Interpreting PCAT
Scores
AACP Webinar
September 14, 2007
PHARMACY COLLEGE ADMISSION TEST
Interpreting
PCAT Scores
•
The PCAT for 2007–08 and beyond
1. Revised test blueprint
2. New Writing Scores
•
Interpreting PCAT Scores:
1. Scaled Scores and Percentile Ranks
2. Writing Scores
•
PCAT Data Trends:
1. 1998–2003 through 2006–07
2. Subtest Intercorrelations
•
PCAT Predictive Validity Data:
1. Kuncel meta-analyses
2. Harcourt Study
Don Meagher, EdD
Senior Research Director
Post-Secondary Education
The Psychological Corporation
Copyright © 2007 by Harcourt Assessment, Inc.
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
The PCAT for 2007–08
and Beyond
PCAT Changes for 2007–08 and Beyond
Polling Question
Discussions between Harcourt Assessment and the AACP
PCAT Advisory Panel have resulted in the following changes
to the PCAT for 2007–08 and beyond:
• A revised PCAT test blueprint, with each multiple-choice
subtest shortened slightly
• A second Writing subtest added to allow new Writing
prompts to be field-tested with each test administration
• Separate Writing scores for Conventions of Language and
Problem Solving
• Mean scores for Conventions of Language and Problem
Solving
PCAT Test Structure for
2007–08 and Beyond
PCAT Subtest
Part 1: Writing
Part 2: Verbal Ability
Analogies
Sentence Completion
Part 3: Biology
General Biology
Microbiology
Anatomy & Physiology
Part 4: Chemistry
General Chemistry
Organic Chemistry
Number of
Number of
Operational
Experimental
Items
Items
1 Prompt (either operational or
experimental)
40
8
25
4
15
4
40
8
25
4–5
7–8
1–2
7–8
1–2
40
8
25
5–6
15
2–3
Rest Break
PCAT Test Structure for
2007–08 and Beyond
Time
Allowed
30 min.
PCAT Subtest
30 min.
Part 5: Writing
Part 6: Reading Comprehension
Comprehension
Analysis
Evaluation
Part 7: Quantitative Ability
Basic Math
Algebra
Probability & Statistics
Pre-Calculus
Calculus
Variable
Total Test
30 min.
30 min.
Number of
Number of
Operational
Experimental
Items
Items
1 Prompt (either operational or
experimental)
40 (5 passages)
8
12–13
4
15
4
12–13
8
4–5
40
5–6
1–2
7–8
1–2
7–8
8
9–10
5–6
9–10
2–3
200 items + 1
40 items + 1
writing
writing
prompt
prompt
Time
Allowed
30 min.
50 min.
40 min.
240 min. =
4 hrs. +
Rest Break
1
PCAT Score Reporting
for 2007–08 and Beyond
PCAT Score Reporting
for 2007–08 and Beyond
Sample PCAT Official Transcript
Writing Scores
•
•
•
Multiple-choice scaled scores range from 200–600.
•
Conventions of Language: Range from 1.0 to 5.0, based on one scorer’s
evaluation (0.0 scores for invalids)
Multiple-choice percentile ranks range from 1–99.
•
Problem Solving: Range from 1.0 to 5.0, based on average of two scorers’
evaluations (0.0 scores for invalids)
•
Mean Scores: Averages for total examinees testing on a given date
Writing scores range from 1.0–5.0.
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
PCAT scaled scores: Introduced in October 2004;
derived from raw scores; represent equal units on a
continuous scale:
• range from 200 to 600
• mean of 400
• standard deviation of 25
Polling Question
Percentile ranks: Based on ranking of examinees
relative to the current norm group—all first-time
PCAT examinees from Oct. 1998 to March 2003:
• range from 1 to 99
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
PCAT Raw Score (RS) to Scaled Score (SS) to Percentile Rank (PR)
Relationships: June 2007 Chemistry
RS
0–9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
SS
260–353
357
361
365
369
373
376
379
383
386
389
392
396
399
402
PR
1
2
4
6
9
12
16
20
26
30
35
40
48
52
58
RS
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37-40
SS
405
409
412
415
419
423
427
431
436
441
446
453
460
469-523
PR
61
67
72
75
80
83
87
89
92
94
96
97
98
99
Writing Score Distribution & Mean Data: June 2007
Writing Prompt:
Conventions of Language
Score Point Distributions
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Total n /
Mean *
Discuss a solution to the problem
of assuring national security in an
open and free society that is based
on individual civil rights and
liberties.
n
104
1,398
2,890
311
0
4,703
%
2.2%
29.7%
61.4%
6.6%
0.0%
2.72
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
Total n /
Mean *
n
104
234
1,037
1,244
1,673
337
70
1
0
4,700
%
2.2%
5.0%
22.0%
26.4%
35.5%
7.2%
1.5%
0.0%
0.0%
2.57
Problem Solving
Score Point Distributions
* Note: Frequencies and means include valid scores only and do not include 7 invalids (0.0) for Conventions
of Language and 10 for Problem Solving.
2
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Conventions of Language Rubric
Conventions of Language Scores
Score Point 5: Superior
The following scoring rules are observed for assigning the
Conventions of Language scores:
•
Following the Conventions of Language rubric, one scorer assigns
a score for the essay ranging from 1.0–5.0 (or 0.0 if deemed
invalid).
•
10% of the essays scored are read again by a supervisor to ensure
that the scorers are assigning scores that are consistent with their
training and the Conventions of Language scoring rubric.
•
•
The writer is in command of the conventions of language.
The writer makes very few, if any, mistakes in sentence
formation, usage, and mechanics.
• A number of these responses show some evidence of advanced
techniques or successful “risk taking.”
Score Point 4: Efficient
•
•
On the whole, the writer correctly applies the conventions of
language.
Some mistakes in sentence formation, usage, or mechanics are
present. However, none of these errors are serious enough to
interfere with the overall flow of the response or with its
meaning.
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Conventions of Language Rubric (continued)
Conventions of Language Rubric (continued)
Score Point 3: Adequate
Score Point 2: Limited
•
•
•
•
•
The writer is fairly successful in applying the conventions of
language.
Several mistakes in sentence formation, usage, or mechanics
are present. The density of these errors may interfere with the
overall flow of the response but does not interfere with its
meaning.
Score successful in applying the conventions of language.
Patterns of mistakes in sentence formation, usage, and
mechanics significantly detract from the presentation.
At times, the meaning of the response may be impaired.
•
The writer is marginally successful in applying the conventions
of language.
Patterns of mistakes in sentence formation, usage, and
mechanics significantly detract from the presentation.
• At times, the meaning of the response may be impaired.
Score Point 1: Weak
•
•
•
The writer’s achievement in applying the conventions of
language is limited.
Frequent and serious mistakes in sentence formation, usage, and
mechanics make the response difficult to understand.
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Problem Solving Scores
Problem Solving Rubric
The following scoring rules are observed for assigning the Problem Solving
scores:
Score Point 5: Superior
•
Following the Problem Solving Rubric (see Figure 4), one score is
assigned per essay ranging from 1.0–5.0 by each of two scorers (or 0.0, if
deemed invalid).
•
When two scores are the same (e.g., 3 and 3), or differ by no more than
one score point (e.g., 3 and 4), then the two scores are averaged, resulting
in a score to one decimal place (e.g., 3.5).
•
When the two scores differ by more than one score point (e.g., 3 and 5), a
resolution leader reads the essay and assigns a score. The resolution
score is then combined with the higher of the two original scores, with
the average of these two scores representing the final score (e.g., original
high score of 5 + resolution score of 4 = final score of 4.5).
•
•
•
•
•
Taking great care throughout to avoid fallacious reasoning of all kinds, the
writer develops a powerful, sophisticated argument embodying important
principles of effective composition.
The solution discussed is clearly related to the problem and is developed in
sufficient detail with relevant, convincing support provided (facts,
examples, anecdotes).
At appropriate points, the main tenets of the problem and the solution are
discussed and explained.
Multiple possible solutions are adequately discussed and evaluated.
The response is organized logically (and sometimes ingeniously) from
beginning to end.
3
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Problem Solving Rubric (continued)
Problem Solving Rubric (continued)
Score Point 3: Adequate
• This response is fairly successful in using important principles
of effective composition.
• Though the presentation may remain too general to be
convincing, the discussion of the problem and solution is clear.
• The solution discussed is clearly related to the problem, and
most of the support presented is appropriate and relevant, but
the response lacks the detailed, in-depth support characteristic
of the higher score points.
• The writing may progress logically enough but may be loosely
organized; in such cases, the writer may digress from the
organizational plan or offer unnecessary redundancies, thus
making the presentation less straightforward and compromising
its effect.
Score Point 4: Efficient
• Despite possible bits and pieces of questionable reasoning, the
response is a persuasive essay showing strong evidence of effective
composition.
• The solution discussed is clearly related to the problem and is
developed with relevant, appropriate support provided with some
degree of depth.
• The main tenets of the problem and the solution are discussed and
explained.
• Multiple possible solutions are at least mentioned, with some attempt
at evaluation.
• For the most part, the organization is logical, although minor lapses
may occur.
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Problem Solving Rubric (continued)
Problem Solving Rubric (continued)
Score Point 2: Limited
• The writer may seem more concerned with self-expression than
with meeting the demands of an abstract task.
• A solution related to the problem is discussed, though it may be
either implicit or, if explicit, not clearly stated.
• Support is sketchy and, at times, interrupted with redundancies,
digressions, irrelevancies, and/or conditions/qualifications not
clearly related to the problem.
• Organization may be rather haphazard. In such instances, this
loose structuring of ideas weakens the overall flow (and, hence,
the power) of the discussion.
Score Point 1: Weak
• The response does not successfully embody important
principles of effective composition.
• It is unclear how the solution presented relates to the problem.
• If a solution can be ascertained, the support is either
fragmentary and unconvincing or is a combination of material
that does not contribute to the presentation (contradictions,
caveat, digression, redundancies, and outright irrelevancies).
• Chaotic organization may make it hard to follow the logic of the
presentation.
PCAT Score Trends
PCAT Score Trends
Repeater Trends: Comparative Data for PCAT Examinees with Most Recent
Scores During the June 2006 through January 2007 Testing Cycle
PCAT Score Data by Testing Cycle
PCAT
Test Cycle
Mean Multiple-Choice Scaled Scores
n
Verb.
Bio.
Read.
Quant.
Chem.
Mean Multiple-Choice Scaled Scores and Mean Writing Scores
Comp.
Writing
Repeat Attempts
PCAT Subtest
Only 1
Attempt
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Verbal SS
403.5
396.6
399.9
396.9
395.3
392.4
389.1
393.3
392.9
408
PR
56
47
52
47
43
38
33
40
40
65
Biology SS
405.4
396.7
403.2
402.6
401.3
400.5
399.8
406.1
408.4
417
1998–2003
Normative Sample
41,136
400.0
400.0
400.0
399.9
400.0
400.0
NA
2004–05
25,629
400.2
403.3
404.5
406.5
404.7
403.8
NA
2005–06
27,371
401.5
402.9
401.3
406.1
403.7
403.1
3.32
PR
61
48
58
58
55
55
53
62
65
76
2006–07
28,758
400.4
403.2
401.4
2.92
Reading SS
404.2
399.1
400.7
397.9
395.6
393.1
389.6
389.3
392.3
399
PR
56
48
52
46
43
39
34
33
37
48
Quantitative SS
407.7
402.6
406.1
405.0
403.7
402.0
401.9
407.1
412.1
427
PR
67
59
64
62
61
57
57
65
73
87
Chemistry SS
408.0
398.8
406.4
405.1
403.4
401.7
403.1
406.1
409.6
416
PR
66
52
63
61
59
58
59
63
69
76
Composite SS
405.8
63
398.8
49
403.3
57
401.5
53
399.9
51
398.0
47
396.7
45
400.4
51
403.1
57
413
406.0
405.8
403.4
Note: The normative sample consists of all first-time PCAT examinees from October 1998 through
March 2003.
PR
75
Writing
2.95
2.86
2.94
2.88
2.87
2.83
2.75
2.51
2.75
3
n
12,654
3,774
7,666
2,747
931
327
110
39
8
1
4
PCAT Score Trends
Predictive Validity
Subtest Score Intercorrelations:
June 2006 through January 2007 Testing Cycle
Multiple-Choice Scaled Scores & Writing Score Correlations (r)
PCAT Subtest/
Composite
Verb.
Bio.
Read.
Quant.
Chem.
Comp.
Writing
Verbal
1.00
0.59
0.71
0.37
0.40
0.79
0.30
Biology
0.59
1.00
0.53
0.44
0.58
0.80
0.16
Reading
0.71
0.53
1.00
0.36
0.36
0.77
0.29
Quantitative
0.37
0.44
0.36
1.00
0.63
0.73
0.14
Chemistry
0.40
0.58
0.36
0.63
1.00
0.77
0.12
Composite
0.79
0.80
0.77
0.73
0.77
1.00
0.26
Writing
0.30
0.16
0.29
0.14
0.12
0.26
1.00
Predictive validity
How well test scores predict subsequent grades,
professor ratings, degrees awarded, departmental
evaluations, or other indicators of success.
Predictive validity of the PCAT
Many studies conducted over the years have shown
positive correlations between PCAT scores and
subsequent academic performance.
Notes: All correlations significant at <.0001 level; n = 28,758
Predictive Validity
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/315/5815/1080
Supporting Online Material also available at the same website.
Standardized Test Score Correlations with
Subsequent Student Success
0.70
Corrected Correlations
Validity of Standardized Tests
A recently published study that analyzed data from several
meta-analyses of standardized tests used in the United
States for graduate admissions:
Kuncel, N. R., & Hezlett, S. A. (2007). Standardized
tests predict graduate students’ success. Science, 315
(5815), 1080–1081.
Predictive Validity
0.60
0.50
1st Year GPA
0.40
Graduate GPA
0.30
Licensing Exams
0.20
0.10
0.00
PCAT
GRE-Total
GRESubject
MCAT
Standardized Test Scores
Note: Adapted from Kuncel & Hezlett (2007) by Harcourt Assessment.
Predictive Validity
Conclusions
From meta-analyses of GMAT, GRE, LSAT, MAT, and
PCAT studies, Kuncel and Hezlett (2007) concluded that
standardized tests:
• effectively predict graduate school performance
• predict academic outcomes other than grades
• predict most measures of student performance more
effectively than prior academic records
• are free of bias
Predictive Validity
PCAT Meta-Analysis
Predictive validity data for academic criteria included in a
meta-analysis of PCAT research:
Kuncel, N.A., Credé, M., Thomas, L.L., Klieger, D.M.,
Seiler, S.N. Woo, S.E. (2005). A meta-analysis of the
validity of the Pharmacy College Admission Test (PCAT)
and grade predictors of pharmacy student performance.
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 69 (3),
Article 51, 339–347.
• are not compromised by test preparation coaching
5
Predictive Validity
Predictive Validity
Operational Validities for Outcome Variables
1st
2nd
3rd
Grade
Year
Year
Year
in a Current NABPLEX
Pharm. Pharm. Pharm. Pharm. Pharm.
Exam
GPA
GPA
GPA Course
GPA
Scales
Predictors
PCAT Verbal
PCAT Quantitative
PCAT Biology
PCAT Chemistry
0.31
0.41
0.43
0.49
0.22
0.32
0.44
0.46
0.24
0.34
0.33
0.38
0.16
0.28
0.33
0.40
0.23
0.34
0.35
0.38
0.19–0.39
0.15–0.44
0.23–0.48
0.23–0.56
PCAT Reading
PCAT Composite
Pre-Pharmacy GPA
0.35
0.50
0.50
0.45
NA
0.44
0.32
NA
0.50
0.32
NA
0.41
0.32
NA
0.54
0.26–0.42
NA
0.09–0.22
SAT Verbal
SAT Math
0.25
0.34
0.26
0.28
0.30
0.26
0.22
0.24
NA
NA
0.23–0.38
0.20–0.36
Note: Adapted from Kuncel, et al. (2004) by Harcourt Assessment.
Conclusions
From their meta-analysis of PCAT studies, Kuncel and
colleagues (2005) concluded the following:
• The PCAT is a valid predictor of performance in
pharmacy programs.
• PCAT subtest scores were valid predictors of student
•
•
performance and were strongly correlated with
NABPLEX scores.
The PCAT appears to be a better predictor of pharmacy
school performance than SAT scores.
Combined PCAT scores appear to be as predictive as
pre-pharmacy GPA.
Predictive Validity
Predictive Validity
Semester
Credits
Required
PCAT Predictive Validity Study
A study of the validity of PCAT scores for predicting GPA in
years 1–4 of pharmacy programs:
Meagher, D.G., Lin, A., Stellato, C.P. (2006). A predictive
validity study of the Pharmacy College Admission Test.
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 70 (3),
Article 53.
Pre-Pharmacy Requirements
Biological Sciences
Chemistry
Physics
Math
English & Speech
Social Sciences & Humanities
Pharmacy Program
Requirements
Biological Sciences
Chemistry
Quantitative
Verbal/Communication
Professional Pharmacy
Internship/Clerkship/Rotation
Predictive Validity
All
Students
Entering
Fall 2000
(n = 899)
Grad. BS
After 3
Years
(n = 47)
Left
Program
Before
4th Year
(n = 41)
Grad.
PharmD
After 4
Years
(n = 759)
Still
Enrolled
After 4
Years
(n = 52)
407.0
396.1
400.3
408.1
405.3
Cumulative
3.25
3.14
3.16
3.28
2.99
Math/Science
3.24
3.07
3.25
3.26
3.14
Pharmacy GPA—1st Year
3.15
(n = 796)
2.88
(n = 46)
2.57
(n = 29)
3.23
(n = 684)
2.62
(n = 37)
Pharmacy GPA—2nd Year
3.14
(n = 772)
2.87
(n = 46)
2.27
(n = 12)
3.21
(n = 681)
2.58
(n = 33)
Pharmacy GPA—3rd Year
3.21
(n = 759)
3.09
(n = 46)
2.47
(n = 5)
3.25
(n = 679)
2.76
(n = 29)
Pharmacy GPA—4th Year
3.48
(n = 709)
NA
3.50
(n = 683)
2.88
(n = 26)
PCAT Composite SS
Entering GPA
NA
Prerequisite and Pharmacy
Program Academic and
Professional Course
Requirements for the 11
Participating Pharmacy
Programs
Mean
11.2
16.3
4.7
6.0
7.5
15.6
1st Year
Range Mean
4–15
11.0
0–9
6.4
0–7
3.4
0–5
1.2
6–20
13.3
0–4
2.5
Semester Credits Required
2nd Year
3rd Year
Range Mean Range Mean
0–14
7.3
0–14
3.7
0–12
4.9
0–4
1.0
0–6
2.5
0–12
2.8
0–4
2.1
0–11
3.1
6–30
16.8
7–29
18.4
0–4
1.9
0–14
3.4
4th Year
Range Mean
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0–4
0.8
0–4
0.7
30–50
37.7
Predictive Validity
Characteristics of Students Entering in the Fall 2000 for 11 Participating Pharmacy
Programs: Mean PCAT Composite Scaled Scores (converted to 2003 norms) and GPAs
Characteristics of Students
Entering Fall 2000
Range
4–16
15–18
0–8
3–12
3–12
3–26
Correlations Between Predictors and GPAs in Years 1–4
of Professional Pharmacy Programs
Variable
PCAT Verbal SS
PCAT Biology SS
PCAT Reading SS
PCAT Quantitative SS
PCAT Chemistry SS
PCAT Composite SS
Entering Cumulative GPA
Entering Math/Science GPA
1st Year
GPAs
r
r2
0.27 0.073
0.35 0.123
0.31 0.096
0.29 0.084
0.41 0.168
0.43 0.185
0.49 0.240
0.47 0.221
2nd Year
GPAs
r
r2
0.23 0.053
0.31 0.096
0.29 0.084
0.28 0.078
0.39 0.152
0.40 0.160
0.47 0.221
0.45 0.203
3rd Year
GPAs
r
r2
0.22 0.048
0.27 0.073
0.30 0.090
0.27 0.073
0.38 0.144
0.38 0.144
0.43 0.185
0.42 0.176
4th Year
GPAs
r
r2
0.19 0.036
0.19 0.036
0.26 0.068
0.21 0.044
0.29 0.084
0.30 0.090
0.38 0.144
0.35 0.123
6
Predictive Validity
Predictive Validity
Multiple Regression Analyses for PCAT Subtest Scaled Scores and
Entering Cumulative GPA
Model 1: PCAT
Subtest SS +
Entering
Cumulative
GPA
1st Year GPA
2nd Year GPA
3rd Year GPA
4th Year GPA
Model 2: PCAT
Subtest SS Only
1st Year GPA
2nd Year GPA
3rd Year GPA
4th Year GPA
Year in Pharmacy
Program
1st Year Students
2nd Year Students
3rd Year Students
4th Year Students
Model 1: PCAT Subtest
SS + Entering Cumulative
GPA
Lowest
Highest
5%
95%
83
75
83
73
77
68
65
62
Year in Pharmacy
Program
1st Year Students
2nd Year Students
3rd Year Students
4th Year Students
Model 2: PCAT Subtest
SS
Lowest
Highest
5%
95%
71
69
71
67
71
66
73
60
Parameters
2
R
0.37
0.34
0.30
0.21
2
R
0.24
0.21
0.19
0.12
Verbal
SS
*
*
*
*
Biology
SS
0.39
0.27
0.12
*
Reading
SS
0.27
0.27
0.30
0.18
Verbal
SS
*
*
*
*
Parameters
Biology
Reading
SS
SS
0.37
0.37
0.26
0.35
*
0.35
*
0.21
Quant.
SS
*
*
*
*
Quant.
SS
*
*
*
*
Chem.
SS
0.44
0.41
0.33
0.15
Entering
Cum.
GPA
0.54
0.47
0.32
0.20
Chem.
SS
0.60
0.54
0.42
0.21
Predictive Validity
SS
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
PR
35
37
39
41
43
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
1st Year
% of
% of
Lowest Highest
5%
95%
53
81
56
79
64
77
69
75
69
73
71
71
73
68
73
66
76
63
78
59
78
57
84
56
Equivalent
2003 PCAT
Composite
SS
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
PR
59
61
63
64
66
68
70
72
73
75
76
78
1st Year
% of
% of
Lowest Highest
5%
95%
84
53
84
50
87
47
87
44
89
43
91
41
91
38
91
36
96
34
98
33
98
30
100
28
• Lowest 5% = percent
identified that earned the
lowest 5% GPAs in
program (sensitivity)
• Highest 95% = percent
identified that earned the
highest 95% GPAs in
program (specificity).
Predictive Validity
Diagnostic Accuracy for Predicting GPAs in Professional Pharmacy
Programs from Entering PCAT Scores (sample mean = 407)
Equivalent
2003 PCAT
Composite
Discriminant Analyses for
Weighted PCAT Subtest
Scaled Scores and Entering
Cumulative GPA:
• % of Lowest
5% = percent
identified that
earned the
lowest 5% GPAs
in program
(sensitivity)
• % of Highest
95% = percent
identified that
earned the
highest 95%
GPAs in
program
(specificity).
Conclusions
The results of the 2005 PCAT predictive validity study
suggest the following:
• The PCAT has moderate to strong value in predicting
students’ pharmacy college GPA, especially for the first
year.
• Of the PCAT scaled scores, the Chemistry and
Composite are the most predictive.
• Entering GPAs are slightly more predictive of
subsequent performance than PCAT scores.
• A combination of PCAT scores and entering GPAs is
more effective in predicting subsequent performance
than either predictor alone.
Predictive Validity
Follow-up Analysis
As a follow-up to the 2005 PCAT predictive validity study, a
stepwise discriminant function analysis was performed that
had not been done for the original study:
Meagher, D.G., Lin, A., Stellato, C.P. (2007). Predicting
pharmacy students’ performance from PCAT scores: A
further analysis of predictive validity study data.
Manuscript submitted for publication.
The purpose of this analysis is to indicate the relative
importance of each PCAT multiple-choice subtest in
predicting first-year pharmacy school GPA.
Predictive Validity
1st Year
GPA PR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PCAT Subtest
VB BO RC QT CM
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
1
2
The Biology (BO)
and Quantitative
Ability (QT) subtests
combined to best
predict students likely
to earn the lowest
10% of first-year
pharmacy GPAs.
Note: 1 and 2 indicate the most significant
contributions (in order of significance) and 3 and 4
indicate contributions of lesser significance.
7
Predictive Validity
1st Year
GPA PR
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
PCAT Subtest
VB BO RC QT CM
2
3
1
4
3
2
1
4
3
2
1
3
2
4
1
3
2
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
4
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
The Chemistry (CM),
Reading Comprehension
(RC), and Biology (BO)
subtests combined to best
predict students likely to
earn the middle 15–85%
of first-year pharmacy
GPAs.
Predictive Validity
Predictive Validity
1st Year
GPA PR
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
PCAT Subtest
VB BO RC QT CM
2
4
3
1
2
4
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
The Chemistry (CM),
Verbal Ability (VB),
and Reading
Comprehension (RC),
subtests combined to
best predict students
likely to earn the
highest 90–96% of firstyear pharmacy GPAs.
Interpreting PCAT
Scores
Overall Conclusions
• Both PCAT scores and pre-pharmacy GPAs show
consistently positive correlations with subsequent
performance in pharmacy school (especially with firstyear GPA) and on the NAPLEX.
Polling Question
• It therefore seems reasonable for pharmacy schools to
evaluate pharmacy school candidates for admission by
considering PCAT scores and pre-pharmacy GPAs,
along with other personal information and application
materials.
Predictive Validity
Interpreting PCAT Scores
Questions & Answers
Don
DonMeagher,
Meagher,EdD
EdD
Senior
SeniorResearch
ResearchDirector
Director
Post-Secondary
Post-Secondary Education
Education
The
ThePsychological
PsychologicalCorporation
Corporation
210-339-5297
210-339-5297
don_meagher@harcourt.com
don_meagher@harcourt.com
AACP Webinar
September 14, 2007
8