n t . 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 P e r f o r m a n c e : A F a c t o r i a l Study o f D e n t a l Students." J . Dent. E d u c . , 3 5 ( 9 ) , 563-6, September 1971.  17.  Graham, J.W.: "Substitution of 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 D e n t a l Admission T e s t i n g Program." J . D e n t . E d u c , 3 6 ( 1 1 ) , 9-14, November 1972.  18.  Graham, J.W.: " F a c t o r A n a l y s i s o f the P e r c e p t u a l - M o t o r A b i l i t y Test." J . D e n t . E d u c , 3 8 ( 1 ) , 16-19, January 1974.  19.  Graham, J.W.: " C o m p a r i s o n o f M a l e s and D e n t a l A d m i s s i o n T e s t i n g Program." 4 0 ( 1 2 ) , 783-6, December 1976.  20.  G r a i n g e r , R.M.: o f t h e CDA,  21.  G r a i n g e r , R.M.: " R e p o r t on V a l i d i t y o f D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t Used i n Canadian D e n t a l S c h o o l s . " CDA T e s t Committee o f t h e C o u n c i l on D e n t a l E d u c a t i o n , F e b r u a r y 19 73.  22.  G r a i n g e r , R.M.: " N o t e s on A u g u s t , 19 74.  23.  Guilford,  24.  Gullicksen,  J.P.: H.:  Females i n the J . Dent. E d u c ,  " V a l i d i t y S t u d y o f DAT." F e b r u a r y 19 72.  S t a t u s o f DAT."  Psychometric  Measurement.  Theory o f Mental  Tests.  DAT  Test  Committee  Unpublished. McGraw-Hill, Wiley,  1950.  1964,  76 25.  H e l l e r , B.D. , C a r s o n , R..L. , D o u g l a s , B.L.: "Selection of Students f o r Dental School." J . D e n t , 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 J . D e n t . E d u c , 27, 148-55, 1963.  27.  H o u s t o n , J.B., Merish, I.N.: "Multiple Regression of P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a o f D e n t a l S c h o o l P e r f o r m a n c e . " 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 S t u d e n t S u c c e s s i n D e n t a l Schools." U. S. D e p a r t m e n t o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and W e l f a r e , 1971.  29.  K r e i t , L.H.> M c D o n a l d , R.E.: " P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l G r a d e s and the D e n t a l 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 S t u d e n t Performance i n Dental School." J . Dent. E d u c , 32(4), 4 52-5 7, December 196 8.  30.  L e w i s , D.W.: "DAT - R e p o r t t o F a c u l t y C o u n c i l . " Report on a F o u r Y e a r S t u d y . U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o , November 19 71.  31.  M a n h o l d , J.H., M a n h o l d , B.S.: " F i n a l R e p o r t o f an 8-Year Study o f the E f f i c a c y o f the D e n t a l 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 P e r f o r m a n c e i n a New S c h o o l . " J . Dent. E d u c . , 2 9 ( 1 ) , 41-44, 1965.  32.  M a n h o l d , J.H., M a n h o l d , B.S.: " P r e d i c t i v e Value f o r Four Year Performance o f I n d i v i d u a l P a r t s o f the Dental Aptitude Test." J . D e n t . E d u c , 3 1 ( 1 ) , 62-70, March 196 7.  33.  McGrath, E . J . : " P r e d i c t i v e V a l u e s o f Grades i n V a r i o u s Types o f P r e d e n t a l C o u r s e s . " J . D e n t . E d u c . , 7, 46-55, 1942.  34.  P a r k i n , G.L.: "Report o f the R e s u l t s o f the A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g Program." J . D e n t . E d u c . , 22, 9-32, 1958.  35.  P e t e r s o n , S.: The ADA C h a l k C a r v i n g T e s t . " 11-15, J a n u a r y 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 t h e DDS P r o g r a m . " J . Dent. E d u c . , 150-58, M a r c h 1971.  37.  P h i p p s , G.T., F i s h m a n , R., S c o t t , R.H.: "Prediction of Success i n Dental School." J . Dent. Educ., 32(2), 161-70, J u n e 1968.  School."  J . Dent. Educ.,  77 38.  P o d s h a d l e y , D.W., Chen, M.K., S h r o c k , J.G.: "A F a c t o r A n a l y t i c Approach t o t h e P r e d i c t i o n o f Student Performance." J . D e n t . E d u c . , 3 3 ( 1 ) , 105-11, March- 1969.  39.  P r o u t , R.E., Hoy, T.G.: "University Examination P e r f o r m a n c e 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 E x a m i n a t i o n s . " B r i t . Dent. J . , 1 4 1 ( 5 ) , 141-45, September 1976.  40.  P y s k a c e k , R.A. : "Development o f t h e P e r c e p t u a l - M o t o r A b i l i t y Test to Replace the Carving D e x t e r i t y E x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e D e n t a l A d m i s s i o n T e s t i n g Program." J . D e n t . E d u c . , 3 5 ( 2 ) , 51, F e b r u a r y 1971.  41.  P y s k a c e k , R.A.: "The D e n t a l A d m i s s i o n T e s t i n g P r o g r a m a n d P r o p o s e d Changes." J . D e n t . E d u c , 35 ( 4 ) , 237-42, A p r i l 1971.  42.  R o s s , N.M.: " D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t R e s u l t s and C o l l e g e G r a d e s as P r e d i c t o r s o f S u c c e s s i n a S c h o o l o f D e n t i s t r y . " J . Dent. E d u c , 31(1).,, 84-88, M a r c h 1967.  43.  S h i p , I . I . , L a s t e r , L . L . : " A p t i t u d e and A c h i e v e m e n t i n D e n t a l E d u c a t i o n . " J . D e n t . E d u c , 3 1 ( 1 ) , 44-5 7, M a r c h 196 7.  44.  S m i t h , B.G.: "The V a l u e o f T e s t s o f S p a t i a l a n d P s y c h o 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 . D e n t . J . , 1 4 1 ( 5 ) , 150-54, S e p t e m b e r 1976.  45.  S m i t h , T.: " P r e d i c t i n g Grade P o i n t A v e r a g e s f r o m 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.  T a t s u o k a , M.M.: "Validation Studies; The Use o f 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 Aptitude Test Results, 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 R e p o r t , .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 R e p o r t , November 1976.  49.  Thompson, G.W.: " V a l i d a t i o n S t u d y 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 R e p o r t , F e b r u a r y 1977.  78  50,.  T o c c h i n i , J . J . , Endy, M.W., Thomas s e n , P.R,, R e i n k e , B.C.: " C o r r e l a t i o n S t u d y Between A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g a n d D e n t a l Student Performance." J . Dent, E d u c . , 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 t h e D e n t a l Aptitude Test Battery." J . D e n t . E d u c . , 3 5 ( 3 ) , 144-48, M a r c h 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 M o t o r A b i l i t i e s of Dental Students." J . Dent. Educ., 35(6), 356-61, June 1971.  79  APPENDIX A SCORING SYSTEM USED IN THE DENTAL ADMISSION TESTING PROGRAM Standard Deviation  P e r c e n t i a l Band Equivalents  Coded Score  +2.5  1.1%  98.9 - 99.9  +2.0  2.8%  97.0 - 98.8  +1.5  7  6.6%  90.0 - 96.0  +1.0  6  12.1%  78.0 - 89.0  +0.5  17.5%  61.0 - 77.0  0  19.8%  40.0 - 60.0  -0.5  3  17.5?  23.0  39.0  -1.0  2  12.1?  11.0  22.0  -1.5  1  6.6%  4.0  10.0  -2.0  0  2.8%  1.2  3.0  -2.5  -1  1.1%  0.0  1.1  The p e r c e n t a g e f i g u r e s i n c l u d e d i n t h e d i a g r a m i n d i c a t e t h e p o r t i o n o f t h e a p p l i c a n t s who w o u l d r e c e i v e e a c h c o d e d s c o r e i f t h e r e were a n o r m a l o r 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 n o r m a l d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f raw s c o r e s s o t h e p e r c e n t a g e s i n d i c a t e d above w o u l d a p p l y f o r e a c h p a r t o f t h e t e s t b a t t e r y . A c o d e d s c o r e o f n i n e w o u l d a l w a y s mean t h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t r a n k e d , o n t h e t e s t i n q u e s t i o n , w i t h t h e t o p one p e r c e n t of a l l applicants. A c o d e d s c o r e o f minus one w o u l d a l w a y s mean t h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t r a n k e d w i t h t h e l o w e s t one p e r c e n t of a l l applicantsi Coded s c o r e s o f t h r e e , f o u r , a n d f i v e would always r e p r e s e n t the m i d d l e group o f about f i f t y - f i v e per cent.  80 APPENDIX B CONVERSION TABLE FOR GRADE POINT SCALES  TO  PERCENTAGES FOR ADMISSION TO UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA  4 POINT  SCALE  Where i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o d e t e r m i n e an a p p r o x i m a t e p e r c e n t a g e e q u i v a l e n t t o a g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e (G.P.A.) on t h e 4 p o i n t s c a l e t h e f o l l o w i n g t a b l e s h o u l d be u s e d . (A=4.0  -  B=3.0  -  C=2.0  D=1.0)  GPA o n 4 point scale  Approximate % equivalent  -° 3.9 3.8 3.7 3.5  90+ 88 gg 84 82 80  3.4  78  3*2 i'*  11 76  i't 3-0  75 73  4  3  6  2.9 2.8  7  First Class  Upper  Second Class  1  70  l'l I'l  69 67  Lower Second Class  2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0  64 63 62 61 60 59  Pass Class  58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50  81 9 POINT SCALE (University of V i c t o r i a ) Where i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o d e t e r m i n e an a p p r o x i m a t e p e r c e n t a g e e q u i v a l e n t t o a g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e (G.P.A.) on t h e 9 p o i n t s c a l e u s e d by t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f V i c t o r i a t h e f o l l o w i n g t a b l e s h o u l d be u s e d . GPA on 9 point scale  Approximate % Equivalent  9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5  95+ 90 88 85 83 80  6.0 5.5 5.0  78 75 73  4.5 4.0 3.5  70 68 65  3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0  63 62 60 55 50  (To c o n v e r t t o 4 point scale) 4.0 First Class 3 .5  3.0  Upper Second Class  2.5  Lower Second Class Pass Class  2.0 1.0  9 POINT SCALE (University 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5  90+ 90 85 80  7 0  S.l  75 73  6.5 6.0  70 65  5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5  63 60 57 53 50  of  Alberta)  - First Class 3.5 ° •  P  p  e  r  3.0 2.5 2.0 1.0  ^ Lower Second Class Pass Class  82  APPENDIX C PREREQUISITE SUBJECTS FOR ADMISSION INTO THE FACULTY OF DENTISTRY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA  E n g l i s h 100  (Literature  and C o m p o s i t i o n )  M a t h e m a t i c s 100  (Calculus  I)  M a t h e m a t i c s 101  ( C a l c u l u s II)  o r M a t h e m a t i c s 130  (Finite  Combination Mathematics). C h e m i s t r y 103  (General  Chemistry)  o r C h e m i s t r y 120 o r (Principles of  C h e m i s t r y 203  (Organic Chemistry)  or Chemistry (Organic  Biochemistry P h y s i c s 145  110  Chemistry). 230  Chemistry).  300 (Elementary  Physics)  o r P h y s i c s 110 Electricity  (Mechanics,  and A t o m i c  Structure), 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 o r P h y s i c s 120 Mechanics). B i o l o g y 101 o r 102  (Principles of  Biology).  Electricity)  (Matter  and  83  APPENDIX D COURSE WEIGHTING ACCORDING TO UNIT VALUES ASSIGNED.  ABBREVIATIONS OF  COURSES FOR COMPUTER USE ARE SHOWN Unit C o u r s e Name 1st  (Dental Morphology)  ANAT ANAT BIOC ORBI PHYL  400 401 300 410 400  8.0 6.0 3.0 2.0 8.0  ANAT MICR ORBI ORBI ORME ORTH PCDH PCOL PHYL ORSU REST REST  425 425 420 423 425 429 427 425 425 426 422 421  2.0 5.0 3.0 8.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0  ORBI ORME ORME ORSU ORTH PCDH REST  430 434 435 436 439 437 431  3.0 4.0 4*0 3*0 3.0 3*0 12.0  year  Anatomy (Neuroanatomy) Microbiology Oral Biology (Occlusion) Oral Biology (Oral Pathology) Oral Medicine (Diagnosis) Orthodontics P u b l i c & Community D e n t a l H e a l t h Pharmacology Physiology (neurophysiology) Oral Surgery (anaesthesiology) Restorative Dentistry Restorative Dentistry (Materials) 3rd  Weight  year  Anatomy Anatomy Biochemistry Oral Biology Physiology 2nd  Computer E n t r y  year  Oral Biology Oral Medicine (Periodontology) Oral Medicine (Oral Diagnosis) O r a l Surgery Orthodontics P u b l i c & Community D e n t a l H e a l t h Restorative Dentistry  84 C o u r s e Name 4th  Computer  Entry  Unit Weight  year  Oral Biology Oral Medicine (Periodontology) Oral Medicine (Oral Diagnosis) O r a l Surgery Orthodontics P u b l i c & Community D e n t a l H e a l t h Restorative Dentistry  ORBI 440 ORME 444 ORME 445 ORSU.446 ORTH 449 PCDH 447 REST 441  3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 12.0  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 39 25
United States 10 0
Canada 4 0
Japan 2 0
City Views Downloads
Putian 34 0
Ashburn 5 0
Unknown 3 7
Shenzhen 3 25
Scarborough 2 0
Tokyo 2 0
Beijing 2 0
Mountain View 1 0
Redmond 1 0
University Park 1 0
Vancouver 1 0

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

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055788/manifest

Comment

Related Items