Cognitive and non-cognitive predictors of college readiness and performance: Role of academic discipline

Learning and Individual Differences 24 (2013) 103–109

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Learning and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lindif

Cognitive and non-cognitive predictors of college readiness and performance: Role of academic discipline Meera Komarraju ⁎, Alex Ramsey, Virginia Rinella Southern Illinois University Carbondale, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 12 March 2012 Received in revised form 14 September 2012 Accepted 21 December 2012 Keywords: Academic Performance Achievement Non-cognitive Cognitive

a b s t r a c t Identifying the best predictors of academic performance is crucial for postsecondary institutions seeking students with the greatest promise. We investigated the relative strength of standardized test scores (ACT), high school GPA, and non-cognitive, college readiness skills in predicting college GPA. College freshmen (505) completed the 108-item Student Readiness Inventory (Le, Casillas, Robbins & Langley, 2005) and reported their high school GPA. We also obtained college GPA for 375 students from college records. In Study 1, MANOVA results showed that students in groups with higher high school GPA or lower ACT reported increased college readiness. In Study 2, regression analyses showed that although ACT scores predicted 13% of the variance in college GPA, high school GPA predicted an additional 11%, and Academic discipline, a non-cognitive factor, predicted an extra 2%. Further, Academic discipline partially mediated the relationship between high school GPA and college GPA. We discuss implications of identifying and assisting “at-risk” students. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction College students vary greatly in their readiness for college. Some have the ability and psychosocial skills that facilitate an effectual transition into college academic life, whereas others appear to flounder. Given this variability amongst college freshmen it is important for admissions personnel at both private and public colleges to select students who demonstrate the greatest promise for academic and career success. Further, identifying the best predictors of academic performance is extremely important as academic success is often used as a metric to evaluate the effectiveness of colleges and universities. Therefore, being able to identify accurate selection criteria that predict student success and persistence is crucial for the survival of educational organizations (Garton, Dyer, & King, 2000; Schmitt et al., 2009). Beyond identifying reliable admission criteria, ensuring students' success through the first year as well as their persistence through graduation is also vital to the existence of postsecondary institutions. Student retention is critical for universities and colleges which are, in a large part, financially supported by tuition and fees associated with enrollment. Academic performance during the first year of college has been found to be one of the best predictors of college retention (Allen, 1999). The importance of success during the freshman year becomes

⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-6502, United States. Tel.: + 1 618 453 3543; fax: + 1 618 453 3563. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Komarraju). 1041-6080/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.12.007

even more salient when considering that four-year postsecondary education institutions lose about 30% of incoming freshmen students after the first year. Additionally, only 57% of college students from 4-year institutions complete a bachelor's degree within six years. Perhaps even more shocking, graduation rates for two-year institutions are at 31%, on average (Aud, Hussar, & Grace, 2011). Traditionally, standardized test scores have been the primary criteria used by admission personnel and are thought to accurately predict college grade point average (GPA). However, there is an increasing advocacy for including psychosocial factors as additional sources of valid data in predicting academic performance (Robbins et al., 2004). Currently, the Student Readiness Inventory (SRI), a comprehensive measure of college readiness published by ACT, Inc., serves as a viable complement to standardized tests in predicting college academic success and retention. However, its relationship with high school GPA and scores on college entrance exams such as the American College Test (ACT) and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) which are primarily used as aptitude tests to predict college success, as well as its ability to predict college GPA, is not well established. Thus, through the current studies, we sought to clarify the relationship between cognitive and non-cognitive factors and to investigate the relative strength of ACT, high school GPA, and non-cognitive factors in predicting college GPA. 1.1. Cognitive factors and academic performance Several researchers offer empirical evidence to support the role of cognitive ability as a valid predictor of college performance. For

104

M. Komarraju et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 24 (2013) 103–109

instance, Schmitt et al. (2009) reported that standardized test scores (SAT/ACT) and high school GPA were primary predictors of cumulative college GPA whereas non-cognitive measures best predicted contextual behaviors including class absenteeism and organizational citizenship behaviors. Similarly, Adebayo (2008) found that high school GPA was the best predictor of first semester college GPA; better than high school percentile rank and ACT scores. Noble and Sawyer (2004) and Sawyer (2007) offer further clarification by noting that high school GPA reflects some non-cognitive factors and is a better predictor of retention; whereas standardized test scores like the ACT composite are somewhat distinct and are better predictors of college performance. A metaanalysis of several studies provides robust support for multiple cognitive tests as important predictors of various academic success outcomes, including first-year GPA, graduate GPA, degree attainment, and qualifying or comprehensive examination scores (Kuncell & Hezlett, 2010). Finally, in examining multiple, large data sets, Sackett, Kuncel, Arneson, Cooper, and Waters (2009) conclude that cognitive tests (ACT/SAT) are strongly correlated (r = .44) to college GPA, even after accounting for socioeconomic status. Thus, there is strong support for the role of standardized tests of cognitive ability in predicting some of the variance in college performance. 1.2. Non-cognitive factors and academic performance Although standardized test scores continue to be actively used as selection criteria, there is an intensifying debate regarding their adequacy in predicting academic performance. A growing body of research suggests the need for examining psychosocial or non-cognitive factors, particularly in the selection of minority students (Allen, 1999) or when there is a narrow range in ability as is the case in highly selective postsecondary institutions (Furnham, Monsen, & Ahmetoglu, 2009). Amongst the psychosocial factors that have been examined, conscientiousness is a personality trait that has emerged as a robust predictor of academic performance, beyond cognitive ability (Conard, 2006; Noftle & Robins, 2007). A meta-analysis of 25 studies provides support for a significant and positive association between conscientiousness and academic performance (O'Connor & Paunonen, 2007). While conscientiousness is positively associated with both high school and college GPA (Kaufman, Agars, & Lopez-Wagner, 2008), most studies indicate either no correlation or a slight negative correlation between conscientiousness and standardized test scores (e.g., Conard, 2006). This finding is in accordance with research indicating that the relationship between conscientiousness and performance is evident in the persistence to continue learning over time, a luxury that is not generally afforded in standardized tests that are taken at one point in time (Perlow & Kopp, 2004). Other Big Five personality traits that are positively associated with academic performance include openness and agreeableness (Poropat, 2009), whereas neuroticism has a negative association (Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2003). Besides personality traits, motivational factors such as intrinsic motivation to accomplish and work drive are also predictive of college GPA (Komarraju, Karau, & Schmeck, 2009; Ridgell & Lounsbury, 2004). Thus, it appears that although cognitive ability might inform us about what an individual student is capable of achieving, personality and motivational factors help explain what the student might actually achieve. Distal personality traits such as conscientiousness, agreeableness, extraversion, and neuroticism tend to be expressed through more proximal classroom behaviors that influence academic performance, such as study habits, class attendance, following guidelines, joining in class discussions, completing group projects, and being able to handle time pressures (Conard, 2006; Credé & Kuncel, 2008; Dollinger, Matyja, & Huber, 2008; Farsides & Woodfield, 2003; Kappe & van der Flier, 2010). Further, conscientiousness is also displayed through effective self-regulatory behavior such as managing study efforts which leads to successful academic performance (Pintrich, 2003; Schunk, 2008; Zimmerman, 2008). Highly

conscientious students also exert effort and show initiative in evaluating learning tactics and gathering valuable feedback to achieve successful performance (Bidjerano & Dai, 2007; Noftle & Robins, 2007). 1.3. Student Readiness Inventory and academic performance With the aim of integrating the various non-cognitive predictors of academic persistence and performance into a meaningful framework, Robbins et al. (2004) meta-analyzed 109 studies that examined the incremental validity of non-cognitive factors in predicting academic success after controlling for high school GPA, cognitive tests, and socioeconomic status. They identified three psychosocial constructs – academic self-efficacy, academic motivation, and academic goals – that comprised the various non-cognitive predictors. Following this, Le et al. (2005) constructed a 108-item Student Readiness Inventory (SRI) to assess these three major psychosocial factors as well as other constructs and their sub-factors that were found to be important predictors of college performance and retention: Motivation and skills (Commitment to college, Goal striving, Academic discipline, General determination, Study skills, Communication skills); Social engagement (Social activity, Social connection); and Self-management (Academic self-confidence, Steadiness). In a follow-up study that used the SRI with a very large sample of students from two- and four-year institutions, Academic discipline – described as the amount of effort students put into schoolwork and the extent to which they see themselves as being hardworking – emerged as a significant predictor of GPA and retention, after controlling for factors including gender, race/ethnicity, and differences between participating institutions. In addition, Social Activity and Emotional Control were two other constructs that also predicted GPA and retention, and Commitment to College and Social Connection were significant predictors of student retention (Robbins, Allen, Casillas, Peterson, & Le, 2006). Thus, more recently, the SRI has emerged as a comprehensive measure of psychosocial factors that explains a greater amount of variance in GPA relative to the Big Five personality traits (Peterson, Casillas, & Robbins, 2006), suggesting that it captures more than just personality (Le et al., 2005). There is also reason to believe that college readiness may be a non-cognitive factor resulting from strong high school performance and, further, an important mediating link between high school GPA and college GPA (Noble & Sawyer; 2004; Sawyer; 2007). The concept of self-efficacy is useful in explaining how early academic performance is responsible for later academic performance, in at least two important ways (Bandura, 1997). As a primary determinant of self-efficacy, mastery experiences, such as those acquired through success in high school, serve to motivate individuals to perform highly in the future (Bandura, 1994). Additionally, social persuasion, which is often provided by parents and teachers in response to high school success, is a powerful way to strengthen and increase high school students' self-efficacy and motivation for continued success in college (Bandura, 1994). The manifestation of this heightened self-efficacy is captured in facets of college readiness such as academic discipline. Academic discipline is a critical component of college readiness that can be influenced by prior experiences and has been found to effectively predict college performance (Robbins et al., 2006). Therefore, high school success may, in part, strengthen academic discipline which, in turn, is a critical predictor of college GPA. However, additional empirical evidence is needed to convincingly establish the importance of non-cognitive factors such as college readiness in predicting college academic performance. Further, although several studies have examined differences in psychosocial and academic-related factors between high- and low-performing students as they enter college (e.g., Clark & Cundiff, 2011; Jamelske, 2009; Nounopoulus, Ashby, & Gilman, 2006), our studies address a critical gap in the literature by investigating potential differences in the sub-factors of college readiness, based on high school GPA and

M. Komarraju et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 24 (2013) 103–109

ACT scores. We also examine the predictive power of the SRI, over and above cognitive ability predictors (i.e., high school GPA, ACT scores), with regard to college GPA. Finally, we test the possibility that one sub-factor of the SRI (i.e., Academic Discipline) partially mediates the relationship between high school and college academic performance. This investigation would 1) further address the incremental predictive validity of the SRI subscales, 2) shed light on potentially interesting variance in psychosocial factors between college freshmen performing at different levels, and 3) help inform intervention strategies targeting at-risk or low-performing students.

1.4. The current studies In Study 1, we examined differences in college readiness between students who scored in the upper half and lower half on the ACT and those who were above the median and below the median for high school GPA. Instead of using a composite score, each of the 10 sub-factors of the SRI were examined separately to obtain a fuller understanding of the specific facets of college readiness that differ with respect to high school GPA and ACT scores. Given the available literature on the relationship between high school GPA, ACT scores, and non-cognitive factors (Conard, 2006; Kaufman et al., 2008), we anticipated that ACT scores and high school GPA would differ in their relationships with non-cognitive factors such as college student readiness. It seems likely that college students who were high performers in high school likely possess intellectual ability as well as the psychosocial characteristics suggesting college readiness (e.g., self-confidence, academic discipline, drive to succeed, and good study strategies). We hypothesized that, in general, students with higher high school GPA would score higher on the sub-factors of college readiness compared to students with lower high school GPA. Conversely, we predicted that students with lower ACT scores would report more readiness for college than their higher scoring peers. Prior research indicates that standardized tests tap into the cognitive aptitude of students and are theoretically unrelated to non-cognitive and motivational factors such as Academic or Self-Discipline (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005, 2006). In other words, students with high ACT scores likely possess higher intelligence and other cognitive factors but may not necessarily also display non-cognitive factors that often account for higher college GPA. For instance, students with lower ACT scores report having stronger study methods and being motivated by performance goals aimed at proving their intellectual ability (Livengood, 1992; Schmeck & Grove, 1973). Further, a majority of the low scorers on standardized tests tend to be from minority groups and are career-oriented and motivated to succeed (Schmitt et al., 2007). Thus, students who struggle with standardized tests appear to compensate for this deficit by exhibiting non-cognitive, psychosocial skills indicative of college preparedness. Therefore, it was hypothesized that: Hypothesis 1. Students in the upper half regarding high school GPA will score higher on the sub-factors of college readiness than those in the lower half. Hypothesis 2. Students in the lower half regarding ACT scores will score higher on the sub-factors of college readiness than those in the upper half. In Study 2, we examined the predictive validity of ACT scores, high school GPA, and Academic Discipline, with regard to current college GPA. We expected all factors to predict current college GPA, but primarily, that the non-cognitive factor (Academic Discipline) would predict current college GPA over and above the cognitive factors generally used to evaluate prospective students in college admission decisions (i.e., ACT scores, high school GPA). We also investigated the

105

relative strength of these factors to determine which was the most predictive of current college GPA. Thus, we predicted that: Hypothesis 3. ACT scores, high school GPA, and Academic discipline will each significantly predict current college GPA. Hypothesis 4. Academic discipline will significantly predict current college GPA above and beyond ACT scores and high school GPA. In Study 3, we investigated a potential mediating relationship between high school GPA, Academic discipline, and current college GPA. Specifically, it was expected that Academic discipline will at least partially mediate the predicted relationship between high school GPA and current college GPA. Based on prior research, we believe that the ability of high school GPA to predict college GPA is at least in part explained by the non-cognitive factor of Academic discipline (Noble & Sawyer, 2004; Robbins et al., 2006; Sawyer, 2007). Students with higher high school GPA are likely to be more academically disciplined and this psychosocial factor may be responsible for higher college GPA. On the other hand, we did not anticipate that Academic discipline would mediate the relationship between ACT scores and current college GPA. We expected that the predicted relationship between ACT and college GPA is likely explained to a large degree by cognitive factors such as general cognitive ability and test taking prowess, not by non-cognitive factors such as Academic discipline. Accordingly, it was hypothesized that: Hypothesis 5. Academic discipline will mediate the relationship between high school GPA and current college GPA. Hypothesis 6. Academic discipline will not mediate the relationship between ACT scores and current college GPA. 2. Method 2.1. Participants In Study 1, a sample of 540 freshman undergraduates (301 male, 238 female, 1 missing response) responded to 10 subscales of the 108-item SRI, which includes items for reporting their ACT scores and high school GPA. Students completed the inventory in a group setting during class, within the first week of classes. Of these students, 67.0% were Caucasian, 21.3% African American, 1.1% Asian American, 2.2% Mexican American/Chicano, 0.7% Puerto Rican/Cuban/Other Hispanic Origin, 0.2% Native American, 3.2% Multiracial, 1.9% Other, and 2.4% preferred not to answer. High and low scoring groups were created by separation at the median score, which was 22 (out of 36) for ACT, and a 3.0 high school grade point average. For Study 2 and Study 3, we tested our hypotheses using a sample of 375 freshmen (212 male, 163 female) who reported their ACT scores and high school GPA, completed the 108-item SRI, and for whom we obtained college GPA from college records. These participants consisted of 69.4% Caucasian, 18.3% African American, 1.3% Asian American, 2.4% Mexican American/Chicano, 0.8% Puerto Rican/ Cuban/Other Hispanic Origin, 4.3% Multiracial, 1.1% Other, and 2.4% preferred not to answer. 2.2. Measures The Student Readiness Inventory (SRI; Le et al., 2005) consists of three major non-cognitive domains that include a total of 10 subscales: Motivation and skills (Academic discipline, Commitment to college, General determination, Goal striving, Study skills, Communication and skills), Social engagement (Social activity and Social connection), and Self-regulation (Academic self-confidence, and steadiness). The 108 items utilize a 6-point, Likert-type scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree, with each subscale including 10 to 12 items and

106

M. Komarraju et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 24 (2013) 103–109

having sound psychometric properties with acceptable internal consistency Cronbach alpha reliability values ranging from .81 to .87 and established validity (Le et al., 2005; Peterson et al., 2006; Robbins et al., 2006). A sample item for each of the SRI subscales follows: Academic discipline (10 items; I turn in my assignments on time), Academic self-confidence (12 items; I am a fast learner), Commitment to college (10 items; I am motivated to complete my college degree), Communication skills (10 items; I'm willing to compromise when resolving a conflict), Emotional control (12 items; I am a patient person), General determination (11 items; It is important for me to finish what I start), Goal striving (10 items; I bounce back after facing disappointment or failure), Social activity (10 items; I make friends easily), Social connection (11 items; I feel part of this college), and Study skills (12 items; I summarize important information in diagrams, tables, or lists). The SRI also includes items for reporting high school GPA and ACT scores. We obtained the most recent cumulative college GPAs from college records for 375 students who had entered college within the previous four years and had also completed the SRI.

Table 2 Multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) results comparing means on the Student Readiness Inventory for students with high or low high school grade point averages (HSGPA). Source

Low HSGPA

High HSGPA

F

Sig.

Commitment to college Goal striving Academic discipline General determination Study skills Communication skills Social activity Social connection Academic self-confidence Emotional control

54.37 45.60 41.86 49.80 42.08 52.33 54.61 53.61 46.23 50.59

58.77 53.31 60.53 58.23 52.65 56.57 55.93 57.19 56.12 52.73

2.88 9.88 62.47 12.91 19.73 3.11 0.29 2.40 17.06 0.74

.090 .002 .001 .001 .001 .078 .591 .122 .001 .391

3.2. Study 2, regression analyses Initial correlations obtained from the previous Study 1 sample were used to determine the strength of association between ACT scores, high school GPA, Academic discipline (one of the 10 factors measured by the SRI) and college GPA (see Table 1). In line with our prediction for Hypothesis 3, ACT scores (r = .36), high school GPA (r = .43), and Academic discipline (r = .28) were significantly related to college GPA scores. Based on the results from Study 1, only Academic discipline was believed to impact college GPA. Therefore, we only tested the predictive validity for this sub-factor of college student readiness. Next, hierarchical regression analyses were computed to determine the relative predictive power of ACT scores, high school GPA, and Academic discipline in predicting college GPA (see Table 4). When considered alone, ACT scores accounted for a significant proportion of variance (13%) in current college GPA, R 2 = .13, F(1, 372) = 55.20, p b .001. Additionally, through hierarchical regression analyses, high school GPA significantly predicted current college GPA scores over and above ACT scores, β = .35, t(371) = 7.39, p b .001. After taking into account the variance explained by ACT scores, high school GPA explained an additional 11% of the variance in college GPA, R 2 = .11, F(2, 372) = 54.59, p b .001. Further, using a hierarchical regression analysis, Academic discipline significantly predicted current college GPA over and above both ACT scores and high school GPA, β = .14, t(370)= 2.86, p = .004. Even after accounting for ACT scores and high school GPA, Academic discipline explained an additional 2% of the variance in college GPA, R2 = .02, F(3, 371) = 8.18, p = .004. In support of our Hypothesis 4, Academic discipline was found to predict current college GPA above and beyond both ACT scores and high school GPA. Together, the three significant predictors of current college GPA (i.e., ACT scores, high school GPA, and Academic discipline) captured 26% of the variance in current college GPA, R2 = .26, F(3, 371) =42.72, p b .001.

3. Results A correlation matrix is provided to display effect sizes between high school GPA, ACT scores, college GPA, and all the sub-factors of the SRI (see Table 1).

3.1. Study 1, MANOVA analyses To account for the correlations between the sub-factors of the SRI and to control for Type I error, MANOVA procedures were used to determine whether differences in college readiness existed between high and low scoring students with regard to high school GPA and ACT scores. In line with our prediction for Hypothesis 1, results indicated that students scoring in the upper half regarding high school GPA generally possessed higher college readiness than students scoring in the lower half. Specifically, students in the upper half reported significantly higher Goal striving, Academic discipline, Determination, Study skills, and Academic self-confidence (see Table 2). The results regarding Hypothesis 2 generally supported our expectations, with one exception. Students scoring in the upper half regarding ACT scores reported significantly higher Academic self-confidence than those scoring in the lower half; however, as anticipated, students scoring in the lower half reported significantly higher Commitment to College, Goal Striving, Determination and Study Skills than those scoring in the upper half (see Table 3). While those scoring high on standardized tests seem to have higher academic self-confidence, students with lower ACT scores are the ones generally reporting higher noncognitive, psychosocial skills indicative of college readiness.

Table 1 Intercorrelations between college GPA, high school GPA, ACT scores and the ten subscales of the Student Readiness Inventory.

1. College GPA 2. High school GPA 3. ACT 4. Academic discipline 5. Commitment to college 6. Goal striving 7. General determination 8. Study skills 9. Communication 10. Social activity 11. Social connection 12. Academic self-confidence 13. Emotional control

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

–

.43 –

.36 .32 –

.28 .42 .05 –

.00 .07 −.04 .44 –

−.03 .16 −.10 .60 .50 –

.07 .18 −.16 .68 .48 .78 –

.05 .18 −.10 .55 .29 .64 .62 –

.03 .08 −.11 .37 .31 .43 .53 .45 –

−.08 .02 −.04 .15 .23 .40 .21 .26 .25 –

.00 .10 −.05 .27 .33 .40 .30 .32 .50 .62 –

.06 .22 .39 .41 .33 .51 .32 .31 .18 .29 .24 –

.04 .00 .02 .25 .15 .29 .26 .26 .32 .28 .26 .35 –

M. Komarraju et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 24 (2013) 103–109 Table 3 Multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) results comparing means in students on the Student Readiness Inventory for students with high or low ACT scores. Source

Low ACT

High ACT

F

Sig.

Commitment to college Goal striving Academic discipline General determination Study skills Communication skills Social activity Social connection Academic self-confidence Emotional control

59.15 53.03 53.25 58.25 50.09 56.40 55.48 56.05 44.74 52.37

53.83 45.82 50.66 49.62 45.10 52.48 55.16 54.97 60.30 51.01

4.20 8.62 1.07 13.51 4.25 2.66 0.02 0.22 44.13 0.30

.041 .003 .300 .001 .040 .104 .897 .641 .001 .587

3.3. Study 3, mediational analyses Mediation analyses were used to explore whether a mediating relationship existed between high school GPA, Academic discipline, and current college GPA. To examine whether or not mediation analyses were warranted, we first needed to demonstrate that significant relationships existed between high school GPA (independent variable) and Academic discipline (mediator), high school GPA (independent variable) and current college GPA (dependent variable), and Academic discipline (mediator) and current college GPA (dependent variable). Indeed, high school GPA was significantly related to Academic discipline b = 11.42, t(372) = 8.91, p b .001, high school GPA was significantly related to current college GPA, b = .33, t(372) = 9.21, p b .001, and Academic discipline was significantly related to current college GPA, b = .01, t(372) = 5.56, p b .001. Given that existing relationships were found between all three variables, testing a potential mediating relationship was warranted (Baron & Kenny, 1986). For Academic discipline to be considered a mediator, it needed to significantly shrink the relationship between the independent variable (high school GPA) and the dependent variable (current college GPA) when included in the model. We did find that the initial relationship between high school GPA and college GPA, b = .3, t(372) = 9.21, p b .001, decreased after accounting for Academic discipline, b = .29, t(371) = 7.48, p b .001 (see Fig. 1). However, the relationship between high school GPA and college GPA was still significant, indicating that Academic discipline was not fully mediating the relationship. A Sobel (1982) procedure was then conducted to test for partial mediation. With adequate sample sizes and normally distributed data, Sobel has been found to be an effective test of mediation with sufficient power and appropriate type I error rates (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Pituch, Whittaker, & Stapleton, 2005). Analyses using the Sobel procedure indicated that a significant mediating relationship did exist, z = 2.84, p = .004, suggesting that the relationship between high school GPA and college GPA was significantly diminished after accounting for the effect of Academic discipline. Thus, in support of Hypothesis 5, Academic discipline was found to partially mediate the relationship between high school GPA and current college GPA.

Table 4 Stepwise multiple regression analyses with ACT, high school GPA and academic discipline regressed on college GPA. Predictor

Beta

R2

Step1

ACT

.13

Step 2

ACT High school GPA ACT High school GPA Academic discipline

.36⁎⁎ .13⁎ .25⁎⁎ .35⁎⁎ .26⁎⁎ .29⁎⁎ .14⁎⁎

Factor College GPA

Step 3

⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.

Adj. R2

.24

.24

.26

.25

107

Academic Discipline 11.42 (.42)

.01 (.28)

High School GPA

College GPA

.43 (.33) reduced to .38 (.29) after including Academic Discipline Fig. 1. Mediation analyses showing Academic discipline partially mediating the relationship between High School GPA and College GPA. First values listed are unstandardized regression coefficients and values in parentheses are the standardized regression coefficients.

Regarding Hypothesis 6, it was necessary to determine whether significant relationships existed between ACT scores (independent variable) and Academic discipline (mediator), ACT scores (independent variable) and current college GPA (dependent variable), and Academic discipline (mediator) and current college GPA (dependent variable). While the latter two paths were statistically significant, no relationship between ACT scores and Academic discipline was found, b = .01, t(372) = 1.07, p = .303. This finding effectively ruled out the potential for a mediating relationship, and no further mediational analyses were conducted. Therefore, in support of Hypothesis 6, Academic discipline was not found to mediate the relationship between ACT scores and current college GPA. 4. Discussion Our results suggest that students' high school GPA and ACT scores reveal different patterns of non-cognitive or psychosocial skills and varied levels of readiness amongst college freshmen. Students with higher high school GPAs appear to be more academically disciplined, determined, and self-confident, along with having stronger study skills. These non-cognitive factors may reflect personality characteristics that, in part, accounted for their academic success in high school. It is also plausible that these psychosocial skills emerged or were more fully developed through the success these students experienced while navigating through high school. There is evidence to suggest that factors of the SRI may represent malleable characteristics that can be cultivated over time (Robbins et al., 2004). Specifically, interventions that help in identifying “at-risk” students and then provide coaching to teach and reinforce psychosocial skills such as selfdiscipline may result in gradual improvements in students' academic pursuits (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Kaufman et al., 2008). Interestingly, although students with higher ACT scores reported being more academically self-confident, it is noteworthy that they scored relatively low on several non-cognitive factors. It is likely that their self-assurance stems from their history of academic achievements, high cognitive ability, and test-taking success. Perhaps high ACT scores reflect a general intelligence factor that need not be accompanied with goal-setting, commitment, determination, or study skills. This might explain why even students with strong cognitive ability might not persist beyond the first year of college. In contrast, students scoring relatively low on the ACT may rely heavily on non-cognitive psychosocial skills in order to keep pace in their academic pursuits. In essence, these students may need to compensate for a lack of natural cognitive or test-taking ability by showing greater resolve, dedication, and effective study strategies to achieve successful academic performance. These findings may encourage selection committees to not “rule out” prospective students solely based on

108

M. Komarraju et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 24 (2013) 103–109

their standardized test scores. As our findings demonstrate, students scoring lower on the ACT, particularly if their high school grade-point averages are relatively high, may generally possess non-cognitive skills indicative of intrinsic motivation, commitment, sound study skills, and an overall readiness to succeed in college. These results also emphasize the importance of enhancing or strengthening non-cognitive college readiness factors such as study skills and goal-setting in students with high ACT scores. Further, our results also increase our understanding of the variables influencing college students' academic success by establishing the relative importance of ACT scores, high school GPA, and the non-cognitive factor of academic discipline as reliable predictors of college GPA. These results add to prior research suggesting that students' ACT scores, although relied upon heavily by college admission committees, are not the only effective predictor of future college performance (Robbins et al., 2004). Even factoring in high school GPA along with ACT scores may not sufficiently reflect students' probability of college success. Instead, the incremental predictive validity of the Academic discipline subscale of the SRI suggests that a more accurate prediction of college success is provided when accounting for certain non-cognitive factors. Conceptually, academic discipline seems critical in maintaining good grades through college; therefore, it is not difficult to imagine this factor as a strong predictor of college student GPA. These results suggest that students high in conscientiousness, diligence, and persistence – the hallmarks of Academic discipline – are more likely to perform well academically. Additionally, we found that Academic discipline partially explains the ability of high school GPA to predict college GPA. This further suggests that students who were successful in high school tend to be more academically disciplined, and that this non-cognitive indicator of college readiness is, in part, responsible for their continued success in college. While high school GPA is an effective benchmark by which to evaluate prospective college students, it may simply be a reflection of certain internal characteristics, such as academic-related discipline, which may be more directly influencing students' grades in college. 4.1. Implications, limitations and conclusions These results may have implications for college personnel involved in selecting and coaching potential college students to achieve academic success. For example, Academic discipline could be assessed as a selection criterion, in addition to standardized tests and high school GPA. As documented through Study 1, for students with substandard ACT or SAT scores, high scores on non-cognitive measures of college readiness may warrant further consideration for acceptance, particularly in students with higher high school GPA. Additionally, these findings may persuade educators in postsecondary institutions to use student readiness measures in identifying and attending to “problem areas” for at-risk incoming students who might benefit from various training, coaching, and mentoring programs. Even for students who are not optimally ready for college at the time of entry, the development of academic and psychosocial skills may substantially reduce the risk of first year drop-outs and academic failure. College personnel could foster academic success by designing workshops and training programs that help at-risk students develop academic discipline by cultivating time management, goal-setting, self-regulation, and study skills. Future researchers could overcome some of the limitations of the current studies by exploring other mediating factors of the relationship between cognitive factors and academic performance, conducting experimental studies to establish causality, and also carrying out longitudinal research by tracking cohorts of college students to identify the non-cognitive factors that predict persistence across several years. To conclude, our results make an important contribution to the literature by highlighting the uniqueness of academic discipline in illuminating the link between high school GPA and college GPA, and

in explaining incremental variance in college GPA, beyond standardized test scores and high school GPA. Taken together, our results establish the relative strength of standardized test scores, high school GPA and non-cognitive factors in predicting academic performance in college. Further, the data support the argument that psychosocial factors, such as Academic discipline, are significant predictors of college GPA, even after accounting for cognitive factors. College personnel could potentially use these results to guide their selection criteria and develop programs that foster academic discipline for increasing student success from the first year through graduation. References Adebayo, B. (2008). Cognitive and non-cognitive factors: Affecting the academic performance and retention of conditionally admitted freshmen. Journal of College Admission, 200, 15–21. Allen, D. (1999). Desire to finish college: An empirical link between motivation and persistence. Research in Higher Education, 40(4), 461–485. Aud, S., Hussar, W., & Grace, K. (2011). The condition of education. (NCES 2011033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachandran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior, Vol. 4. (pp. 71–81)New York: Academic Press. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Bidjerano, T., & Dai, D. Y. (2007). The relationship between the big-five model of personality and self-regulated learning strategies. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 69–81. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2003). Personality traits and academic examination performance. European Journal of Personality, 17, 237–250. Clark, M. H., & Cundiff, N. L. (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of a college freshman seminar using propensity score adjustments. Research in Higher Education, 52, 616–639. Conard, M. A. (2006). Aptitude is not enough: How personality and behavior predict academic performance. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 339–346. Credé, M., & Kuncel, N. R. (2008). Study habits, skills, and attitudes: The third pillar supporting collegiate academic performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3, 425–453. Dollinger, S. J., Matyja, A. M., & Huber, J. L. (2008). Which factors best account for academic success: Those which college students can control or those they cannot? Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 872–885. Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939–944. Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). Self-discipline gives girls the edge: Gender in self-discipline, grades, and achievement test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 198–208. Farsides, T., & Woodfield, R. (2003). Individual differences and undergraduate academic success: The roles of personality, intelligence, and application. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1225–1243. Furnham, A., Monsen, J., & Ahmetoglu, G. (2009). Typical intellectual engagement, Big Five personality traits, approaches to learning and cognitive ability predictors of academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 769–782. Garton, B. L., Dyer, J. E., & King, B. O. (2000). The use of learning styles and admission criteria in predicting academic performance and retention of college freshmen. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41, 46–53. Jamelske, E. (2009). Measuring the impact of a university first-year experience program on student GPA and retention. Higher Education, 57, 373–391. Kappe, R., & van der Flier, H. (2010). Using multiple and specific criteria to assess the predictive validity of the big five personality factors on academic performance. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 142–145. Kaufman, J. C., Agars, M. D., & Lopez-Wagner, M. C. (2008). The role of personality and motivation in predicting early college academic success in non-traditional students at a Hispanic-serving institution. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 492–496. Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., & Schmeck, R. R. (2009). Role of the big five personality traits in predicting college students' academic motivation and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 47–52. Kuncell, N. R., & Hezlett, S. A. (2010). Fact and fiction in cognitive ability testing for admissions and hiring decisions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 339–345. Le, H., Casillas, A., Robbins, S., & Langley, R. (2005). Motivational and skills, social, and self-management predictors of college outcomes: Constructing the Student Readiness Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 482–508. Livengood, J. M. (1992). Students' motivational goals and beliefs about effort and ability as they relate to college academic success. Research in Higher Education, 33, 247–261. Noble, J. P., & Sawyer, R. L. (2004). Is high school GPA better than admission test scores for predicting academic success in college? College and University, 79, 17–22. Noftle, E. E., & Robins, R. W. (2007). Personality predictors of academic outcomes: Big five correlates of GPA and SAT Scores. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 116–130.

M. Komarraju et al. / Learning and Individual Differences 24 (2013) 103–109 Nounopoulus, A., Ashby, J. S., & Gilman, R. (2006). Coping resources, perfectionism, and academic performance among adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 613–622. O'Connor, M. C., & Paunonen, S. V. (2007). Big Five personality predictors of post-secondary academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 971–990. Perlow, R., & Kopp, L. S. (2004). Conscientiousness and ability as predictors of accounting learning. Human Performance, 17, 359–373. Peterson, C. H., Casillas, A., & Robbins, S. B. (2006). The Student Readiness Inventory and the Big Five: Examining social desirability and college academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 663–673. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686. Pituch, K., Whittaker, T. A., & Stapleton, L. M. (2005). A comparison of methods to test for mediation in multisite experiments. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 1–23. Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338. Ridgell, S. D., & Lounsbury, J. W. (2004). Predicting academic success: General intelligence, “Big Five” personality traits, and work drive. College Student Journal, 38, 607–618. Robbins, S., Allen, J., Casillas, A., Peterson, C. H., & Le, H. (2006). Unraveling the differential effects of motivational and skills, social and self-management measures from traditional predictors of college outcomes: A prospective study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 598–616. Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261–288.

109

Sackett, P. R., Kuncel, N. R., Arneson, J., Cooper, S. R., & Waters, S. (2009). Socio-economic status and the relationship between admissions tests and post-secondary academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 1–22. Sawyer, R. (2007). Indicators of usefulness of test scores. Applied Measurement in Education, 20, 255–271. Schmeck, R. R., & Grove, E. (1973). Academic achievement and individual differences in learning processes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 43–49. Schmitt, N., Keeney, Oswald, F. L., Pleskac, T. J., Billington, A. Q., Sinha, R., et al. (2009). Prediction of 4-year college student performance using cognitive and noncognitive predictors and the impact on demographic status of admitted students. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1479–1497. Schmitt, N., Oswald, F. L., Kim, B. H., Imus, A., Merritt, S., Friede, A., et al. (2007). The use of background and ability profiles to predict college student outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 165–179. Schunk, D. H. (2008). Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Research recommendations. Educational Psychological Review, 20, 463–467. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological Methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). Washington DC: American Sociological Association. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 166–183.