I am currently reading William Sedlacek's "Beyond the Big Test: Non-cognitive Assessment in Higher Education" (2004) for a research and assessment course. The author discusses the limitations of the standardized aptitude tests currently used in the college admissions process, like the SAT and ACT. He argues that an admissions assessment based on non-cognitive variables would obviate affirmative action or any other means of racial/ethnic preference.
Sedlacek identifies eight non-cognitive variables based on "extensive research":
- Positive self-concept
- Realistic self-appraisal
- Successfully handling the system
- Preference for long-term goals
- Availability of strong support person
- Leadership experience
- Community involvement
- Knowledge acquired in a field
He suggests that these eight variables would strongly predict student success in college. Here's a great excerpt about how he thinks these variables relate to race and affirmative action:
"Whereas I supported the efforts of the University of Michigan to consider race directly in its admissions policies, I believe there is a better way to proceed. If the university were to use the non-cognitive variables proposed here in its admissions systems, it would achieve diversity in its classes by virtue of considering variable that reflect race, culture, gender, and the other aspects of nontraditionality discussed earlier. Thus, by not directly selecting according to aspects of diversity, a school can achieve increased diversity in a more sophisticated way" (p. 10).
This view assumes that racial/ethnic diversity is desirable and beneficial to students, and that the non-cognitive variables can serve as a kind of proxy to race/ethnicity or other social identities. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I agree that noncognitive variables are a more accurate way to predict student success, but I wonder how we could make them easily understandable to the general public and policy makers? It seems both the general public and policy makers want an easily quantifiable measure based on merit.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNo, I do not feel that this type of admissions policy would necessarily increase diversity as the author indicates. These non-cognitive variables sound very similar to developmental assets- I attached a few pdf files on development assets from early childhood, middle childhood, and adolescents, to give an example of the importance of positive social interactions which influence the resiliency of a student in the face of adversity. Not all social interactions are created equally, just as not all youth have the privilege of developing these non-cognitive attributes. I do not believe the non-cognitive variables necessarily “reflect race, culture, gender, and the other aspects of nontraditionality,” because there is no mention of stress or negative impact on one’s life span trajectory because of their group association and/or race/ethnicity. Being a person of color does not necessarily go hand in hand with the listed attributes.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.search-institute.org/system/files/40AssetsEC.pdf
http://www.search-institute.org/system/files/40Assets_MC_0.pdf
http://www.search-institute.org/system/files/40AssetsList.pdf
Speaking from my upbringing, in the lovely Saginaw Michigan, I would argue these non-cognitive variables were NOT highly visible among youth of color, specifically African-American and Chicano youth. Saginaw is a highly segregated community, in which youth of color learn, “keeping it real” is to refute any white dominate norms. For example aspiring to attend college is often considered a “white” thing to do and some “minority” youth may feel engaging in sub-culture deviant behavior is what keeps them closer to their “true” identity. Now back to the blog, what concerns me is if we move away from quantitative tests and toward this seemingly holistic approach aren’t we then just judging the quality of the applicant’s upbringing? So we would be saying, “you deserve to attend college because you appear to be a seemingly whole person, based on your balanced life experiences.” I would have rather seen a variable which would attempt to measure perseverance and resiliency, in combination with the occurrences of challenges one may face because of their identity. I do feel the attributes listed are indicators for academic successful, but I do not feel that they are directly related to securing diversity on college campuses.
My verdict- no, those non-cognitive variables are moderately biased and do not exhaustively “reflect race, culture, gender, and the other aspects of nontraditionality.”