Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] failure is always an option



I agree with John Denker that "motivation" is important, and I agree it is not perfectly clear what motivation is or how we get it. I think we have some data that point toward one way to determine the motivation of a college applicant.

When we evaluate applicants for admission and scholarships we look at four things... [1] ACT/SAT score, [2] HS GPA, [3] HS class rank, [4] letters of recommendation. Which of these is the best predictor of success in college? Think about that for a second or two before reading the next paragraph.

The admissions folks at Bluffton and neighboring universities and colleges agree that, although we have no crystal ball, the HS class rank is the best predictor of success in college, followed by the ACT/SAT score. The HS GPA and the letters of recommendation are almost not worth looking at. It is unusual for people to write bad letters of recommendation unless the student has some very serious problems. Grading is not uniform among high schools, and grade inflation is rampant. I don't think it is difficult to understand why GPA and recommendations are not very useful, but why does class rank give a better indication of success than standardized exam scores?

It is believed that class rank is a measure of motivation. The student who rose to the top of his class is motivated. If a student was motivated to rise to the top of her class, she will most likely have the motivation to rise to the top of her college class. To the extent the ACT/SAT score is a measure of ability (shall we say IQ?) it is also very important, but to some extent the ACT/SAT score also measures the degree of academic exposure, and that hints at the academic quality and the academic environment of the high school. There also have been claims that the standardized exams also show some racial or ethnic bias. In the end, a high-ranked student from a mediocre high school can have a lower ACT/SAT score than a lower-ranked student from a better high school. If this is the case, our admissions people claim the higher-class-rank but lower ACT/SAT student is more likely to have success in college. The academic climate at the "better school" allowed the lower-ranked (less motivated) student to achieve a higher ACT/SAT score without trying all that hard. The poor academic climate at the "lesser school" hindered the higher-ranked (more motivated) student from achieving a high ACT/SAT score. When these two students get to college and face tough courses, the more-motivated student will rise to the challenge more readily than the less-motivated student even though the less-motivated student might be smarter and/or better prepared.

Of course this is a generalization, and applying generalizations to individuals is quite risky. But we have to accept/deny students and award scholarships based upon some criteria, and generalizations based upon data and reason are about all we have.

I have a few more things to say about motivation, including some types of motivation that are not so healthy, but I'll sleep on that and try to compose that email tomorrow.

Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D.
Professor of Chemistry and Physics
Bluffton University
1 University Drive
Bluffton, OH 45817
419.358.3270
edmiston@bluffton.edu