我们想念谁?研究生学历考试的定量分数是少数民族心理博士项目录取的障碍。

IF 1.8 2区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Training and Education in Professional Psychology Pub Date : 2021-08-01 Epub Date: 2021-04-05 DOI:10.1037/tep0000336
Jennifer M Gómez, Annmarie Caño, Boris B Baltes
{"title":"我们想念谁?研究生学历考试的定量分数是少数民族心理博士项目录取的障碍。","authors":"Jennifer M Gómez, Annmarie Caño, Boris B Baltes","doi":"10.1037/tep0000336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The field of psychology must racially/ethnically diversify to create a workforce that can meet the needs of education, training, and interventions in an increasingly pluralistic society. Systemic bias in psychology doctoral programs' admissions process may partially account for relatively few psychologists being underrepresented minorities (URMs). The use of the Graduate Record Examination Quantitative score (GRE-Q) is one important modifiable barrier. The purpose of the current study is to go beyond replicating the association between the GRE-Q and desired doctoral outcomes by examining if a cut-off score for the GRE-Q as a proxy for potential to succeed in psychology doctoral programs disproportionately impacts URMs. Participants (<i>N</i> = 226) were psychology doctoral students at a Carnegie-classified Highest Research Activity (R1) large Midwestern university, who were admitted to graduate school from 2001 to 2011. Our findings show that, while controlling for undergraduate grade point average (GPA) and prior master's degree attainment, the GRE-Q predicted grades in two required graduate statistics courses and overall graduate GPA. Importantly, all students, regardless of their GRE-Q score, demonstrated competence in their statistics coursework, as assessed by their course grades. Moreover, we found that guidelines that bar admission into the psychology doctoral program for students with low GRE-Q scores would have disproportionately impacted URMs, resulting in 44% being barred admission versus only 17% of their White/Asian/Pacific Islander counterparts. Practical implications include introducing holistic review protocols into the admissions process, while educating faculty on how heavy emphasis on the GRE-Q contributes to inequitable exclusion of capable URMs.</p>","PeriodicalId":47035,"journal":{"name":"Training and Education in Professional Psychology","volume":"15 3 1","pages":"211-218"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9075693/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who Are We Missing? Examining the Graduate Record Examination Quantitative Score as a Barrier to Admission into Psychology Doctoral Programs for Capable Ethnic Minorities.\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer M Gómez, Annmarie Caño, Boris B Baltes\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/tep0000336\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The field of psychology must racially/ethnically diversify to create a workforce that can meet the needs of education, training, and interventions in an increasingly pluralistic society. Systemic bias in psychology doctoral programs' admissions process may partially account for relatively few psychologists being underrepresented minorities (URMs). The use of the Graduate Record Examination Quantitative score (GRE-Q) is one important modifiable barrier. The purpose of the current study is to go beyond replicating the association between the GRE-Q and desired doctoral outcomes by examining if a cut-off score for the GRE-Q as a proxy for potential to succeed in psychology doctoral programs disproportionately impacts URMs. Participants (<i>N</i> = 226) were psychology doctoral students at a Carnegie-classified Highest Research Activity (R1) large Midwestern university, who were admitted to graduate school from 2001 to 2011. Our findings show that, while controlling for undergraduate grade point average (GPA) and prior master's degree attainment, the GRE-Q predicted grades in two required graduate statistics courses and overall graduate GPA. Importantly, all students, regardless of their GRE-Q score, demonstrated competence in their statistics coursework, as assessed by their course grades. Moreover, we found that guidelines that bar admission into the psychology doctoral program for students with low GRE-Q scores would have disproportionately impacted URMs, resulting in 44% being barred admission versus only 17% of their White/Asian/Pacific Islander counterparts. Practical implications include introducing holistic review protocols into the admissions process, while educating faculty on how heavy emphasis on the GRE-Q contributes to inequitable exclusion of capable URMs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Training and Education in Professional Psychology\",\"volume\":\"15 3 1\",\"pages\":\"211-218\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9075693/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Training and Education in Professional Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000336\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/4/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Training and Education in Professional Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000336","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/4/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

心理学领域必须在种族/族裔上多样化,以创造一支能够满足日益多元化的社会中教育、培训和干预需求的劳动力队伍。心理学博士项目招生过程中的系统性偏见可能是少数心理学家代表性不足的部分原因。研究生学历考试定量分数(GRE-Q)的使用是一个重要的可修改障碍。当前研究的目的是通过检查作为心理学博士项目成功潜力代表的GRE-Q的截止分数是否对URM产生了不成比例的影响,从而超越复制GRE-Q与期望的博士成果之间的联系。参与者(N=226)是卡内基分类的最高研究活动(R1)中西部大型大学的心理学博士生,他们于2001年至2011年被研究生院录取。我们的研究结果表明,在控制本科生平均绩点(GPA)和之前的硕士学位成绩的同时,GRE-Q预测了两门必修研究生统计学课程的成绩和研究生的总体GPA。重要的是,所有学生,无论他们的GRE-Q成绩如何,都在统计课程中表现出了能力,这是通过他们的课程成绩来评估的。此外,我们发现,禁止GRE-Q分数低的学生进入心理学博士项目的指导方针会对URM产生不成比例的影响,导致44%的学生被禁止入学,而白人/亚裔/太平洋岛民学生只有17%被禁止入学。实际意义包括在招生过程中引入全面的审查协议,同时教育教师如何过分强调GRE-Q会导致不公平地排斥有能力的URM。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Who Are We Missing? Examining the Graduate Record Examination Quantitative Score as a Barrier to Admission into Psychology Doctoral Programs for Capable Ethnic Minorities.

The field of psychology must racially/ethnically diversify to create a workforce that can meet the needs of education, training, and interventions in an increasingly pluralistic society. Systemic bias in psychology doctoral programs' admissions process may partially account for relatively few psychologists being underrepresented minorities (URMs). The use of the Graduate Record Examination Quantitative score (GRE-Q) is one important modifiable barrier. The purpose of the current study is to go beyond replicating the association between the GRE-Q and desired doctoral outcomes by examining if a cut-off score for the GRE-Q as a proxy for potential to succeed in psychology doctoral programs disproportionately impacts URMs. Participants (N = 226) were psychology doctoral students at a Carnegie-classified Highest Research Activity (R1) large Midwestern university, who were admitted to graduate school from 2001 to 2011. Our findings show that, while controlling for undergraduate grade point average (GPA) and prior master's degree attainment, the GRE-Q predicted grades in two required graduate statistics courses and overall graduate GPA. Importantly, all students, regardless of their GRE-Q score, demonstrated competence in their statistics coursework, as assessed by their course grades. Moreover, we found that guidelines that bar admission into the psychology doctoral program for students with low GRE-Q scores would have disproportionately impacted URMs, resulting in 44% being barred admission versus only 17% of their White/Asian/Pacific Islander counterparts. Practical implications include introducing holistic review protocols into the admissions process, while educating faculty on how heavy emphasis on the GRE-Q contributes to inequitable exclusion of capable URMs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: The Association of Postdoctoral and Internship Centers and the American Psychological Association have joined together to publish Training and Education in Professional Psychology, which serves as the primary source for gathering the most important information that contributes to and advances professional psychology education and training. The journal is written for psychologists and other mental health professionals who educate, supervise, and train mental health practitioners during their academic programs as well as during their participation at practicum, internship, and postdoctoral settings.
期刊最新文献
The development and current directions of a diversity specialty clinic: Implications for multicultural training in psychology. Clinical Psychology Graduate Programs: Falling Short in Cultural Humility Training. When voices are left unheard: BIPOC doctoral student feedback toward a decolonized curriculum. Effects of a brief mindfulness intervention program: Changes in mindfulness and self-compassion predict increased tolerance of uncertainty in trainee psychologists. Supplemental Material for Improving Culturally Responsive Clinical Training: Exploring the Acceptability and Feasibility of an Exposure-Based Strategy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1