Notes

1. The normal legal citation for Judge Prado's decision in the TAAS case is GI Forum Image De Tejas v. Texas Education Agency, 87 F. Supp. 667 (W.D.Tex. 2000). However, since this citation only recently became available, in the body of this paper I cite Judge Prado's decision as Prado, 2000.
2. The volume 2, number 2 issue of The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Minority Issues has recently published major portions of the reports of eight experts who testified in the TAAS trial, including portions of both my original (Haney, 1998) and supplementary (Haney, 1999) reports concerning the case.
3. I do not know how many schools have been taken over by the state, but I am aware that the TEA took over control of the Wilmer-Hutchins district in 1996 because of poor performance (Wertheimer, 1999).
4. At least one independent analyst has found that the equating of TAAS forms has not been successful. In a study commissioned by the Tax Research Association of Houston and Harris County (TRA), Sandra Stotsky analyzed TAAS reading tests for 1995 through 1998 and found that the grade 4, 8 and 10 TAAS reading tests for these years and grades were not comparable in difficulty (see, Stotsky, 1998).
5. In the second report for the TAAS case (Haney 1999), I also applied the 80% rule to results for three different grade 10 TAAS tests (reading writing and math). Writing test results for Blacks and Hispanics have generally not fallen below 80% of the White pass rates, but TAAS math test results consistently have.
6. The latest version of the joint test Standards was issued in 1999, after the TAAS case and my work on it, were under way. Therefore, here I cite both 1985 and 1999 versions of the Standards. Where pertinent, I also document how specific provisions changed between 1985 and 1999.
7. The corresponding 1985 standard read: Standard 8.12 In elementary or secondary education, a decision or characterization that will have a major impact on a test taker should not automatically be made on the basis of a single test score. Other relevant information for the decision should also be taken into account by the professionals responsible for making the decision. (APA, AERA & NCME, 1985, p. 54)
8. MALDEF attorneys sought to have the Heubert & Hauser report entered as evidence in the TAAS trial, but after attorneys for the state of Texas objected, the judge refused to allow the NRC report entered as evidence in the case. In a symposium on the GI Forum case at the Annual Conference of the Council of Chief State School Officers, Snowbird Utah, June 17, 2000, I asked Geoffrey T. Amsel, the lead lawyer for the State of Texas in the case, why in the world he had sought to have NRC report excluded from evidence in the case. His public response? "I was just trying to be a pain in the ass."
9. The corresponding passages from the 1985 Standards are: Standard 6.9 When a specific cut score is used to select, classify, or certify test takers, the method and rationale for setting that cut score, including any technical analyses, should be presented in a manual or report. When cut scores are based primarily on professional judgment, the qualifications of the judges also should be documented. (AERA, APA & NCME, 1985, p. 34) And 1985 Standard 2.10 specifies that "standard errors of measurement should be reported for score levels at or near the cut score" (p. 22).
10. It is worth mentioning that since 1990 considerable literature has been published on methods for setting passing scores on tests (for example, Gregory Cizek, Setting passing scores, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, Summer 1996, pp. 20-31). However in discussing the setting of passing scores on TAAS in 1990, it seems reasonable to focus on literature that was prominently available before that year.
11. Part 6.2 below provides more explanation on how this survey was undertaken. Haney, Myth of the Texas Miracle, v. 4, July 28, 2000, p. 58.
12. I was able to assemble this data set thanks to the generous assistance of Dr. Ed Rincon of Rincon Associates and Terry Hitchcock of the Texas Education Agency (TEA).
13. When a graph like Figure 5.2 was presented during the TAAS trial (the same, except that it did not include 1998-99 data), the pattern was sufficiently startling that Judge Prado interjected exactly this question, ìWhat happened?î
14. The original Table 6.1 in the NRC report contained several printing errors, but a corrected version has been released.
15. It should be explained that the TEA data cited shows slightly different numbers of students taking the three portions of the grade 10 TAAS (reading writing and math) in any given administration. To derive the results shown in Table 5.5, I calculated the number of special education students taking each portion of the TAAS in each years and then averaged the numbers and percentages taking each portion.
16. We should acknowledge that this response rate of less than 15% was certainly less than ideal. One likely reason for the low response rate is that we were able to mail the survey only one week before the last week of the 1998-99 Texas school year. One respondent even spontaneously chided us for sending a survey that arrived during such a hectic time in the school year. Because of this timing we were unable to send follow-up letters to non-respondents.
17. ARD stands for Admission, Review and Dismissal, the name of the Committee in Texas schools that oversees special education designations and plans.
18. Recently, thanks to a suggestion of Jeff Rodamar, I have become aware of a set of short papers on the web site of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (http://www.tppf.org/). One paper, by John Pisciotta summarizes two 1996 surveys of satisfaction and dissatisfaction of teachers in Texas. The report states: "Overall, this report indicates that with all the Texas public education reforms of recent years, the environment for Texas professional educators has not improved. One key finding is that public school teachers did not generally believe the teaching quality in their schools was improving. When asked if quality of teaching at their school had improved compared to five years ago, only 39% of public school teachers said yes. Almost a third believed teaching quality was worse than five years ago. In contrast, 71% of private school teachers saw their schools as better than five years ago. Social promotion, passing students from one grade to the next without adequate academic achievement, was another topic of the surveys. Public school teachers viewed social promotion as a widespread problem. Over half of the public school teachers indicated that social promotion was a problem at their school, compared to 29% of private school teachers. The most central question relating to teacher attrition was: Are you seriously considering leaving the teaching profession? For public school teachers, 44% said they were. Only 28% of the private-school teachers were seriously considering leaving the profession. As the major reason for leaving, private school teachers cited inadequate financial compensation. Public school teachers cited poor working conditions as their major reason for leaving." (http://www.tppf.org/, accessed 5/7/00).
19. In trying to track down possible sources of discrepancies in Texas dropout rates, I talked with Phil Kaufman of MPR of Berkeley California. Among other things he explained that the CPS data gathering began to use computer assisted telephone interviewing in 1994, and hence it is hazardous to compare CPS results from before and after that date.
20. In order to further explore this issue, I consulted with a number of scholars who have previously analyzed CPS, data including Robert Hauser, Phil Kaufman, Richard Murnane, Duncan Chaplin and John Tyler. What I conclude from these consultations is that for a variety of reasons, one needs to be wary of dropout rate estimates based on CPS data. See, for example, Hauser, 1997; Chaplin, 1999.
21. The very next sentence after the passage quoted here says "Consequently, GED graduates in 1997 and beyond must meet or surpass the performance of the top two- thirds of traditional graduating high school seniors." Obviously this statement is mistaken. What was meant was that the new GED passing standard raised the minimum scores such that instead of exceeding the performance of 25% of the norm group of high school seniors, the new minimum was equal to or surpassed the performance of 33% of the norm group.
22. A minor mystery appeared when it was learned that 15 to 20% of GED takers in Texas were only 16 or 17 years of age. GED annual reports indicate that the minimum age for taking the GED in Texas is 18. So I called the Office of Continuing Education in the Texas Education Agency (512-463-9292, 6/1/00). It was readily explained that people can take the GED in Texas below age 18 if they have a letter from a parent, parole officer. or judge. In a personal communication (6/8/00), John Tyler generously told me how to solve another mystery. GED statistics from the TEA are slightly different than those reported by GEDTS, apparently because TEA tends to report GED statistics in terms of GED certificates actually awarded, whereas GEDTS also reported numbers who pass the GED tests.
23. The only jurisdiction with a larger drop in its passing rate in 1997 was American Samoa, where only 30 people were tested in 1997.
24. To be clear, the new GED passing standard in Texas was more difficult than the pre-1997 Texas standard. It appears to be much lower than the passing standard on TAAS. Though I have been unable to locate any studies comparing the difficulty of the TAAS and GED tests, according to Barasch et al. (1990, p. 9) ìTo be successful in passing the GED in most states, a candidate must get a total minimum standard score of 225 on the five tests, with no score less than 35 on any single test. In general this means that a candidate who answers just over half of the questions in each test will get a passing score.î As we have seen, in Texas until 1997, people could pass the GED with a total standard score of only 200.
25. For more recent evidence on economic returns to earning the GED, see Murnane, Willett, & Tyler, 2000.
26. It is worth noting that analyses of grade enrollment data in part 5.5 above suggest that Murdock et al.ís estimate of the 1-2% annual in-migration rate for the Texas population appears to hold for the school age population in the 1990s. For example, referring to Table 5.3, if we average the % difference between predicted and actual grade enrollments for 1996-97 for grades 2-7 where retention in grade is quite uncommon, we get a little over 1% across the three ethnic groups. Note too that to the extent that Hispanic in-migration is greater than White in-migration, as Murdock et al., indicate, so too will the Hispanic-White gap in dropout rates be underestimated.
27. The correlation between these two variables is -0.51, statistically significant at the 0.05 level, even with the small sample of states for which grade 9 retention rates are available. Also, I suspect that for Arizona, the outlier data point in Figure 7.3, data on high school completion may be unreliable. If we replace the 77.1 % high school completion rate for 1996-98 for Arizona with the rate of 83.8% that Kaufman et al. (1999) report for Arizona for 1993-95, the correlation changes to -0.7. And if we simply delete the Arizona case, the correlation is -0.80. If the Arizona case is deleted, the regression of HS completion rate on grade 9 retention rate is HSC = 95.6 - 0.69G9R (R2 = 0.657) This suggests that for every 10 students retained to repeat grade 9, about seven will not complete high school. Given this regression equation, the predicted rate of high school completion for Texas would be 83.3, but the actual rate is about three points lower, at 80.2.
28. This finding is particularly significant given that previous research has shown that quantitative test scores are more sensitive to school experiences than are verbal test scores (Haney, Madaus & Lyons, 1993).
29. The exception to this pattern is that since it was decided that a student must achieve at least a 2 score on the written composition in order to pass the TAAS writing test, a composition score of "1" plus 27 or more multiple-choice items is truncated to a scale score of 1499, which is one point below mastery.
30. Rodamar (2000) also has an interesting summary of how college-going in Texas has changed between 1994 and 1996 (see exhibit 15, p. 21).

APA, & NCME. (1999) Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Arrow, K. J. (1950). A difficulty in the concept of social welfare. Journal of political economy. 58, 328-346.

Barasch, S. et al. (1990). ARCO GED High School Equivalency Examination. NY: Prentice Hall.

Becker, B. J. (1990). Coaching for the Scholastic Aptitude Test: Further synthesis and appraisal. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 373-417.

Berk, R. (1986). A consumer's guide to setting performance standards on criterion-referenced tests. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 137-172.

Cameron, S. V. and Heckman, J.J. (1993), "The Nonequivalence of High School Equivalents," Journal of Labor Economics, 11(1) Part 1, 1-47.

Cannell, J. J. (1987). Nationally normed elementary achievement testing in America's public schools: How all 50 states are above the national average. Daniels, WV: Friends for Education.

Cannell, J. J. (1988). Nationally normed elementary achievement testing in America's public schools: How all 50 states are above the national average. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7(2), 5-9.

Cannell, J. J. (1989). The 'Lake Wobegon' report: How public educators cheat on standardized achievement tests. Albuquerque, NM: Friends for Education.

Catterall, J. S. (1989). Standards and school dropouts: A national study of tests required for graduation. American Journal of Education, 98(1), 1-34.

Chaplin, D. (1999). GED Policies and High School Completion: Are there Unintended Consequences? (Paper presented at the 1998 annual meetings of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, New York, N.Y.). Wash. D.C.: The Urban Institute.

Cizek, G. (1996) Setting passing scores, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice (Summer 1996) 20-31.

Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (Revised. Ed.). New York: Academic press.

Cooper, H. and Hedges, L. V. (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage.

Daley, B. (1999), Embarassed into success: Texas school experience may hold lessons for Massachusetts. "Boston Globe" (June 10, 1999), p. A1.

Drahozal, E. C., & Frisbie, D. A. (1988). Riverside comments on the Friends for Education report. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7, 12-16.

Dyer, H. S. (1973). Does Coaching Help? College Board Review, 19, 331-335.

Fassold, M. (1999) Affidavit filed in case of GI Forum Image De Tejas v. Texas Education Western District of Texas (Civil Action No. SA-97-CA-1278-EP), July 13, 1999.

Fienberg, S. (1989). The evolving role of statistical assessments as evidence in courts. (Report of the Panel on Statistical Assessments as Evidence in Courts of the National Research Council.) NY: Springer-Verlag.

Funkhouser, C. (1990). Education in Texas. Policies, practices and perspectives. (5th Edn.) Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.

GED Testing Service. (1989-1998). Statistical Reports, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.

Gilmore, M. E. (1927). Coaching for intelligence tests. Journal of Educational and Psychological Measurement, 19, 319-330.

Glass, G. V (1976). Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3-8.

Glass, G. V. (1978). Standards and criteria. Journal of Educational Measurement, 15, 237-261.

Glass, G.V, McGaw, B. and Smith, M.L. (1981) Meta-analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.

Gordon, S. P. and Reese, M. High stakes testing: Worth the price? Journal of School Leadership. Volume 7 ( July 1997) 345-368.

Greene, J. (1998). Why do over half of the public school students in big Texas districts fail to graduate? "Houston Chronicle" (October 22, 1998).

Greenwald, E, Persky, H. Cambell, J. & Mazzeo, J. (1999). NAEP 1998 Writing report card for the nation and the states. (NCES report 1999-462). Washington, D.C. National Center for Education Statistics.

Grissmer, D. & Flanagan A. (1998). Exploring rapid achievement gains in North Carolina and Texas. Washington, D.C.: National Education Goals Panel. (Available at http://www.negp.gov/reports).

Haas, N. S., Haladyna, T. M., & Nolen, S. B. (1990, April). Standardized achievement testing: War stories from the trenches. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Boston, MA.

Haladyna, T. M., Nolen, S. B., & Haas, N. S. (1991). Raising standardized test scores and the origins of test score pollution. Educational Researcher, 20(5), 2-7.

Haney, W. (1993). Testing and minorities. In Weis, L. & Fine, M. (Eds). Beyond silence: Class, race and gender in United States schools. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 45-73.

Haney, W. (1998). Preliminary report on Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Exit Test (TAAS-X). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Center for the Study of Testing Evaluation and Educational Policy. (Portions of this report have been published in volume 2, number 2 issue of The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Minority Issues).

Haney, W. (1999). Supplementary report on Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Exit Test (TAAS-X). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Center for the Study of Testing Evaluation and Educational Policy. (Portions of this report have been published in volume 2, number 2 issue of The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Minority Issues).

Madaus, G., West, M., Harmon, M. Lomax, R., and Viator, K. (1992). The influence of testing on teaching math and science in grades 4 – 12. (report of a study funded by the National Science Foundation under grant SPA8954759) Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Center for the Study of Testing Evaluation and Educational Policy.

Haney, W., Fowler, C., and Wheelock, A. (1999) Less Truth Than Error?: An independent study of the Massachusetts Teacher Tests. Education Policy Analysis Archives Volume 7 Number 4 February 11, 1999. Published on the WWW at: http://epaa.asu.edu. (With Damian Bebell and Nicole Malec).

Haney, W., Madaus, G., and Lyons, R. (1993) The Fractured Marketplace for Standardized Testing. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Haney, W. & Raczek, A. (1994). Surmounting outcomes accountability in education. Report prepared for the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment.

Hauser, R. M. (1997). Indicators of High School Completion and Dropout. Pp. 152-84 in R. M. Hauser, B. V. Brown, and W. Prosser (Eds.) Indicators of Children's Well-Being. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Heubert, J. & Hauser, R. (Eds.) (1999). High Stakes: Testing for Tracking, Promotion, and Graduation. A Report of the National Research Council, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Hodgkinson, H. (1986) Texas: The State and Its Educational System. Institute for Educational Leadership.

Hoel, P. (1971). Introduction to mathematical statistics . NY: Wiley, 1971.

Hoffman, J., Pennington, J., Assaf, L. & Paris, S. (1999) High Stakes Testing in Reading and Its Effects on Teachers, Teaching, and Students: Today in Texas, Tomorrow? (Unpublished manuscript). University of Texas at Austin.

Intercultural Development Research Association. (1986). Texas School Survey project: A Summary of Findings. San Antonio: TX: Intercultural Development Research Association. (October 31, 1986).

Jaynes, G., D. and Williams, R.n. W. (Eds.) (1989). A common destiny: Blacks and American society. National Academy Press.

Jerald, C. (2000). The state of the states. Education Week (January 13, 2000) pp. 62-163.

Kaufman, P., Kwon, J., Klein, S. and Chapman, C. (1999). Dropout rates in the United States: 1998. (NCES 2000-022). Wash., D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, p. 20.

Kaye, D. H. and Freedman, D. (1994) Reference guide on statistics. Federal Judicial Center.

Koretz, D. M. & Barron, S. I. (1998) The validity of gains in scores on the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS). (RAND report MR-1014-EDU). Washington, D.C. RAND.

Koretz, D. M. & Barron, S. I. (1999) Test-based accountability systems: Lessons of Kentucky's experiment. (RAND research brief RB-8017) (http://www.rand.org/publications/RB8017).

Koretz, D. M., Linn, R. L., Dunbar, S. B., & Shepard, L. A. (1991, April). The effects of high stakes testing on achievement: Preliminary findings about generalization across tests. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL:

Lenke, J. M., & Keene, J. M. (1988). A response to John J. Cannell. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7, 16-18.

Linn, R. L. (1982). Ability testing: Individual differences, prediction and differential prediction. In Wigdor, A. K. & Garner, W. R. Ability testing: Uses consequences and controversies. Part II. Washington, D.C. National Academy Press. Pp. 335- 388.

Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher 29:2, 4-15.

Linn, R. L., Graue, M. E., and Sanders, N. M. (1989, March). Comparing state and district test results to national norms: Interpretations of scoring 'above the national average'. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Linn, R. L., Graue, M. E., and Sanders, N. M. (1990). Comparing state and district test results to national norms: The validity of claims that "everyone is above average". Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9(3), 5-14.

Linton, T.H. and Debiec, M. (1992). The secondary level TAAS test: An analysis of the 70% mastery level. Paper presented to the Texas Testing Conference, Austin, Texas, March 2-4, 1992.

Madaus, G.; West, M.M.; Harmon, M.C.; Lomax, R.G.; and Viator, K.A. (1992) The influence of testing on teaching math and science in grades 4-12. Report of research funded by National Science Foundation Grant SPA8954759. Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation and Educational Policy.

Mullis, I. V. S., Dossey, J. A., Owen, E. H., & Phillips, G. W. (1993). NAEP 1992 Mathematics Report card for the Nation and the States. (Report No. 23-ST02). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics.

Murdock, S., Hoque, M. N., Michael, M., White, S., & Pecotte, B.. (1997). The Texas challenge: Population change and the future of Texas. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.

Murnane, R. J., J. B. Willett, and J. H. Tyler. (2000) Who Benefits from Obtaining a GED?: Evidence from High School and Beyond? Review of Economics and Statistics, 82:1, 23-37

National Education Goals Panel, (November 5, 1998). North Carolina and Texas Recognized as Models for Boosting Student Achievement (press release). Washington, D.C.: National Education Goals Panel.

Office of Civil Rights (1999). The use of tests when making high-stakes decisions for students: A resource guide for educators and policy-makers. (Draft) Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Office of Technology Assessment. (1987). State Educational Testing Practices. (Background Paper, December 1987). Washington, D.C.: Office of Technology Assessment.

Palmaffy, T. (1998). The Gold Star State: How Texas jumped to the head of the class in elementary school achievement. Policy Review (March-April, 1998). No. 88. (http://www.policyreview.com//mar98/goldstar.html)

Phillips, G. W., & Finn, C. E. (1988). The Lake Wobegon effect: A skeleton in the testing closet? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7, 10-12.

Prado, E. (2000). Order in case of GI Forum Image De Tejas v. Texas Education Western District of Texas (Civil Action No. SA-97-CA-1278-EP. Filed January 7, 2000. (GI Forum Image De Tejas v. Texas Education Agency, 87 F. Supp. 667 (W.D. Tex. 2000).

Qualls-Payne, A. L. (1988). SRA responds to Cannell's article. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7, 21-22.

RAND (1999) Test-based accountability systems: Lessons of Kentucky's experiment. (RAND research brief RB-8017) (www.rand.org/publications/RB8017). (Base on Koretz, Daniel M. & Barron, Sheila I., 1998).

Reese, C. M., Millert, K. E. Mazzeo, J. and Dossey, J. A. NAEP 1996 Mathematics Report Card for the Nation and the States. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics. (Report available at http://www.ed.gov/NCES/naep).

Rodamar, J. (2000). Tall Tales? Texas Testing Moves from Pecos to Wobegon. Washington, D.C.: Unpublished draft v.2.1 dated Feb. 29, 2000.

Schrag, P. (2000). "Too Good to be True ," The American Prospect. 11:4 (January 3, 2000). (http://www.prospect.org/archives/V11-4/schrag.html).

Schumpeter, J. A. (1954). History of economic analysis. NY: Oxford University press.

Shepard, L. (1989, March). Inflated test score gains: Is it old norms or teaching to the test? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco, CA.

Shepard, L. A. (1990). Inflated test score gains: Is the problem old norms or teaching to the test? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9(3), 15-22.

Shepard, L.A. & Smith, M.L. (1989) Flunking Grades: Research and Policies on Retention. London: The Falmer Press.

Stonehill, R. M. (1988). Norm-referenced test gains may be real: A response to John Jacob Cannell. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7, 23-24.

Stotsky, S. (1998). Analysis of Texas reading tests, grades 4, 8 and 10, 1995-1998. (report prepared for the Tax Research Association). Available: http://www.educationnews.org/analysis_of_the_texas_reading_te.htm (August 1, 2000)

Taxpayer Research Association (1999) TRA OVERVIEW, TRA Reading Tests. (http://tra.org. Accessed September 11, 1999).

Texas House of Representatives House Research Organization (1999). The Dropout Data Debate. Austin TX: Texas House of Representatives. (http:www.capitol.state.tx.us/hrofr).

Texas Education Agency (1997). Texas Student Assessment ProgramTechnical Digest for the Acadmeic year 1996-97. Austin, TX: TEA.

Thorndike, Robert and Hagen, Elizabeth (1977). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education (4th Edition). New York: Wiley.

University of Houston. (1998). Freshman admission requirements. (http://www.uh.edu/enroll/admis/freshman_req.html ) November 3, 1998.

Wertheimer, Linda (1999) Inquiry into tampering names 4 local districts. Dallas Morning News, February 18, 1999.

Williams, P. L. (1988). The time-bound nature of norms: Understandings and misunderstandings. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 7, 18-21.

Willingham, W., Lewis, C., Morgan, R., & Ramist, L. (1990). Predicting college grades: An analysis of institutional trends over two decades. Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Winglee, M., Marker, D., Henderson, A. Young, B. A. & Hoffman, L. (2000). A recommended approach to providing high school dropout and completion rates at the state level. (NCES 2000-305). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics

Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.