A major study released Monday by the University of California suggests that high school grades may be good at predicting not only first-year college performance, as commonly believed, but performance throughout four undergraduate years. The same study suggests that the SAT adds little predictive value to admissions decisions and is hindered by a high link between SAT scores and socioeconomic status — a link not present for high school grades.
And further, the study finds that all of the information admissions officers currently have is of limited value, and accounts for only 30 percent of the grade variance in colleges — leaving 70 percent of the variance unexplained.
Taken together, the study questions many assumptions widely held in admissions. And while the last year has seen numerous studies on the impact of standardized testing in admissions (with a range of conclusions), the new study is from Saul Geiser and Maria Veronica Santelices through the University of California at Berkeley’s Center for Studies in Higher Education, and is based on data from all University of California campuses. Past studies by the center have been influential in the evolving debate over admissions standards — and anything involving the University of California tends to get attention, given the system’s influence and top campuses.
There is more in this report by Scott Jaschik in Inside HigherEd. It's quite amazing that nearly 70 percent of the variability in the students' performance remains unexplained!
While it is not of the same scope as the systematic, large scale study above, this study from IIT-M also found a good correlation between students' B.Tech CGPA and their marks in Classes X and XII; more importantly, it found very little correlation between the students' CGPA and their entrance exam rank. Some of you may recall that this study played a key role in our recent discussion on anti-women bias in JEE.