In 2020, the onset of COVID-19 greatly restricted access to admissions testing in higher education and required innovative solutions and flexibility such as at home testing with remote proctoring, reducing testing time, pop-up locations, and additional testing dates. Increased focus on social justice, diversity, and fairness continued to concern admissions professionals during this time. This article is intended to provide an update (Camara) on admissions testing as we enter 2022, documenting enhancements and changes across testing programs. In addition, we report recent data and findings on applications, enrollment, and test taking, as well as the prevalence of test optional and test blind policies and its impact on score sending in undergraduate, graduate, business, law, and medical schools. It is important to note that many questions remain unanswered. Our original intent was to include more information on the impact of test-optional polices on diversity as we thought the pandemic would be in the rear-view mirror by now. Given the lingering effects of the pandemic, it will be critical to evaluate the impact of these policies changes on the entering class of 2021 and beyond as those data become available.

Educational Measurement: Issues and PracticeVolume 40, Issue 4 p. 53-56 Commentary Commentary: Reviving the Messenger: A Response to Koljatic et al. (2021) Krista Mattern, Corresponding Author Krista Mattern krista.mattern@act.org ACT, Inc Correspondence Krista Mattern, ACT, Inc, krista.mattern@act.orgSearch for more papers by this authorTy Cruce, Ty Cruce ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorDianne Henderson, Dianne Henderson ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorTina Gridiron, Tina Gridiron ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorAlex Casillas, Alex Casillas ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorMelinda Taylor, Melinda Taylor ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this author Krista Mattern, Corresponding Author Krista Mattern krista.mattern@act.org ACT, Inc Correspondence Krista Mattern, ACT, Inc, krista.mattern@act.orgSearch for more papers by this authorTy Cruce, Ty Cruce ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorDianne Henderson, Dianne Henderson ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorTina Gridiron, Tina Gridiron ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorAlex Casillas, Alex Casillas ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this authorMelinda Taylor, Melinda Taylor ACT, IncSearch for more papers by this author First published: 02 August 2021 https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12459Citations: 1Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume40, Issue4Winter 2021Pages 53-56 RelatedInformation

In this brief, we present a method for predicting the impact of school closures on average ACT® test scores. We use ACT test-retest data to estimate the average per-month gain in ACT scores while schools are in session and the average permonth loss in ACT scores while schools are not in session. We then apply the estimates to predict the impact of school closures on average ACT test scores under three different scenarios for school closure, school re-opening, duration and effectiveness of online instruction, and ACT test dates.

We examined summary indices of high school performance (coursework, grades, and test scores) based on the graded response model (GRM). The indices varied by inclusion of ACT test scores and whether high school courses were constrained to have the same difficulty and discrimination across groups of schools. The indices were examined with respect to skewness, incremental prediction of college degree attainment, and differences across racial/ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups. The most difficult high school courses to earn an "A" grade included calculus, chemistry, trigonometry, other advanced math, physics, algebra 2, and geometry. The GRM-based indices were less skewed than simple high school grade point average (HSGPA) and had higher correlations with ACT Composite score. The index that included ACT test scores and allowed item parameters to vary by school group was most predictive of college degree attainment, but had larger subgroup differences. Implications for implementing multiple measure models for college readiness are discussed.

In 2018, 26 states administered a college admissions test to all public school juniors. Nearly half of those states proposed to use those scores as their academic achievement indicators for federal accountability under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA); many others are planning to use those scores for other accountability purposes. Accountability encompasses a number of different uses and subsumes a variety of claims. For states proposing to use summative tests for accountability, a validity argument needs to be developed, which entails delineating each specific use of test scores associated with accountability, identifying appropriate evidence, and offering a rebuttal to counterclaims. The aim of this article is to support states in developing a validity argument for use of college admission test scores for accountability by identifying claims that are applicable across states, along with summarizing existing evidence as it relates to each of these claims. As outlined by The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing , multiple sources of evidence are used to address each claim. A series of threats to the validity argument, including weaker alignment with content standards and potential influences in narrowing teaching, are reviewed. Finally, the article contrasts validity evidence, primarily from research on the ACT, with regulatory requirements from ESSA. The Standards and guidance addressing the use of a “nationally recognized high school academic assessment” (Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Negotiated Rulemaking Committee; Department of Education) are the primary sources for the organization of validity evidence.

Educational Measurement: Issues and PracticeVolume 38, Issue 4 p. 33-33 Article Throwing Out the Good in Search of the Perfect: A Rejoinder Wayne J. Camara, Wayne J. Camara ACTSearch for more papers by this authorKrista Mattern, Krista Mattern ACTSearch for more papers by this authorMichelle Croft, Michelle Croft ACTSearch for more papers by this authorSara Vispoel, Sara Vispoel ACTSearch for more papers by this authorPaul Nichols, Paul Nichols NWEASearch for more papers by this author Wayne J. Camara, Wayne J. Camara ACTSearch for more papers by this authorKrista Mattern, Krista Mattern ACTSearch for more papers by this authorMichelle Croft, Michelle Croft ACTSearch for more papers by this authorSara Vispoel, Sara Vispoel ACTSearch for more papers by this authorPaul Nichols, Paul Nichols NWEASearch for more papers by this author First published: 26 November 2019 https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12311 Wayne J. Camara, Krista Mattern, Michelle Croft, Sara Vispoel, ACT, Inc., 500 ACT Drive, Iowa City, IA 52243 (wayne.camara@act.org; krista.mattern@act.org; michelle.croft@act.org; sara.vispoel@act.org). Paul Nichols, Northwest Evaluation Association, 121 NW Everett Street, Portland, OR 97209 (paul.nichols@nwea.org). Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume38, Issue4Winter 2019Pages 33-33 RelatedInformation

Ensuring postsecondary readiness is a goal of K-12 education, but it is unclear whether high school students should get different messages about the required levels of academic preparation depending on their postsecondary trajectories. This study estimated readiness benchmark scores on a college admissions test predictive of earning good grades in majors associated with middle-skills occupations at 2-year postsecondary institutions. Results generally indicated similarity between those scores, the corresponding scores for students preparing for high-skills jobs requiring a bachelor's degree, and established readiness benchmarks for the general college-going population. Subsequent analyses revealed small variation between readiness benchmarks for different college majors. Overall, results suggest that high school graduates need a strong academic foundation regardless of the postsecondary path they choose.

We derived an index of high school academic rigor (HSAR) by optimizing the prediction of first-year college GPA (FYGPA) based on high school courses taken, grades, and indicators of advanced coursework. Using a large data set and nominal parameterization of high school course outcomes, the HSAR index capitalizes on differential contributions across courses and nonlinear relationships between course grades and FYGPA. Test scores from eighth grade were incorporated in the model to isolate the contribution of HSAR. High school courses with the largest relationships with FYGPA were English 11, English 12, Chemistry, English 10, Calculus, and Algebra 2. Participation in Advanced Placement, accelerated, or honors courses increased HSAR. The correlation of the HSAR index and FYGPA was .52 and the HSAR index led to modest improvement in overall prediction when combined with high school GPA and ACT Composite score. HSAR index subgroup differences were smaller than subgroup differences in ACT Composite score. Implications for high school counselors, researchers, and postsecondary student service personnel are discussed.

Educators are continuously looking for ways to enhance their teaching strategies and skills. At the same time, students and parents need access to qualified instructors in many different subject areas. The ACT® Certified EducatorTM program is designed to satisfy each of these needs and, ultimately, to help students learn and succeed. Formally launched in September 2018, the ACT Certified Educator program is a training program designed for educators seeking certification to show they have the content knowledge and teaching skills necessary to improve students’ academic achievement and readiness for success after high school.

We examined indices of high school coursework and grades based on the graded response model (GRM). The indices varied by inclusion of ACT® test scores and whether high school courses were constrained to have the same difficulty and discrimination across groups of schools. The indices were examined with respect to skewness, incremental prediction of college degree attainment, and differences across racial/ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups. The most difficult high school courses to earn an “A” grade included calculus, chemistry, trigonometry, other advanced math, physics, algebra 2, and geometry. The GRM-based indices were less skewed than simple HSGPA and had higher correlations with ACT Composite score. The index that included ACT test scores and allowed item parameters to vary by school group was most predictive of college degree attainment but had larger subgroup differences. Implications for implementing multiple measure models for college readiness are discussed.

The percentage of students retaking college admissions tests is rising. Researchers and college admissions offices currently use a variety of methods for summarizing these multiple scores. Testing organizations such as ACT and the College Board, interested in validity evidence like correlations with first-year grade point average (FYGPA), often use the most recent test score available. In contrast, institutions report using a variety of composite scoring methods for applicants with multiple test records, including averaging and taking the maximum subtest score across test occasions (superscoring). We compare four scoring methods on two criteria. First, we compare correlations between scores and FYGPA by scoring method. We find them similar (r approximate to.40). Second, we compare the extent to which test scores differentially predict FYGPA by scoring method and number of retakes. We find that retakes account for additional variance beyond standardized achievement and positively predict FYGPA across all scoring methods. Superscoring minimizes this differential predictionalthough it may seem that superscoring should inflate scores across retakes, this inflation is true in that it accounts for the positive effects of retaking for predicting FYGPA. Future research should identity factors related to retesting and consider how they should be used in college admissions.