"Education, Faculty of"@en . "Educational Studies (EDST), Department of"@en . "DSpace"@en . "UBCV"@en . "Wood, William Winston"@en . "2010-02-26T21:32:31Z"@en . "1978"@en . "Master of Arts - MA"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "Admission into Faculties of Dentistry is based heavily on overall preprofessional average, prerequisite average and Dental Aptitude Test scores amongst other criteria. The purpose of this study was to investigate the predictive validity of these variables on success in the Faculty of Dentistry at the University of British Columbia. This success was measured by standardized grades for individual courses, and year averages which were the sum of course grades weighted for unit value. A further measure of success in psychomotor skills was dentoform technique grades for second year Fixed Prosthodontics and Operative Dentistry. Data were collected from 312 students admitted to the Faculty of Dentistry at The University of British Columbia between 1969 and 1976. The data were organized into files on which multiple regression analyses were performed. The results of these analyses showed that overall preprofessional average significantly correlated .17 to .29 with eight individual first and second year course grades. Overall average also significantly correlated .36 with first year average and .29 with second year average. Prerequisite average did not correlate significantly with any of the criteria studied. Of the DAT scores, the consistently significant correlations were between DAT Manual Average and five individual course grades. These were second, third and fourth year Restorative Dentistry (.36, .21 and .20 respectively), Oral Biology Occlusion .31 and Biochemistry 300 at .27. DAT Manual Average correlated .20 with second year average and .30 with third year average grades. Manual Average also showed significant correlations with preclinical technique grades, .38 with Fixed Prosthodontics and .32 with Operative. Chalk Carving showed consistently significant correlations ranging from .20 to .40 with five individual course grades. These were second and third year Restorative Dentistry, Oral Biology Occlusion, Biochemistry and Anatomy (Neuro). Chalk Carving correlated .24 with third year average, .31 with Fixed Prosthodontics and .33 with Operative technique grades. DAT academic average correlated significantly with five individual course grades in the first two years, it also correlated .2 0 with first year average. The remaining DAT subscores showed few significant correlations which could be used in the selection of students for admission to the Faculty of Dentistry. It is recommended that overall average and chalk carving should be given equal emphasis in the selection process and that Manual Average may be disregarded if the chalk carving score is available."@en . "https://circle.library.ubc.ca/rest/handle/2429/21133?expand=metadata"@en . "A VALIDATION OF SOME PREDICTIVE CRITERIA USED BY DENTAL FACULTY ADMISSIONS by WILLIAM WINSTON WOOD B.D.Sc, Melbourne U n i v e r s i t y , 1966 D.D.S., U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto, 1970 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES ( THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION ) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA SEPTEMBER 197 8 \u00C2\u00A9 William Winston Wood, 1978 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree ly ava i lab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th is thes is for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives . It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion o f th is thes is fo r f inanc ia l gain shal1 not be allowed without my wri t ten permission. Department of The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ABSTRACT A d m i s s i o n i n t o F a c u l t i e s o f D e n t i s t r y i s b a s e d h e a v i l y o n o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l a v e r a g e , p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e a n d D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t s c o r e s amongst o t h e r c r i t e r i a . The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s o n s u c c e s s i n t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . T h i s s u c c e s s was m e a s u r e d by s t a n d a r d i z e d g r a d e s f o r i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e s , a nd y e a r a v e r a g e s w h i c h w e r e t h e sum o f c o u r s e g r a d e s w e i g h t e d f o r u n i t v a l u e . A f u r t h e r m e a s u r e o f s u c c e s s i n p s y c h o m o t o r s k i l l s was d e n t o f o r m t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s f o r s e c o n d y e a r F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a n d O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y . D a t a w e r e c o l l e c t e d f r o m 312 s t u d e n t s a d m i t t e d t o t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a b e t w e e n 1969 a n d 1976. The d a t a w e r e o r g a n i z e d i n t o f i l e s o n w h i c h m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s w e r e p e r f o r m e d . The r e s u l t s o f t h e s e a n a l y s e s showed t h a t o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l a v e r a g e s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d .17 t o .29 w i t h e i g h t i n d i v i d u a l f i r s t a n d s e c o n d y e a r c o u r s e g r a d e s . O v e r a l l a v e r a g e a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d , . 3 6 w i t h f i r s t y e a r a v e r a g e a n d .29 w i t h s e c o n d y e a r a v e r a g e . i i i P r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e d i d n o t c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h a n y o f t h e c r i t e r i a s t u d i e d . Of t h e DAT s c o r e s , t h e c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w e r e b e t w e e n DAT M a n u a l A v e r a g e a n d f i v e i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e g r a d e s . T h e s e w e r e s e c o n d , t h i r d a n d f o u r t h y e a r R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (.36, .21 and .20 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , O r a l B i o l o g y O c c l u s i o n .31 a n d B i o c h e m i s t r y 300 a t .27. DAT M a n u a l A v e r a g e c o r r e l a t e d .20 w i t h s e c o n d y e a r a v e r a g e a n d .30 w i t h t h i r d y e a r a v e r a g e g r a d e s . M a n u a l A v e r a g e a l s o showed s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h p r e c l i n i c a l t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s , .38 w i t h F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a n d .32 w i t h O p e r a t i v e . C h a l k C a r v i n g showed c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s r a n g i n g f r o m ;20 t o .40 w i t h f i v e i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e g r a d e s . T h e s e w e r e s e c o n d and t h i r d y e a r R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y , O r a l B i o l o g y O c c l u s i o n , B i o c h e m i s t r y and Anatomy ( N e u r o ) . C h a l k C a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d .24 w i t h t h i r d y e a r a v e r a g e , .31 w i t h F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and .33 w i t h O p e r a t i v e t e c h n i q u e g r a d e s . DAT a c a d e m i c a v e r a g e c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h f i v e i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e g r a d e s i n t h e f i r s t t w o y e a r s , i t a l s o c o r r e l a t e d .2 0 w i t h f i r s t y e a r a v e r a g e . The r e m a i n i n g DAT s u b s c o r e s showed f e w s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s which c o u l d be used i n the s e l e c t i o n o f students f o r admission t o the F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y . I t i s recommended t h a t o v e r a l l average and c h a l k c a r v i n g should be g i v e n equal emphasis i n the s e l e c t i o n process and t h a t Manual Average may be d i s r e g a r d e d i f the c h a l k c a r v i n g score i s a v a i l a b l e . TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT L I S T OF TABLES CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I I : REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t B a t t e r y F a c t o r A n a l y s i s S t u d i e s P r e d i c t i v e S t u d i e s CHAPTER I I I : DESIGN OF THE STUDY P r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e D a t a F i l e A n a l y s i s o f t h e D a t a CHAPTER I V : RESULTS R e s t r i c t i o n o f Range C o r r e l a t i o n s o f I n d i v i d u a l C o u r s e G r a d e s w i t h P r e d i c t o r s C o r r e l a t i o n s o f Y e a r A v e r a g e s w i t h P r e d i c t o r s C o r r e l a t i o n s B e t w e e n Y e a r A v e r a g e s C o r r e l a t i o n s B e t w e e n T e c h n i q u e : S c o r e s a n d P r e d i c t o r s CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER V I : BIBLIOGRAPHY CHAPTER V I I : APPENDICES v i LIST OF TABLES TABLE I F a c t o r A n a l y s i s Summary o f L i t e r a t u r e TABLE II P r e d i c t i o n S t u d i e s Summary of L i t e r a t u r e TABLE I I I Summary of Regression Analyses TABLE IV Means and standard d e v i a t i o n s o f o v e r a l l averages and DAT subscores f o r t o t a l a p p l i c a n t s group and admitted group f o r e n t e r i n g years 1972 to 1976 Summary of r e s u l t s of r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y ses A 1 to A-:4 f o r f i r s t year course grades Summary of r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s A 1 to A 4 f o r second year course grades. Summary of r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y ses A 1 t o A 4 f o r t h i r d year course grades Summary o f r e s u l t s of r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y ses A 1 to A 4 f o r f o u r t h year course grades Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted 1st year averages and p r e r e q u i s i t e average, o v e r a l l average and DAT subscores f o r years e n t e r i n g 1972-76 TABLE X Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted 2nd year averages and p r e r e q u i s i t e average, o v e r a l l average and DAT subscores f o r years e n t e r i n g 1972-76 TABLE XI Simple c o r r e l a t i o n between weighted 3rd year averages and p r e r e q u i s i t e average, o v e r a l l average and DAT subscores f o r years e n t e r i n g 1972-76 TABLE V TABLE VI TABLE VII TABLE V I I I TABLE IX page 15 18-22 37 42 45 46-47 48 49 53 54 55 v i i TABLE X I I TABLE X I I I TABLE X I V TABLE XV TABLE X V I TABLE X V I I S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n w e i g h t e d 56 4 t h y e a r a v e r a g e s a nd p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a n d DAT s u b s c o r e s f o r y e a r s e n t e r i n g 1972-76 S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n w e i g h t e d 57 t o t a l a v e r a g e s a n d p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a n d DAT s u b s c o r e s f o r y e a r s e n t e r i n g 1972-76 Means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s f o r 58 y e a r a v e r a g e , p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a nd DAT s u b s c o r e s f o r y e a r s e n t e r i n g 1972-76 Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n 59 a n a l y s e s B 1 t o B 4 f o r y e a r a v e r a g e a n d t o t a l a v e r a g e Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n 61 a n a l y s e s C 1 t o C 5. C o r r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n y e a r a v e r a g e s a n d p r e v i o u s y e a r a v e r a g e s S i m p l e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n p s y c h o - 63 m o t o r a n d p e r c e p t u a l s c o r e s o f DAT and t e c h n i q u e c o u r s e g r a d e s i n f i x e d p r o s t h o d o n t i c s , o p e r a t i v e d e n t i s t r y a n d a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b o t h TABLE X V I I I Summary o f r e s u l t s o f r e g r e s s i o n 64 a n a l y s e s D 1 t o D 6. C o r r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n p s y c h o m o t o r a n d p e r c e p t u a l s c o r e s o f DAT a n d t e c h n i q u e c o u r s e g r a d e s i n f i x e d p r o s t h o d o n t i c s , o p e r a t i v e d e n t i s t r y a n d a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b o t h 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The h i g h c o s t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e d u c a t i o n i n u n i v e r s i t i e s a n d t h e h i g h a t t r i t i o n r a t e i n p r o f e s s i o n a l s c h o o l s i n t h e e a r l y p a r t o f t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y l e d t o a n i n c r e a s i n g demand f o r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y b y g o v e r n m e n t a n d u n i v e r s i t y a d m i n i s t r a t o r s * , D e n t a l s c h o o l s i n N o r t h A m e r i c a a r e among t h e m o s t e x p e n s i v e o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l f a c u l t i e s a n d t h e p r e s s u r e o n d e n t a l a d m i s s i o n s ' p r o c e d u r e s l e d t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f b a t t e r i e s o f a p t i t u d e e t e s t s a i m e d a t p r e d i c t i n g s u c c e s s i n d e n t a l s c h o o l s . The f i r s t s c h o o l s t o d e v e l o p a p t i t u d e t e s t s w e r e t h e U n i v e r s i t y o o f Iowa i n 1927 a n d C o l u m b i a a n d New Y o r k U n i v e r s i t i e s i n 1929. T h e s e t e s t s w e r e e x p e r i m e n t a l a n d w e r e r e g a r d e d w i t h some s k e p t i c i s m b y d e n t a l e d u c a t o r s * / T h i s a t t i t u d e was r e f l e c t e d b y C o w l i n g (1943), who c o m p l a i n e d t h a t \" . . . i n t h i s s t a t i s t i c a l age e v e r y q u a l i t y m u s t be m e a s u r e d ; s o i t seems. E x e c u t i v e s f r e q u e n t l y a r e f o r c e d t o a s s e n t t o t h e p r o n o u n c e m e n t s o f s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s i n p r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i r own j u d g m e n t . \" 2 Although most d e n t a l s c h o o l s r e l i e d h e a v i l y on p r e d e n t a l grades as a b a s i s f o r s e l e c t i o n , few s t a t i s t i c a l s t u d i e s of t h e i r p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y had been undertaken p r i o r t o 1940. An e x c e p t i o n was McGrath, who analyzed data a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B u f f a l o i n a l t e r n a t e c l a s s e s from 1932 to 1940. McGrath's f i n d i n g of a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f .54 between p r e d e n t a l grades and t o t a l grade p o i n t average i n d e n t a l school i s c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r than t y p i c a l r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d today. Lower c o r r e l a -t i o n s found i n c u r r e n t s t u d i e s r e f l e c t the impact o f improved admissions procedures which r e s t r i c t the range of a b i l i t i e s of those who apply to d e n t a l s c h o o l s . T h i s r e s t r i c t i o n o ccurs through s e l e c t i o n of b e t t e r students and r e j e c t i o n of l e s s competent stu d e n t s . The standard d e v i a t i o n of the t o t a l group, taken as a measure of range of a b i l i t y , w i l l be g r e a t e r than the standard d e v i a t i o n of the s e l e c t e d group on t h a t same a b i l i t y , whether i t be academic or psychomotor. Thus, the more s e l e c t i o n by a b i l i t y o c c u r s , the lower w i l l be c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s between t h a t a b i l i t y and any c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e where the sample i s the s e l e c t e d group ( G u l l i k s e n , 1950). A f t e r s e v e r a l years of t e s t i n g , the nationwide Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g Program was i n s t i t u t e d i n 1951, and s i n c e 3 t h a t t i m e d e n t a l s c h o o l s i n t h e U.S.A. h a v e r e q u i r e d a p p l i c a n t s t o t a k e t h e D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t (DAT). S u b s e q u e n t l y , i n 1 9 6 6 , t h e C a n a d i a n D e n t a l A s s o c i a t i o n t o o k t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a d m i n i s t e r i n g a n d e v a l u a t i n g t h e DAT p r o g r a m f o r C a n a d a . The n a t u r e o f t h e DAT b a t t e r y h a s c h a n g e d o v e r t h e y e a r s a s r e l i a b i l i t y a n d v a l i d i t y s t u d i e s h a v e p r o d u c e d more d e t a i l e d i n f o r m a t i o n . I n t h e U.S.A. i n 1 9 7 7 , f i v e s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s w e r e u s e d f r o m w h i c h e l e v e n c o d e d s c o r e s w e r e d e r i v e d ( s e e A p p e n d i x A f o r c o d i n g m e t h o d , C h a p t e r I I f o r n a t u r e o f t e s t s a n d s c o r e s ) . I n C a n a d a i n 197 7 , t h e r e i s t h e c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e t e s t s u s e d i n t h e U.S.A. A l s o , t h e 1 6 P F , a p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s t e s t h a s b e e n a d m i n i s t e r e d o n a n e x p e r i m e n t a l b a s i s s i n c e 1 9 7 4 ; t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s t e s t a r e , a s y e t , u n p u b l i s h e d . The A m e r i c a n D e n t a l A s s o c i a t i o n D i v i s i o n o f E d u c a t i o n M e a s u r e m e n t s i n 1 9 7 5 , s u r v e y e d d e n t a l s c h o o l s t o d e t e r m i n e how t h e y u s e d i n f o r m a t i o n i n a d m i s s i o n s . N i n e t y - t h r e e p e r c e n t o f s c h o o l s r a t e d t h e p r e d e n t a l g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e a s \" v e r y i m p o r t a n t \" , t h e DAT was s e c o n d w i t h s e v e n t y - f i v e p e r c e n t o f s c h o o l s r a t i n g i t \" v e r y i m p o r t a n t \" . F i f t y -f o u r p e r c e n t r a t e d p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s v e r y h i g h l y . 4 R a t i n g o r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s by p r e d e n t a l a d v i s o r s w e r e c o n s i d e r e d v e r y i m p o r t a n t b y t h i r t y - n i n e p e r c e n t o f s c h o o l s . No o t h e r m e a s u r e was o f u n i v e r s a l i m p o r t a n c e . A t what c r i t e r i a a r e t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s a i m i n g ? S u c c e s s i n d e n t a l s c h o o l i s t h e o n l y c r i t e r i o n a t p r e s e n t b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d , a l t h o u g h one may l o o k f u r t h e r t o p r e d i c t s u c c e s s o f g r a d u a t e s . T h i s l a t t e r a r e a i s a s y e t n o t r e s e a r c h e d . The m a i n a i m o f d e n t a l s c h o o l s i s t o t r a i n a n d e d u c a t e d e n t i s t s f o r p r a c t i c e i n t h e c o m m u n i t y . A d d i t i o n a l l y , d e n t a l s c h o o l s a r e c h a r g e d w i t h t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l s f o r g r a d u a t e w o r k l e a d i n g t o s p e c i a l i z e d p r a c t i c e , t e a c h i n g a n d r e s e a r c h . I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t t h e d e n t a l c u r r i c u l u m h a s a b r o a d s p e c t r u m o f o b j e c t i v e s . T h e s e may be s u m m a r i z e d a s f o l l o w s : 1. A c a d e m i c e x c e l l e n c e i n b a s i c b i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e s a n d d e n t a l s c i e n c e s . 2. E x c e l l e n c e i n s u r g i c a l t e c h n i q u e s w i t h h a r d a n d s o f t t i s s u e s a n d m a n i p u l a t i o n o f d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s . 3. E x c e l l e n c e i n p a t i e n t management. 4. P r o f e s s i o n a l i s m . I n C a n a d a , t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s a r e met t o a g r e a t e r o r l e s s e r d e g r e e i n a f o u r - y e a r p r o g r a m o f s t u d i e s a f t e r a 5 t h r e e - y e a r p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l b a s i c s c i e n c e a n d a r t s p r o g r a m . The p r e d i c t i o n o f a c a d e m i c e x c e l l e n c e a n d m a n u a l d e x t e r i t y i n t h e s u r g i c a l a r e a s i s a i m e d a t b y b o t h e n t e r i n g g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e a n d DAT s c o r e s , w h i l e a n a t t e m p t w i l l be made i n t h e f u t u r e t o p r e d i c t s u c c e s s i n t h e b e h a v i o u r a l a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l a r e a s b y t h e n e w l y e m p l o y e d 16PF. Somee f a c u l t i e s i n C a n a d a a r e m a k i n g an a t t e m p t t o d e a l w i t h b e h a v i o u r a l a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l p r o b l e m s b y t h e u s e o f i n t e r -v i e w s . The 16PF a n d i n t e r v i e w t e c h n i q u e w e r e n o t i n v e s t i -g a t e d i n t h i s s t u d y . The A d m i s s i o n s C o m m i t t e e f o r t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a h a s u s e d o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l a v e r a g e , p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , D e n t a l A p t i t u d e T e s t s c o r e s , l e t t e r s o f r e f e r e n c e a n d p l a c e o f r e s i d e n c e a s c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i n g s t u d i e s . The C o m m i t t e e i s a s k e d t o a s s i g n s e v e n t y p e r c e n t o f a c a n d i d a t e ' s s c o r e t o o v e r a l l a v e r a g e a n d p r e r e q u i s i t e a v e r a g e , t e n p e r c e n t t o DAT, and t h e r e m a i n i n g t w e n t y p e r c e n t f o r l e t t e r s o f r e f e r e n c e a n d p l a c e o f r e s i d e n c e . I t was t h e a i m o f t h i s s t u d y t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p r e d i c t i v e a v e r a g e , a n d DAT o n \" s u c c e s s i n t h e F a c u l t y o f D e n t i s t r y a t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a \" a n d t o make s p e c i f i c r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e u s e o f t h e s e p r e d i c t o r s . 6 These p r e d i c t o r s were i n v e s t i g a t e d f o r c o r r e l a t i o n with i n d i v i d u a l course grades, with year averages, and with an o v e r a l l average f o r the four years of d e n t a l s c h o o l . S e l e c t e d p r e d i c t o r s were i n v e s t i g a t e d f o r c o r r e l a -t i o n w i t h p u r e l y t e c h n i c a l grades as measures of p e r c e p t u a l and psychomotor a b i l i t i e s . The study was conducted on a t o t a l of 312 students admitted to the F a c u l t y of D e n t i s t r y between 1969 and 1976. 7 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The l i t e r a t u r e reviewed i n t h i s study encompasses m a t e r i a l r e l a t e d to the nature o f the Dental A p t i t u d ^ e T e s t b a t t e r y , f a c t o r a n a l y s i s s t u d i e s performed on the DAT as a whole, c e r t a i n s u b t e s t s o f the b a t t e r y , and p r e d i c t i v e s t u d i e s of the DAT and o t h e r academic c r i t e r i a . The nature of the DAT t r a c e s some of the h i s t o r y o f the t e s t b a t t e r y t o i t s p r e s e n t form. The DAT b a t t e r y has been s u b j e c t e d to f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i n o r d e r t o b e t t e r d e s c r i b e j u s t what i s being measured. The p r e d i c t i v e s t u d i e s cover an o v e r a l l approach c o r r e l a t i n g grade p o i n t average and DAT w i t h success i n d e n t a l s c h o o l . C l o s e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o the p e r c e p t u a l and manual p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f s u b t e s t s o f the DAT b a t t e r y i s done i n t h i s s e c t i o n . I t i s g e n e r a l l y the case t h a t p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades c o r r e l a t e more h i g h l y w i t h student performance i n d e n t a l s c h o o l than do DAT s c o r e s . T h i s happens because the p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grade p o i n t average r e p r e s e n t s a composite 8 of many tes t scores and grades received over a period of several years. Moreover, the preprofessional grade point average may r e f l e c t motivational factors which influence the academic performance of students i n dental school. In contrast, DAT academic scores constitute a more unitary measure of achievement and scholastic aptitude than preprofessional grades. Preprofessional grades have l i m i t a t i o n s which can be minimized by expressing them i n terms of standardized scores. There are variations between i n s t i t u t i o n s i n grading procedures. There are even variati o n s i n grading procedures within i n s t i t u t i o n s , and between the d i f f i c u l t y or l e v e l of courses within an i n s t i t u t i o n . Thus, by taking preprofessional grades, DAT academic average, and other relevant variables into consideration, better predictions r e s u l t . The Dental Aptitude Test Battery The D i v i s i o n of Educational Measurement of the American Dental Association i n 1951, designed the DAT battery to include f i v e types of predictive t e s t s : 1. Mental l e v e l 2. Reading comprehension 3. Science comprehension 4. V i s u a l i z a t i o n or space c o n c e p t i o n 5. C a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y In the U.S.A. i n 1977, e l e v e n coded scores from e i g h t s u b t e s t s were used. C a r v i n g d e x t e r i t y was dropped and the Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t became the P e r c e p t u a l Motor A b i l i t i e s t e s t . The e l e v e n coded scores were as f o l l o w s : A. QUANTITATIVE REASONING - p r e s e n t l y the DAQVT (Dental Admission Q u a n t i t a t i v e - V e r b a l Test) i s used t o y i e l d the \" Q u a n t i t a t i v e Reasoning\", V e r b a l Reasoning\", and \" T o t a l Q + V\" s c o r e s . Q u a n t i t a t i v e r e a s o n i n g o r numerical a b i l i t y i s the a b i l i t y t o reason w i t h numbers, t o manipulate numerical r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and t o d e a l i n t e l l i g e n t l y w i t h q u a n t i t a t i v e m a t e r i a l s . B. VERBAL REASONING - l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t y o r v e r b a l r e a s o n i n g i s the a b i l i t y t o use and understand the meaning o f words. C. TOTAL Q + V - t h i s score i s a combination o f the \" Q u a n t i t a t i v e Reasoning\" and the \"Verbal Reasoning\" s c o r e s . I t i s sometimes r e f e r r e d t o as an \" i n t e l l i g e n c e \" s c o r e . T h i s t e s t has broad norms, 10 thus, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o compare d e n t a l a p p l i c a n t s w i t h c o l l e g e p o p u l a t i o n s i n g e n e r a l . The comparisons are r o u t i n e l y made by the Admissions T e s t i n g Committee and any t r e n d s , e i t h e r f a v o u r -a b l e or unfavourable, are r e p o r t e d immediately t o the d e n t a l s c h o o l s . D. READING COMPREHENSION - a r e a d i n g t e s t i s o f t e n a b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r of s c h o l a s t i c success than i s an i n t e l l i g e n c e o r mental l e v e l t e s t . T h i s i s an instrument t o measure the a p p l i c a n t ' s a b i l i t y t o read, o r g a n i z e , analyze and comprehend new i n f o r m a t i o n . I t i s a measure of r e a d i n g compre-hension and i s not a speed t e s t . E. BIOLOGY - t h i s s c o r e i s a measure o f the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f the elementary p r i n c i p l e s of b i o l o g y and a b i l i t y t o apply these p r i n c i p l e s . F. INORGANIC CHEMISTRY - t h i s score i s a measure of the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f the most elementary p r i n c i p l e s of i n o r g a n i c c h e m i s t r y and a b i l i t y t o app l y these p r i n c i p l e s . G. ORGANIC CHEMISTRY - t h i s score i s a measure o f the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge of the most elementary p r i n c i p l e s o f o r g a n i c chemistry and a b i l i t y t o 11 apply these p r i n c i p l e s . H. TOTAL SCIENCE - the t o t a l s c i e n c e i s a combination o f E, P and G above and r e f l e c t s the a p p l i c a n t ' s knowledge o f f a c t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n i n b i o l o g y and che m i s t r y and a b i l i t y t o apply t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . I. PMAT/2D - t h i s score r e f l e c t s the a b i l i t y o f the a p p l i c a n t t o d e a l w i t h and s o l v e two dimensional p e r c e p t u a l problems. J . PMAT/3D - t h i s score measures the a p p l i c a n t ' s a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h and s o l v e t h r e e dimensional p e r c e p t u a l problems. P a r t s of the Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t f o r m e r l y i n c l u d e d i n the Dental Admission T e s t are a l s o i n c l u d e d i n t h i s s u b t e s t . K. MANUAL AVERAGE - i s a PMAT average of 2D and 3D. In Canada i n 1977, the coded scores d e r i v e d a r e : A. ACADEMIC AVERAGE - t h i s i s a combination o f B, C, D, E below. B. READING COMPREHENSION - as f o r the U.S.A. C. BIOLOGY - as f o r the U.S.A. D. INORGANIC CHEMISTRY - as f o r the U.S.A. E. TOTAL SCIENCE - as f o r the U.S.A. u s i n g o n l y b i o l o g y and i n o r g a n i c chemistry. 12 F. 2D - as f o r the U.S.A. G. 3D - as f o r the U.S.A. H. PMAT AVERAGE - average o f 2D and 3D I. CHALK CARVING - c a r v i n g t e s t u s i n g a k n i f e , a r u l e and a p i e c e o f c h a l k . The c r i t e r i a measured are l e n g t h s , sharp a n g l e s , f l a t p l a n e s , symmetry and s i m i l a r i t y t o the p l a n g i v e n . K. MANUAL AVERAGE - a combination o f 2D, 3D, and ch a l k c a r v i n g weighted by ch a l k c a r v i n g . In the U.S.A., a f t e r t w e n t y - f i v e years of use, the cha l k c a r v i n g t e s t was r e p l a c e d by the PMAT i n 1972. However, i n Canada, the c a r v i n g t e s t was dropped f o r a sh o r t p e r i o d between A p r i l 1972, and January 1975. I t was then r e - i n t r o d u c e d f o r f u r t h e r v a l i d a t i o n s t u d i e s s i n c e i t s d i s c o n t i n u a n c e was accepted w i t h mixed f e e l i n g s by many s c h o o l s . Althoughhthe p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the PMAT and c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t are s i m i l a r , many people are not convinced t h a t the c h a l k c a r v i n g should be dropped. The l a c k of f i n g e r d e x t e r i t y as a c o n s t r u c t i n the DAT b a t t e r y has concerned many. Peterson (1974) speaks s t r o n g l y i n favour o f the ch a l k c a r v i n g t e s t and c l a i m s i t i s p a r t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the a t t r i t i o n r a t e dropping from as much 13 as f i f t y per c e n t i n the middle 1940's t o the n a t i o n a l average of s i x per cent i n 1973. He c l a i m s t h a t the simple f a c t t h a t a manual d e x t e r i t y t e s t i s i n the DAT b a t t e r y adds t o the a p p l i c a n t ' s c o n c e p t i o n t h a t he i s t r u l y b e i n g t e s t e d i n d i g i t a l d e x t e r i t y . Graham (1972) showed t h a t i n f i v e separate s t u d i e s i n f o u r c o n s e c u t i v e y e a r s , the PMAT (2-3D) and c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t s performed e q u a l l y i n p r e d i c t i n g success i n t e c h n i c a l performance i n a sample o f U.S.A. d e n t a l s c h o o l s . The c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t i s an expensive t e s t t o a d m i n i s t e r , e s p e c i a l l y on l a r g e numbers of a p p l i c a n t s whose c a r v i n g s have t o be m a i l e d t o e v a l u a t i o n c e n t r e s w i t h the po;s;s:3jbil]3i.%y o f damage. Even though the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f the two t e s t s i s the same, they do measure d i f f e r e n t fcon's'ttu'cts^, as shown by Z u l l o (1971 b ) . However, the DAT Committee deci d e d to d i s c o n t i n u e the c h a l k c a r v i n g t e s t i n the U.S.A. Much emphasis i s p l a c e d on p e r c e p t u a l and psycho-motor t e s t s mainly because of the p a u c i t y o f i n f o r m a t i o n about these c o n s t r u c t s f o r c a n d i d a t e s e n t e r i n g d e n t a l s c h o o l . A d d i t i o n a l l y , approximately h a l f o f the time spent i n d e n t a l s c h o o l i s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o these s k i l l s . 14 F a c t o r A n a l y s i s S t u d i e s S e v e r a l s t u d i e s have shown s i m i l a r r e s u l t s r e g a r d i n g the nature of the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t b a t t e r y . A summary of these i s shown i n Table I. Chen, .24 .24 .42 -.30 .42' ->30J .06 .25 .06 .25 .20 .04 5 b which was the second v a r i a b l e e n t e r i n g the r e g r e s s i o n a f t e r the DAT Manual Average. PMAT average a l s o c o r r e l a t e d .24 w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 44 0) grades. The c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the DAT s u b t e s t s showed some t r e n d s . Reading Comprehension d i d not c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h any course grades. B i o l o g y , however, c o r r e l a t e d w i t h Anatomy (ANAT 401) , Physiol'ogyy (PHYL 400) and O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 410) i n f i r s t year ra n g i n g from .18 to .21 as the f i r s t v a r i a b l e e n t e r i n g the r e g r e s s i o n and was a l s o the second v a r i a b l e to e n t e r the r e g r e s s i o n equation f o r these same cou r s e s . The 2D and 3D showed no t r e n d c o r r e l a t i n g n e g a t i v e l y and p o s i t i v e l y w i t h grades i n a v a r i e t y of courses which r e q u i r e no psychomotor or p e r c e p t u a l s k i l l s except f o r f o u r t h year O r t h o d o n t i c s (ORTH 449), which c o r r e l a t e d -.30 w i t h 3D and .42 w i t h 2D which was the second v a r i a b l e t o e n t e r the r e g r e s s i o n . Chalk c a r v i n g c o r r e l a t e d .20 w i t h Anatomy (ANAT 425) as the second v a r i a b l e i n the r e g r e s s i o n and .31 w i t h the now p r e r e q u i s i t e B i o c h e m i s t r y (BIOC 300). More s i g n i f i c a n t was the c o r r e l a t i o n o f .29 w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y O c c l u s i o n (ORBI 420), .40 with p r e c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 422) and .20 w i t h c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 431). Inorganic Chemistry c o r r e l a t e d -.20 w i t h second year P u b l i c and Community Dental H e a l t h (PCDH 427) and .27 w i t h t h i r d year O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 430). I t was the second v a r i a b l e t o e n t e r the r e g r e s s i o n c o r r e l a t i n g .18 wi t h second year Anatomy (ANAT 425) and .21 w i t h O r a l B i o l o g y (ORBI 420) . C o r r e l a t i o n s o f Year Averages w i t h P r e d i c t o r s T a b l e s IX - X I I I p r e s e n t the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between the weighted t o t a l averages and the independent v a r i a b l e s . T a b l e XIV p r e s e n t s the means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r the v a r i a b l e s presented i n T a b l e s IX t o X I I I . The r e s u l t s o f the second f o u r r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s (Bl t o B4) as l i s t e d i n Table I I I are presented i n T a b l e XV. B. 1. Weighted year average grades O v e r a l l average DAT average 2. Weighted year average grades O v e r a l l average DAT s u b t e s t s 3. Weighted year average grades DAT averages 4. Weighted year average grades DAT s u b t e s t s Four r e g r e s s i o n analyses were performed f o r each s e t of year averages. As with p r e v i o u s a n a l y s e s , each e n t r y i s the v a l u e of the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t a t the time the 52 a s s o c i a t e d v a r i a b l e entered the r e g r e s s i o n equation as a p r e d i c t o r . From Tab l e XV, the f i r s t year average showed a zero o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f .36 w i t h o v e r a l l average and .20 w i t h DAT Academic Average. The c o r r e l a t i o n of .20 f o r f i r s t year averages w i t h Reading Comprehension accounts f o r much of the c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h DAT Academic Average. From Tab l e IX the c o r r e l a t i o n between the two subscores was .73, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t f i f t y - t h r e e per c e n t o f v a r i a n c e of the two s e t s of scores i s common v a r i a n c e . F u r t h e r examination of the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between f i r s t year averages and a l l the p r e d i c t o r s i n d i c a t e s t h a t a l l the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s are v e r y low. The second year average c o r r e l a t e d .29 w i t h o v e r a l l average and .20 w i t h Manual Average. C o n t r a r y t o e x p e c t a t i o n , no s i n g l e s u b t e s t of the DAT which c o n t r i b u t e d to the Manual Average entered i n t o the m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n . As w i t h f i r s t year, the simple c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r second year were q u i t e low. The t h i r d year average c o r r e l a t e d .30 w i t h Manual Average and .24 w i t h Chalk C a r v i n g . From T a b l e XI, the c o r r e l a t i o n between the two subscores was .73. The remaining simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between t h i r d year averages and the p r e d i c t o r s showed low c o r r e l a t i o n s . T A B L E IX S I M P L E C O R R E L A T I O N BETWEEN WEIGHTED 1ST YEAR AVERAGES AND P R E R E Q U I S I T E A V E R A G E , O V E R A L L AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR Y E A R S E N T E R I N G 1 9 7 2 - 7 6 1STYR OVA DAT DAT GRDE AV AC MAN QR RDG I N ORG TOT V R Q & V COM B I \u00C2\u00B0 CHEM .CHEM S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE OVAAV DATAC DATMAN Q'RP V R Q&'Si V RDGCOM B I O INCHEM ORGCHEM T O T S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMATAV 1.00 0.36 0.20 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.20 0.11 -0,11 0.11 0.12 0.02 0.04 .0.05 0.06 \,\"D3 1 . 0 0 0 . 2 1 1. \u00E2\u0080\u00A20121 0. 0 . 0 3 0. 0 . 0 0 0. 0 . 0 0 0. 0 . 1 3 0. 0 . 0 7 0. 0 . 2 0 0. - 0 . 2 3 0. 0 .12 0, - 0 . 0 1 0, - 0 . 0 8 0. - 0 . 0 4 - 0 , - 0 . 0 4 0 00 02 1 . 0 0 52 0 . 2 6 62 0 . 3 3 79 0 . 4 0 73 0 . 1 1 53 - 0 . 1 6 47 0 . 1 7 31 0 . 0 1 6 7 - 0 . 1 5 24 0 . 5 3 15 0 . 6 3 14 0 .84 20 0 . 5 8 1.00 0.04 1. 00 0.60 0. 78 1. 00 0.32 0. 39 0. 51 1.00?) 0.19 0. 24 0. 30 0027.71. 00 0.26 0. 30 0. 36 0\u00C2\u00A318\u00C2\u00AB0. 30 1. 00 0.03 0. 14 0. 09 0016 \u00C2\u00A3.0. 06 0. 04 1. 00 0.27 0. 33 0. 38 0$3\"0->0. 73 0. 65 0. 50 1. 00 0.27 0. 28 0. 33 0016 \"0. 03 0. 11 0. 21 0. 13 1. 00 0.12 0. 38 0. 34 0C07 y0. 09 0. 06 0. 21 0. 12 0. 54 1. 00 0.00 0. 15 0. 14 -0.02.rO. 15 -0. 25 -0. 00-0. 16 0. 25 0. 37 0 . 3S-9 0. 34 0. 34 0.09 0. 05 0. 08 0. 24-0. 11 0. 85 0. 84 TABLE X SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED 2ND YEAR AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 2ND YEAR OVA DAT DAT GRDE-'AV AC MAN T m _\u00E2\u0080\u009E\u00E2\u0080\u009E RDG _ \u00E2\u0080\u009E IN ORG TOT QR VR QfiV C 0 M BIO C R E M C H E M S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1.00 OVAAV 0.29 1. 00 DATAC 0.18 0. 18 1. 00 DATMAN 0.20 0, 01 0. 34 1.00 QR 0.01 0. 01 0. 52 0.22 1. 00 VR 0.15 0. 02 0. 63 0.33 0. 05 1 .00 Q & V 0.13-0. 01 0. 79 0.37 0. 60 0 .79 1. 00 RDGCOM 0.18 0. 10 0. 73 0.38 0. 32 0 .38 0. 49 1. 00 BIO 0.05 0. 08 0. 54 0.05 0. 21 0 .23 0. 30 0. 25 1. 00 INCHEM 0.06 0. 21 0. 53 0.01 0. 26 0 .34 0. 38 0. 29 0. 44 1. 00 . ORGCHE -0.15 -0. 29 0. 31 0.02 0. 06 0 .13 0. 10 0. 12 0. 09-0. 01 1. 00 TOTSCI 0.06 0. 10 0. 66 0.18 0. 29 0 .32 0. 38 0. 31 0. 75 0. 69 0. 52 1. 00 2D -0.01 0. 00 0. 27^0.61 0. 24 0 .29 0. 31 0. 18-0. 03 0. 09 0. 19 0. 13 1. 00 3D -0.01-0. 07 0. 24 4 0?01 0. 15 0 .34 0. 34 0. 11 0. 10 0. 12 0. 28 0. 17 o. 52 CHALK 0.12 0. 10 0. 03 0.65-0. 04 0 .17 0. 13 0. 12 -0. 02 0. 16 -0. 01 0. 03 0. 34 PMATAV 0.08-0. 01 0. 22 0.09 0. 18 0 .31 0. 32 0. 10 0. 01 0. 11 0. 27 0. 11 0. 71 TABLE XI SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED 3RD YEAR AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 3RD YEAR OVA DAT DAT GRDE AV AC MAN QR VR Q&V RDG COM BIO \u00E2\u0080\u00A2mt. ORG TOT CHEM CHEM SCI 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1.00 OVAAV 0.19 1. 00 DATAC 0.14 0. 21 1. 00 DATMAN 0.30 0. 00 0. 36 i . 00 QR 0.01 0. 09 0. 50 0. 23 1. 00 VR 0.12 0. 02 0. 70 0. 33 0. 09 1. 00 Q&V 0.11 0. 04 0. 81 0. 38 0. 59 0. 81 1. 00 RDGCOM 0.20 0. 11 0. 74 0. 40 0. 31 0. 45 0. 52 1. 00 BIO -0.04 0. 18 0. 55 0. 05 0. 18 0. 26 0. 30 0. 29 1. 00 INCHEM 0.03 0. 20 0. 57 0. 02 0. 33 0. 41 0. 45 0. 34 0. 44 1. 00 ORGCHE 0.00-0. 20 0. 22 0. 02 -0. 11 0. 25 0. 09 0. 04 -0. 04 0. 00 01. 00 TOTSCI 0.04 0. 16 0. 68 0. 18 0. 29 0. 38 0. 41 0. 36 0: 74 0. 69 0. 45 1. 00 2D 0.01 0. 00 o. 34 0. 63 0. 27 0. 29 0. 32 0. 23 0. 03 0. 09 0. 27 0. 22 1. 00 3D -0.03-0. 12 0. 33 0. 01 0. 07 0. 41 0. 34 0. 10 0. 16 0. 16 0. 40 0. 25 0. 61 CHALK 0.24 0. 00 0. 16 0. 73-0. 05 0. 17 0. 13 0. 30 0. 12 0. 00 0. 00 0. 21 0. 32 PMATAV -0.07-0. 05 0. 32 0. 07 0. 18 o. 33 0. 32 0. 12 0. 09 0. 16 0. 37 0. 22 0. 77 uv TABLE XII SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED 4TH YEAR AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 4TH YEAR OVA DAT DAT GRDE AV AC MAN I M _ / \u00C2\u00BB T T RDG IN ORG TOT QR VR _ Q&V C Q M BIO C H E M C H E M S C I 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1. 00 OVAAV 0. 36 1.00 DATAC 0. 20 0.21 1. 00 DATMAN 0. 08-0.12 0. 02 1. 00 QR 0. 07 0.03 0. 52 0. 26 1. 00 VR 0. 05 0.00 0. 62 0. 33 0. 04 1. 00 Q & V 0. 04 0.00 0. 79 0. 40 0. 60 0. 78 1. 00 RDGCOM 0. 20 0.13 0. 73 0. 11 0. 32 0. 39 0. 51 1. 00 0. 11 0.07 0. 53 -0. 16 0. 19 0. 24 0. 30 0. 27 1 .00 INCHEM -0. 11 0.20 0. 47 0. 17 0. 26 0. 30 0. 36 0. 18 0 .30 1. 00 ORGCHE 0. 11 40.23 0. 31 0. 01 0. 03 0. 14 0. 09 0. 16 0 .06 0. 04 1. 00 TOTSCI 0. 12 0.12 0. 67 -0. 15 0. 27 0. 33 0. 38 0. 30 0 .73 0. 65 0. 50 1. 00 2D 0. 02-0.01 0. 24 0. 53 0. 27 0. 28 0. 33 0. 16 0 .03 0. 11 0. 21 0. 13 1. 00 3D 0. 04--0.08 0. 15 0. 63 0. 12 0. 38 0. 34 0. 07 0 .09 0. 06 0, 21 0. 12 0. 54 CHALK 0. 05-0.04--0. 14 0. 84 0. 00 0. 15 0. 14 -0. 02 -0 .15--0. 25--0. 00- 0. 16 0. 25 PMATAV 0. 06-0.04 0. 20 0. 58 0. 19 0. 34 0. 34 0. 09 0 .05 0. 08 0. 24-\u00E2\u0080\u00A20. 11 0. 85 oS TABLE XIII SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN WEIGHTED TOTAL AVERAGES AND PREREQUISITE AVERAGE, OVERALL AVERAGE AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 OVA DAT DAT TOTAL A V A C ^ QR T T O \u00C2\u00AB C T 7 R D G T > \u00E2\u0084\u00A2 I N 0 R G T 0 T V R Q S V COM B I \u00C2\u00B0 CHEM CHEM SCI 2D 3D CHALK PMAT AV GRDE 1.0!) OVAAV 0109 1. 00 DATAC 0.02 0. 17 1. 00 DATMAN 0.11-0. 01 0. 37 1. 00 QR -0.12 0. 25 0. 60 0. 23 1. 00 VR 0.19 -0. 06 0. 69 0. 35 0. 14 1. 00 Q & V 0.10 0. 06 0. 84 0. 39 0. 58 0. 86 1. 00 RDGCOM 0.09 0. 05 0. 78 0. 38 0. 41 0. 52 0. 65 1. 00 BIO -0.07 0. 13 0. 62 0. 05 0. 16 0. 29 0. 29 0. 36 1. 00 INCHEM -0.02 0. 25 0. 75 0, 01 0. 42 0. 32 0. 44 0. 62 0. 54 1. 00 ORGCHE 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1 .00 TOTSCI -0.06 0. 17 0. 76 0. 21 0. 32 0. 38 0. 43 0. 45 0. 83 0. 82 0 .00 1. 00 2D 0.00 -0. 01 0. 34 0. 65 0. 37 0. 25 0. 35 0. 31-0. 05 0. 15 0 .00 0. 18 1. 00 3D -0.06-0. 24 0. 17 0. 00 0. 17 0. 31 0. 32 0. 25-0. 19-0. 01 0 .00 -0. 06 0. 52 CHALK 0.12 0. 01 0. 15 0. 73 -0. 05 0. 17 0. 13 0. 30 0. 12 0. 00 0 100 0. 21 0. 32 PMATAV -0.06 -0. 07 0. 11 0. 06 0. 25 0. 12 0. 19 0. 13-0. 22 0. 08 0 .00 -0. 02 0. 74 Ui <3 TABLE XIV MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS (S.D.) FOR YEAR AVERAGES, PREREQUISITE AVERAGES, OVERALL AVERAGES AND DAT SUBSCORES FOR YEARS ENTERING 1972-76 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year T o t a l Mean S. D. Mean S. D. Mean S. D. Mean S. D. Mean S. D. GRDE 50 .26 7. 28 50 .30 6. 08 50 .21 6. 33 50 .13 6. 65 49 .95 5. 40 OVAAV 77 .69 4. 62 77 .55 4. 84 77 .13 4. 82 76 .52 4. 77 76 .50 4. 67 DATAC 5 .42 1. 50 5 .32 1. 52 5 .49 1. 44 5 .26 1. 42 5 .24 1. 39 DATMAN 4 .78 1. 80 4 .56 1. 51 4 .56 1. 51 4 .56 1. 51 4 .52 1. 51 RDGCOM 4 .80 1. 92 4 .67 1. 99 4 .98 1. 96 4 .92 2. 00 4 .97 2. 00 BIOL 5 .26 1. 67 5 .34 1. 63 5 .48 1. 68 5 .31 1. 78 5 .36 1. 75 INCHEM 5 .61 1. 72 5 .82 1. 59 6 .11 1. 48 6 .03 1. 58 5 .96 1. 54 TOTSCI 5 .89 1. 59 6 .00 1. 59 6 .13 1. 59 6 .04 1. 76 6 .05 1. 74 2D 4 .51 1. 91 4 .61 2. 02 4 .54 2. 06 4 .40 1. 98 4 .32 1. 96 3D 4 .62 1. 75 4 .76 1. 87 4 .68 1. 89 3 .69 1. 61 3 .79 1. 67 CHALK 4 .60 1. 94 4 .52 1. 78 4 .02 1. 77 4 .02 1. 77 3 .97 1. 78 PMATAV 4 .75 1. 76 4 .84 1. 89 4 .73 1. 95 4 .10 1. 61 4 .09 1. 59 n = 19 5 n = 15 7 . n = 10 9 n = 71 n = 76 TABLE XV SUM>S\RY OF RESULTS OF REGFESSION ANALYSES Bl TO 4 FOR YEAR AVERAGES AND TOTAL AVERACH 1st Year Average 1 2 3 4 ,36 .36 .20 .20 .13 .13 .04 .04 2nd Year Aw rage 1 2 3 4 ,2T .29 .2r .20 .12 .08 .04 3rd Year Average 1 2 3 4 30 .30 .24 .24 .09 .06 .09 .06 4th Year Average 1 2 3 4 Total Average 1 2 3 4 60 There was no s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t i n g v a r i a b l e w i t h f o u r t h year average o r w i t h the t o t a l average f o r a l l y e a r s . From Ta b l e X I I , the simple c o r r e l a t i o n of .25 between f o u r t h year average and Manual Average was not s i g n i f i c a n t but hi g h e r than most of the o t h e r s . 3D a t -.27, o v e r a l l average a t .21 and Inorganic Chemistry a t .20 were o t h e r s t o note. From Table X I I I , simple c o r r e l a -t i o n s f o r t o t a l average were v e r y low. C o r r e l a t i o n s Between Year Averages The r e s u l t s of the t h i r d s e t of r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s ( C l to C6) l i s t e d i n T a b l e I I I are presented i n T a b l e XVI. The c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s presented r e p r e s e n t zero order c o r r e l a t i o n s . C. 1. Second year average grades F i r s t year average grades 2. T h i r d year averagesgradess F i r s t year average grades 3. F o u r t h year average grades F i r s t year average grades 4. T h i r d year average grades Second year average grade 5. F o u r t h year average grades Second year average grade 6. F o u r t h year average grades T h i r d year average grades When f i r s t year o v e r a l l weighted average was taken as the independent v a r i a b l e and c o r r e l a t e d w i t h second, t h i r d TABLE XVI SUMMARY OF FEGRESSION ANALYSES CI TO C6 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN YEAR AVERAGES AND PREVIOUS YEAR AVERAGES Independent Variable De 2nd Year Average Grades n = 145 pendent Variables 3rd Year Average Grades n = 106 4th Year Average Grades n = 70 Lst Year average grades .79 .45 .25 2nd Year awrage grades .60 .54 3rd year average grades .79 62 and f o u r t h years as the dependent v a r i a b l e s , the c o r r e l a -t i o n s were .78, .45 and .25 r e s p e c t i v e l y . With second year as the p r e d i c t o r and t h i r d and f o u r t h years as the c r i t e r i o n , the c o r r e l a t i o n s were .60 and .54 r e s p e c t i v e l y . With t h i r d year as the p r e d i c t o r and f o u r t h year as the c r i t e r i o n , the c o r r e l a t i o n was .79. C o r r e l a t i o n s Between Technique Scores and P r e d i c t o r s The r e s u l t s of the l a s t s e t r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s as l i s t e d i n Table I I I are presented i n Table XVIII. Two ana l y s e s were performed f o r each dependent v a r i a b l e . D. 1. F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique PMAT, Manual average 2. F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique 2D, 3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g grades grades 3. O p e r a t i v e technique grades PMAT, Manual average 4. Ope r a t i v e technique grades 2D, 3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g 5. Combined Ope r a t i v e and P r o s t h o d o n t i c s grades PMAT, Manual average 6. Combined O p e r a t i v e and P r o s t h o d o n t i c s grades 2D, 3D, c h a l k c a r v i n g Each e n t r y r e p r e s e n t s a zero order c o r r e l a t i o n . The simple c o r r e l a t i o n s between these v a r i a b l e s i s presented i n Table XVII. From Table XVIII, when the manual s u b t e s t s TABLE XVII SIMPLE CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PSYCHOMOTOR AND PERCEPTUAL SCORES OF DAT AND TECHNIQUE COURSE GRADES IN FIXED PROSTHODONTICS, OPERATIVE DENTISTRY AND A COMBINATION OF BOTH MANUAL AV 2D 3D CHALK PMAT FIXED PROSTH \u00C2\u00B0 P E R COMB MANUAL AV 1.00 2D .42 1.00 3D .70 .53 1.00 CHALK .92 .27 .39 1.00 PMAT .62 .85 .85 .36 1.00 nIXED PROSTH .38 .06 .15 .31 .09 1.00 OPER .32 .11 .18 .33 .14 .67 1.00 COMB . 39 .09 .18 .35 .13 1.00 TABLE XVIII SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF REGRESSION ANALYSES DI TO 6 MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PSYCHOMOTOR AND PERCEPTUAL SCORES OF DAT AND TECHNIQUE COURSE GRADES IN FIXED PROSTHODOHTICS, OPERATIVE DENTISTRY AND A COMBINATION OF BOTH Mean Standard Deviation Fixed Prosths. 1 2 Operative 1 2 Corrbined Prosths & Op 1 2 DAT AVERAGES PMAT AV 4.94 1.80 MANUAL AV 5.07 2.08 .38 .32 .39 DAT SUBTESTS 2D 4.64 1.89 3D 4.84 1.75 CHALK 4.97 1.90 .31 .33 .35 Note: Means and standard deviations for dependent variables were standardized to 50 and 10 respectively. 65 and averages o f the DAT were the p r e d i c t o r s and F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s technique was the c r i t e r i o n , the c o r r e l a -t i o n s were .38 wit h the Manual Average and .31 w i t h Chalk C a r v i n g . The c o r r e l a t i o n s between F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and 2D, 3D and PMAT were not s i g n i f i c a n t (r = .06, .15 and .09 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g accounted f o r most of the v a r i a n c e o f F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a t t r i b u t e d t o the DAT s u b t e s t s . S i m i l a r l y f o r O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y , the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t was .32 with Manual Average and .33 w i t h Chalk C a r v i n g . The c o r r e l a t i o n s between O p e r a t i v e and 2D, 3D and PMAT average were not s i g n i f i c a n t (r = .11, .18 and .14 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) i n d i c a t i n g a g a i n t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g accounted f o r most o f the v a r i a n c e of Oper a t i v e a t t r i b u t e d to the DAT t e s t s . For the combination of O p e r a t i v e and F i x e d P r o s t h o -d o n t i c s , the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s were .39 w i t h Manual Average and .35 with Chalk C a r v i n g . The c o r r e l a -t i o n s between the combination of Oper a t i v e and F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and 2D, 3D and PMAT average were not s i g n i f i c a n t (.09, .18 and .13 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t Chalk C a r v i n g accounted f o r most of the v a r i a n c e o f the combined O p e r a t i v e and F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s a t t r i b u t e d t o the DAT t e s t s . CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS There i s a c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f o v e r a l l average with i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e s , e s p e c i a l l y i n the f i r s t two y e a r s . L i k e w i s e , the c o r r e l a t i o n o f o v e r a l l average w i t h f i r s t year average was .36 and second year average was .29. D e s p i t e the obvious r e s t r i c t i o n o f range by l i m i t i n g the a p p l i c a n t s t o those w i t h o v e r a l l average o f more than s i x t y - f i v e per cent leads one to the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t success i n the f i r s t two years o f d e n t i s t r y i s , i n p a r t , p r e d i c t e d by o v e r a l l average. These r e s u l t s were s i m i l a r to those of P a r k i n (1958) , Manhold and Manhold (1965), Dworkin (1970) and Phipps e t a l (1968), although Dworkin's c o r r e l a t i o n s were lower. The c o n c l u s i o n t h a t academic grades when averaged p r e d i c t academic grades i s not d i f f i c u l t to b e l i e v e . I t i s r a t h e r s u r p r i s i n g , however, to see c o r r e l a t i o n s as low as .36 and .29 although they are common i n the l i t e r a t u r e . The reason f o r t h i s i s u n c l e a r but s u s p i c i o n would l i e w i t h u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f both v a r i a b l e s . P r e r e q u i s i t e average on the oth e r hand d i d not 67 c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y with i n d i v i d u a l course grades. T h i s may be e x p l a i n e d by the t i m i n g o f these p r e r e q u i s i t e s . Commonly, students take these courses i n t h e i r f i r s t year of u n i v e r s i t y which f i x e s t h e i r p r e r e q u i s i t e average t o a c o n s t a n t f i g u r e . The o v e r a l l average, however, may a l t e r by the a d d i t i o n of subsequent courses be they h i g h or low grades. Hence, a student may improve h i s o v e r a l l average but cannot improve h i s p r e r e q u i s i t e average. The c o r r e l a t i o n s between DAT academic average and i n d i v i d u a l f i r s t and second year courses and a l s o f i r s t year averages are s i g n i f i c a n t . The c o r r e l a t i o n o f .20 with f i r s t year average i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t o b tained by P a r k i n (1958) of .28, Manhold and Manhold (1965) of .32 and Dworkin (1970) of .25. The T o t a l Science component of DAT adds l i t t l e t o the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the DAT. Reading Comprehension l i k e w i s e c o r r e l a t e s w i t h f i r s t year average .20 but i s not s i g n i f i c a n t w i t h i n d i v i d u a l c o u r s e s . T h i s r e s u l t i s d i f f i c u l t t o i n t e r p r e t . Thompson (1977) suggests t h a t Reading Comprehension i s a v e r y important p r e d i c t o r i n f i r s t and second year f o r Canadian students but no oth e r i n v e s t i g a t o r s p l a c e much emphasis on i t . B i o l o g y c o r r e l a t e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h some f i r s t year courses and l i k e DAT Academic Average, i s bes t used t o 681 complement knowledge of course grades from p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l years and o v e r a l l average. Inorganic Chemistry may be t r e a t e d i n the same way. The academic e x c e l l e n c e o f an a p p l i c a n t may be assessed then f a i r l y w e l l by t h r e e or more years of p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l u n i v e r s i t y e d u c a t i o n , the o v e r a l l average a t t a i n e d i n t h i s time and complemented by the DAT Academic Average. The r e s u l t s presented i n Tab l e XVI r e v e a l t h a t f i r s t and second years are to some extent s i m i l a r and t h i r d and f o u r t h y ears are s i m i l a r , but t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between the f i r s t two years and the second two y e a r s . The nature of many of the f i r s t two years courses i s more academic than t h a t o f the t h i r d and f o u r t h y e a r s , which are more c l i n i c a l . T h i s i s born out by f i r s t year average c o r r e l a t i n g w i t h second year average .79, the t h i r d year w i t h f o u r t h year .79 but second year w i t h t h i r d year .60. I t should be noted t h a t these a n a l y s e s were performed on st a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e s . A l s o t h e r e was no sy s t e m a t i c drop out d u r i n g these y e a r s . These c o r r e l a t i o n s between years e x p l a i n why o v e r a l l average i s a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r i n f i r s t and second years but not i n t h i r d and f o u r t h y e a r s . Looking at the manual portions of the DAT, the correlations with in d i v i d u a l courses, e s p e c i a l l y the second year courses of Oral Biology (ORBI 420) and p r e c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry (REST 422) are high for Chalk Carving and consequently for Manual Average. These r e s u l t s are i n agreement with DeRevere (1961), Manhold and Manhold (1967), Chebib (1974) and Thompson (1977). The fact that Chalk Carving correlated .24 with t h i r d year average which i s based heavily on c l i n i c a l courses requiring psychomotor s k i l l s strengthens the view that Chalk Carving i s the best predictor of psychomotor oriented courses that i s offered i n the DAT battery. The c o r r e l a t i o n for Chalk Carving with Oral Biology Occlusion (ORBI 420) of .29, a three-unit heavily psycho-motor and perceptual oriented course, with p r e c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry (REST 422) of .42, a three-unit (subsequently upgraded to a six-unit) course heavily oriented to psychomotor s k i l l s , supports t h i s . S i m i l a r l y , the c o r r e l a t i o n for Chalk Carving with c l i n i c a l Restorative Dentistry (REST 431) of .20 which i s a twelve-unit course heavily oriented to psychomotor s k i l l s also supports t h i s view. The consistently high correlations between Manual Average and psychomotor oriented courses of Oral Biology 70 O c c l u s i o n (ORBI 420) .31, p r e c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 422) .36, O r t h o d o n t i c s (ORTH 439) .23, c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 431) .21 and c l i n i c a l R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y (REST 441) .20 (which i s a tw e l v e - u n i t c o u r s e ) , almost m i r r o r e d the c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r Chalk C a r v i n g . T h i s subscore a l s o c o r r e l a t e d w i t h second year averages .20 and t h i r d year averages .30, making t h i s an important p r e d i c t o r of success i n the Dental F a c u l t y . The v a r i a b l e nature o f 2D, 3D and PMAT average i n c o r r e l a t i o n s with i n d i v i d u a l courses l e a d s t o the c o n c l u -s i o n t h a t these s c o r e s are not p a r t i c u l a r l y h e l p f u l . Four of the s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s were p o s i t i v e and t e n were n e g a t i v e . Graham (1972) showed PMAT and Chalk t o be e q u a l l y p r e d i c t i v e i n f i v e separate s t u d i e s i n the U.S.A., however, the r e s u l t s of t h i s study are a t v a r i a n c e with h i s . The c o r r e l a t i o n o f .31 f o r Chalk C a r v i n g w i t h the technique p o r t i o n o f p r e c l i n i c a l F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s was i n c l o s e agreement wi t h t h a t found by B e l l a n t i e t a l (1972) of .37. T h i s f i n d i n g i s strengthened by the c o r r e l a t i o n of .33 found between Chalk C a r v i n g a n d i p r e c l i n i c a l O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y , which resembles t h a t found by DeRevere (1961) of .37. The l a c k o f s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f any of the PMAT scores i n t h i s study u s i n g 71 dependent v a r i a b l e s such as P r o s t h o d o n t i c s and O p e r a t i v e technique grades strengthens the view t h a t PMAT i s not a v a l u a b l e t e s t . DeRevere, however, found a c o r r e l a t i o n of .39 between space v i s u a l i z a t i o n (an o l d form o f 2D) and p r e c l i n i c a l O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y . The PMAT c o r r e l a t i o n s , however, are v a r i a b l e from study to study whereas the Chalk C a r v i n g c o r r e l a t i o n s are very s t a b l e . S e l e c t i o n of students f o r admission t o the d e n t a l f a c u l t y was based h e a v i l y on o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l grades w i t h very l i t t l e emphasis p l a c e d on the DAT s c o r e s . Because academic i n f o r m a t i o n , a l b e i t d o u b t f u l l y r e l i a b l e undergraduate grades, i s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e , much emphasis i s p l a c e d upon i t . L i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e c o n cerning the p e r c e p t u a l or psychomotor a b i l i t i e s of a p p l i c a n t s , although a t l e a s t h a l f of the program of d e n t i s t r y demands e x p e r t i s e i n these a b i l i t i e s . Chalk c a r v i n g was shown t o be a c o n s i s t e n t l y r e l i a b l e p r e d i c t o r of psychomotor a b i l i t y , y e t i s l i t t l e used. S i m i l a r l y , Manual Average was a good p r e d i c t o r . However, Manual Average was made up of 2D, 3D and Chalk C a r v i n g , w i t h a b i a s h e a v i l y to Chalk C a r v i n g . The Chalk C a r v i n g was a \u00E2\u0080\u00A2rcTl'eTa'ffe'rt score u n t a r n i s h e d by the v e r y v a r i a b l e 2D and 3D s c o r e s . From the r e s u l t s of t h i s study, the c o n c l u s i o n was drawn t h a t equal emphasis should be p l a c e d on the Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t and the p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l o v e r a l l average. I f t h i s i s done to exclude students w i t h low a b i l i t y i n these a r e a s , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t students w i l l be admitted w i t h h i g h e r o v e r a l l competence. The Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t , even though i t i s the b e s t p r e d i c t o r a v a i l a b l e a t p r e s e n t , s t i l l e x p l a i n s o n l y a s m a l l amount of the v a r i a n c e of technique grades. L i k e w i s e , o v e r a l l p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l average p r e d i c t s o n l y a s m a l l p r o p o r t i o n of the v a r i a n c e of d i d a c t i c grades, however, both o f these p r e d i c t o r s are important to m a i n t a i n u n t i l b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r s may be v a l i d a t e d . I t i s recommended t h a t p r e p r o f e s s i o n a l averages and DAT Chalk C a r v i n g should be used to s e l e c t students f o r admission to the Dental F a c u l t y . G r a i n g e r ' s s u g g e s t i o n tooexclude a p p l i c a n t s with a c a r v i n g score o f l e s s than f o u r i s sound on the b a s i s t h a t f a l s e p o s i t i v e s are almost n o n - e x i s t e n t i n t h i s t e s t . Admissions committees can a f f o r d t o exclude the f a l s e n e g a t i v e s and cannot a f f o r d the time and e f f o r t o f t r a i n i n g students w i t h l e s s e r psychomotor s k i l l s . I t i s t r u e t h a t the f a l s e n e g a t i v e s (students who perform p o o r l y on the Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t but would have performed w e l l i n d e n t a l school) w i l l be r e j e c t e d . They have the c h o i c e of r e t e s t f o r the f o l l o w i n g year to t r y t o improve t h e i r s c o r e . As long as the number of e l i g i b l e a p p l i c a n t s i s h i g h e r i n r e l a t i o n t o p l a c e s a v a i l a b l e , t h i s p h i l o s o p h y can be f o l l o w e d . The sequelae t o t h i s p h i l o s o p h y i s t h a t the g e n e r a l standard of performance i n d e n t a l s c h o o l w i l l improve. V a l i d a t i o n o f t h i s should be c a r r i e d out a n n u a l l y . I t i s recommended t h a t p r e r e q u i s i t e average not be used as c r i t e r i o n f o r s e l e c t i o n as the academic average i s a s t r o n g e r p r e d i c t o r . S i m i l a r l y , a l l o t h e r s u b t e s t s o f the DAT o t h e r than Chalk C a r v i n g shouiLdclnot be used i n the s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Academic Average i s b e s t used o n l y when o v e r a l l average i s not a v a i l a b l e and Manual Average may be d i s r e g a r d e d i f Chalk C a r v i n g i s a v a i l a b l e . High hopes are h e l d f o r the 16PE p e r s o n a l i t y t e s t c u r r e n t l y being v a l i d a t e d by the Canadian DAT Committee. However, s i m i l a r e f f o r t s should be d i r e c t e d to the development of a b e t t e r t e s t to p r e d i c t psychomotor s k i l l t o be used i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the Chalk C a r v i n g t e s t or r e p l a c e i t g i v e n the e x t e n s i v e .psychomotor demands of d e n t i s t r y . 74, BIBLIOGRAPHY American Dental A s s o c i a t i o n , D i v i s i o n o f E d u c a t i o n Measurements: Report on the Dental Admissions T e s t i n g Program Survey, 1974-75. B e l l a n t i , N.D., Mayberry, W.E., T i r a , D.E.: \" R e l a t i o n Between S e l e c t e d P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s and Grades i n F i x e d P r o s t h o d o n t i c s Laboratory.\" J . Dent. Educ. 36(12), 16-21, December 1972. B r i g a n t e , R.F., Lamb, R.E.: \" P e r c e p t i o n and C o n t r o l T e s t : The Dental T e c h n i c a l A p t i t u d e T e s t o f the Future?\" J . Dent. E d u c , 32 (3), 340-54, September 1968. C i a n f l o n e , D., Z u l l o , T.: \" R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Dental School Performance and P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l Major Courses of Study.\" J . Dent. Educ., 39(2), 78-81, February 1975. Chambers, D.W.,: \" D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Indexes f o r Improving Dental School Admissions.\" J . Dent. Educ., 36(1), 32-41, January 1972. Chebib, F.S.: \" I n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s Between DAT Scores, P r e - d e n t a l Grades and Performance i n Dental School.\" U n i v e r s i t y o f Manitoba, 19 74. Chen, M.K., Podshadley, D.W. Shrock, J . : A F a c t o r i a l Study o f Some P s y c h o l o g i c a l , V o c a t i o n a l I n t e r e s t , and Mental A b i l i t y V a r i a b l e s as P r e d i c t o r s o f Success i n Dental School.\" J . Appl. P s y c h o l . , 51(3), 236-41, 1967. Cowling, R.: \" S e l e c t i n g a Freshman C l a s s . \" J . Dent..Educ. 7, 250-252, 1943. DeRevere, R.E. \"Comparison o f Dental A p t i t u d e Tests with Achievement i n O p e r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y . \" J . Dent. Educ.. 25, 50-56, 1961. Deubert, L.W., Smith, M.C., J e n k i n s , C. B. , B e r r y , D.C: \"The S e l e c t i o n of Dental Students. A P i l o t Study of an Assessment o f P o t e n t i a l Manual A b i l i t y by Psychometric T e s t s . \" B r i t . Dent. J . , 139(5), 167-70, September 1975. Deubert, L.W., Smith, M.C., Downs, S., J e n k i n s , C.B., B e r r y , D.C.: \"The S e l e c t i o n of Dental Students. A P i l o t Study o f an Assessment o f Manual A b i l i t y by P r a c t i c a l T e s t s . \" B r i t . Dent. J . , 139(9), 357-61, November 1975. 75 12. Dworkin, S.F.: \"Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t as Performance P r e d i c t o r Oyer Four Years o f Dental School: Analyses and In te rp re t a t i o n s.\" J . Dent. Educ., 34 CD , 28-38, March 19 70. 13. Dworkin, S.F.: \" F u r t h e r C o r r e l a t i o n a l and F a c t o r Analyses of the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t as a P r e d i c t o r o f Performance: Conclusions and Summary.\" J . Dent. Educ., 34 (4) , 358-64, December 1970. 14. Fernandez-Pabon, J . J . : \" P r e d i c t i o n of Success i n Dental School on the B a s i s o f Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t Scores and Other V a r i a b l e s . \" J . Dent. Educ.. 32(3), 261-71, September 196 8. 15. F r e d e r i c k s , M.A., Mundy, P.: \" R e l a t i o n s Between S o c i a l C l a s s , Average Grades i n C o l l e g e , Dental A p t i t u d e Test Scores and Academic Achievement o f Students.\" J . Dent. E d u c , 32, 26-36, 1968. 16. F u l l , C.A., F o l e y , W.J.: \" S e l e c t i o n and Performance: A F a c t o r i a l Study o f Dental Students.\" J . Dent. Educ., 35(9), 563-6, September 1971. 17. Graham, J.W.: \" S u b s t i t u t i o n o f Perceptual-Motor A b i l i t y T e s t f o r Chalk C a r v i n g i n Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program.\" J . Dent. E d u c , 36(11), 9-14, November 1972. 18. Graham, J.W.: \" F a c t o r A n a l y s i s of the Perceptual-Motor A b i l i t y T e s t . \" J . Dent. E d u c , 38(1), 16-19, January 1974. 19. Graham, J.W.: \"Comparison o f Males and Females i n the Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program.\" J . Dent. E d u c , 40(12), 783-6, December 1976. 20. Grainger, R.M.: \" V a l i d i t y Study of DAT.\" DAT T e s t Committee o f the CDA, February 19 72. 21. Grainger, R.M.: \"Report on V a l i d i t y o f Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t Used i n Canadian Dental Schools.\" CDA T e s t Committee o f the C o u n c i l on Dental E d u c a t i o n , February 19 73. 22. Grainger, R.M.: \"Notes on S t a t u s of DAT.\" Unpublished. August, 19 74. 23. G u i l f o r d , J.P.: Psychometric Measurement. McGraw-Hill, 1964, 24. G u l l i c k s e n , H.: Theory o f Mental T e s t s . Wiley, 1950. 76 25. H e l l e r , B.D. , Carson, R..L. , Douglas, B.L.: \" S e l e c t i o n of Students f o r Dental School.\" J . Dent, E d u c , 29, 202-7, 1965. 26. Hood, A.B. : \" P r e d i c t i n g Achievement i n Dental School.\" J . Dent. E d u c , 27, 148-55, 1963. 27. Houston, J.B., Merish, I.N.: \" M u l t i p l e Regression o f P r e d i c t o r s and C r i t e r i a o f Dental School Performance.\" J . Dent.. Res. , 54 (3) , 515-21, May-June, 19 75. 28. K r e i t , L.H.: \"The P r e d i c t i o n o f Student Success i n Dental Schools.\" U. S. Department o f Health, E d u c a t i o n and Welfare, 1971. 29. K r e i t , L.H.> McDonald, R.E.: \" P r e p r o f e s s i o n a l Grades and the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t as P r e d i c t o r s o f Student Performance i n Dental School.\" J . Dent. E d u c , 32(4), 4 52-5 7, December 196 8. 30. Lewis, D.W.: \"DAT - Report to F a c u l t y C o u n c i l . \" Report on a Four Year Study. U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto, November 19 71. 31. Manhold, J.H., Manhold, B.S.: \" F i n a l Report o f an 8-Year Study of the E f f i c a c y o f the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t i n P r e d i c t i n g 4-Year Performance i n a New School.\" J . Dent. Educ., 29(1), 41-44, 1965. 32. Manhold, J.H., Manhold, B.S.: \" P r e d i c t i v e Value f o r Four Year Performance of I n d i v i d u a l P a r t s of the Dental A p t i t u d e Test.\" J . Dent. E d u c , 31(1), 62-70, March 196 7. 33. McGrath, E . J . : \" P r e d i c t i v e Values of Grades i n V a r i o u s Types of P r e d e n t a l Courses.\" J . Dent. Educ., 7, 46-55, 1942. 34. P a r k i n , G.L.: \"Report o f the R e s u l t s of the A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g Program.\" J . Dent. Educ., 22, 9-32, 1958. 35. Peterson, S.: The ADA Chalk C a r v i n g T e s t . \" J . Dent. Educ., 11-15, January 19 74. 36. P h i l l i p , P.J., R e i t z , W.: \" S t a t i s t i c a l Models f o r the S e l e c t i o n o f A p p l i c a n t s f o r the DDS Program.\" J . Dent. Educ., 150-58, March 1971. 37. Phipps, G.T., Fishman, R., S c o t t , R.H.: \" P r e d i c t i o n of Success i n Dental School.\" J . Dent. Educ., 32(2), 161-70, June 1968. 77 38. Podshadley, D.W., Chen, M.K., Shrock, J.G.: \"A F a c t o r A n a l y t i c Approach to the P r e d i c t i o n o f Student Performance.\" J . Dent. Educ., 33(1), 105-11, March- 1969. 39. Prout, R.E., Hoy, T.G.: \" U n i v e r s i t y Examination Performance o f C o r r e l a t i o n Between E n t r y Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and N o n - C l i n i c a l Examinations.\" B r i t . Dent. J . , 141(5), 141-45, September 1976. 40. Pyskacek, R.A. : \"Development o f the Perceptual-Motor A b i l i t y T e s t to Replace the C a r v i n g D e x t e r i t y Examination o f the Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program.\" J . Dent. Educ., 35(2), 51, February 1971. 41. Pyskacek, R.A.: \"The Dental Admission T e s t i n g Program and Proposed Changes.\" J . Dent. E d u c , 35 (4), 237-42, A p r i l 1971. 42. Ross, N.M.: \"Dental A p t i t u d e Test R e s u l t s and C o l l e g e Grades as P r e d i c t o r s o f Success i n a School o f D e n t i s t r y . \" J . Dent. E d u c , 31(1).,, 84-88, March 1967. 43. S h i p , I . I . , L a s t e r , L.L.: \"Aptitude and Achievement i n Dental E d u c a t i o n . \" J . Dent. E d u c , 31(1), 44-5 7, March 196 7. 44. Smith, B.G.: \"The Value o f Tests o f S p a t i a l and Psycho-Motor A b i l i t y i n S e l e c t i n g Dental Students.\" B r i t . Dent. J . , 141(5), 150-54, September 1976. 45. Smith, T.: \" P r e d i c t i n g Grade P o i n t Averages from A p p l i c a t i o n Data.\" U n i v e r s i t y o f Kentucky. 46. Tatsuoka, M.M.: \" V a l i d a t i o n S t u d i e s ; The Use of M u l t i p l e Regression Equations.\" I n s t i t u t e o f P e r s o n a l i t y and A b i l i t y T e s t i n g , 1969. 47. Thompson, G.W.: \"Dental A p t i t u d e Test R e s u l t s , January and A p r i l 19 75: S t a t i s t i c a l Summary.\" Canadian Dental A s s o c i a t i o n Report, .November 1975. 48. Thompson, G.W.: \"Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t R e s u l t s , January and A p r i l 1976: S t a t i s t i c a l Summary.\" Canadian D e n t a l A s s o c i a t i o n Report, November 1976. 49. Thompson, G.W.: \" V a l i d a t i o n Study o f 1975-76: F i r s t Year D e n t i s t r y Admissions.\" Canadian Dental A s s o c i a t i o n Report, February 1977. 7 8 50,. T o c c h i n i , J . J . , Endy, M.W., Thomas sen, P.R,, Reinke, B.C.: \" C o r r e l a t i o n Study Between A p t i t u d e T e s t i n g and Dental Student Performance.\" J . Dent, Educ., 25, 269-73, 1961. 51. Z u l l o , T.G.: \" P r i n c i p l e Components A n a l y s i s o f the Dental A p t i t u d e T e s t B a t t e r y . \" J . Dent. Educ., 35(3), 144-48, March 19 71. \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 52. Z u l l o , T.G.: \"A F a c t o r A n a l y s i s o f P e r c e p t u a l and Motor A b i l i t i e s of Dental Students.\" J . Dent. Educ., 35(6), 356-61, June 1971. APPENDIX A 79 Standard D e v i a t i o n +2.5 +2.0 +1.5 +1.0 +0.5 0 -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 -2.0 -2.5 SCORING SYSTEM USED IN THE DENTAL ADMISSION TESTING PROGRAM Coded Score 7 6 3 2 1 0 -1 1.1% 2.8% 6.6% 12.1% 17.5% 19.8% 17.5? 12.1? 6.6% 2.8% P e r c e n t i a l Band E q u i v a l e n t s 98.9 - 99.9 97.0 - 98.8 90.0 - 96.0 78.0 - 89.0 61.0 - 77.0 40.0 - 60.0 1.1% 23.0 11.0 4.0 1.2 0.0 39.0 22.0 10.0 3.0 1.1 The percentage f i g u r e s i n c l u d e d i n the diagram i n d i c a t e the p o r t i o n o f the a p p l i c a n t s who would r e c e i v e each coded score i f there were a normal or p e r f e c t d i s t r i b u t i o n o f raw s c o r e s . A l l o f the t e s t s i n c l u d e d i n the admission program produce f a i r l y normal d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f raw scores so the percentages i n d i c a t e d above would apply f o r each p a r t o f the t e s t b a t t e r y . A coded score o f nine would always mean t h a t the a p p l i c a n t ranked, on the t e s t i n q u e s t i o n , w i t h the top one per cent of a l l a p p l i c a n t s . A coded score o f minus one would always mean t h a t the a p p l i c a n t ranked w i t h the lowest one per cent of a l l a p p l i c a n t s i Coded scores o f thr e e , f o u r , and f i v e would always r e p r e s e n t the middle group o f about f i f t y - f i v e p er cent. 80 APPENDIX B CONVERSION TABLE FOR GRADE POINT SCALES TO PERCENTAGES FOR ADMISSION TO UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 4 POINT SCALE Where i t i s necessary t o determine an approximate percentage e q u i v a l e n t t o a grade p o i n t average (G.P.A.) on the 4 p o i n t s c a l e the f o l l o w i n g t a b l e should be used. (A=4.0 - B=3.0 - C=2.0 D=1.0) GPA on Approximate 4 p o i n t s c a l e % e q u i v a l e n t 4 - \u00C2\u00B0 90+ 3.9 88 3.8 gg F i r s t 3.7 84 C l a s s 3 - 6 82 3.5 80 3.4 78 3*2 11 Upper i'* 76 Second i't 75 C l a s s 3-0 73 Lower 2.9 7 1 2.8 70 l'l 69 Second I'l 67 C l a s s 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 64 63 62 61 2.0 60 Pass 1.9 59 C l a s s 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 81 9 POINT SCALE ( U n i v e r s i t y of V i c t o r i a ) Where i t i s necessary to determine an approximate percentage e q u i v a l e n t to a grade p o i n t average (G.P.A.) on the 9 p o i n t s c a l e used by the U n i v e r s i t y of V i c t o r i a the f o l l o w i n g t a b l e should be used. GPA on Approximate (To convert to 9 p o i n t s c a l e % E q u i v a l e n t 4 p o i n t scale) 9.0 95+ 8.5 90 4.0 8.0 88 F i r s t 7.5 85 C l a s s 7.0 83 6 . 5 80 3 .5 6.0 78 Upper 5.5 75 Second 5.0 7 3 3.0 C l a s s 4.5 70 Lower 4.0 6 8 Second 3.5 65 2.5 C l a s s 3.0 63 Pass 2.5 62 C l a s s 2.0 60 2.0 1.5 55 1.0 50 1.0 9 POINT SCALE ( U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a ) 9.0 90+ 8.5 90 - F i r s t 8.0 85 C l a s s 7.5 80 3.5 7 0 75 \u00C2\u00B0 P p e r S.l 73 \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 3.0 ^ 6.5 70 6.0 65 2.5 Lower Second C l a s s 5.5 63 5.0 60 2.0 Pass 4.5 57 C l a s s 4.0 53 3.5 50 1.0 82 APPENDIX C PREREQUISITE SUBJECTS FOR ADMISSION INTO THE FACULTY OF DENTISTRY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA E n g l i s h 100 ( L i t e r a t u r e and C o m p o s i t i o n ) M a t h e m a t i c s 100 ( C a l c u l u s I) M a t h e m a t i c s 101 ( C a l c u l u s I I ) o r M a t h e m a t i c s 130 ( F i n i t e C o m b i n a t i o n M a t h e m a t i c s ) . C h e m i s t r y 103 (Gene ra l C h e m i s t r y ) o r C h e m i s t r y 120 o r 110 ( P r i n c i p l e s o f C h e m i s t r y ) . C h e m i s t r y 203 (O rgan i c C h e m i s t r y ) o r C h e m i s t r y 230 (O rgan i c C h e m i s t r y ) . B i o c h e m i s t r y 300 P h y s i c s 145 ( E l emen ta r y P h y s i c s ) o r P h y s i c s 110 ( M e c h a n i c s , E l e c t r i c i t y and A t o m i c S t r u c t u r e ) , o r P h y s i c s 115 (Wave M o t i o n , M e c h a n i c s and E l e c t r i c i t y ) o r P h y s i c s 120 ( M a t t e r and M e c h a n i c s ) . B i o l o g y 101 o r 102 ( P r i n c i p l e s o f B i o l o g y ) . 83 APPENDIX D COURSE WEIGHTING ACCORDING TO UNIT VALUES ASSIGNED. ABBREVIATIONS OF COURSES FOR COMPUTER USE ARE SHOWN U n i t Course Name Computer E n t r y Weight 1st year Anatomy ANAT 400 8.0 Anatomy ANAT 401 6.0 Bio c h e m i s t r y BIOC 300 3.0 Or a l B i o l o g y (Dental Morphology) ORBI 410 2.0 Phy s i o l o g y PHYL 400 8.0 2nd year Anatomy (Neuroanatomy) ANAT 425 2.0 M i c r o b i o l o g y MICR 425 5.0 O r a l B i o l o g y (Occlusion) ORBI 420 3.0 Or a l B i o l o g y (Oral Pathology) ORBI 423 8.0 Or a l Medicine (Diagnosis) ORME 425 2.0 Ort h o d o n t i c s ORTH 429 1.0 P u b l i c & Community Dental H e a l t h PCDH 427 1.0 Pharmacology PCOL 425 5.0 Ph y s i o l o g y (neurophysiology) PHYL 425 2.0 Or a l Surgery (anaesthesiology) ORSU 426 1.0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y REST 422 3.0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y ( M a t e r i a l s ) REST 421 3.0 3rd year O r a l B i o l o g y ORBI 430 3.0 O r a l Medicine (Periodontology) ORME 434 4.0 O r a l Medicine (Oral Diagnosis) ORME 435 4*0 O r a l Surgery ORSU 436 3*0 Or t h o d o n t i c s ORTH 439 3.0 P u b l i c & Community Dental Health PCDH 437 3*0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y REST 431 12.0 Course Name Computer E n t r y 84 U n i t Weight 4th year O r a l B i o l o g y ORBI 440 3.0 O r a l Medicine (Periodontology) ORME 444 4.0 O r a l Medicine (Oral Diagnosis) ORME 445 4.0 O r a l Surgery ORSU.446 3.0 Ort h o d o n t i c s ORTH 449 3.0 P u b l i c & Community Dental H e a l t h PCDH 447 3.0 R e s t o r a t i v e D e n t i s t r y REST 441 12.0 "@en . "Thesis/Dissertation"@en . "10.14288/1.0055788"@en . "eng"@en . "Administrative, Adult and Higher Education"@en . "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use."@en . "Graduate"@en . "A validation of some predictive criteria used by dental faculty admissions"@en . "Text"@en . "http://hdl.handle.net/2429/21133"@en .