This study evaluates a "mid period" follow-up evaluation of the outcomes of selection of medical students by customary committee review procedures versus actuarial selection. One-third of a freshman class was selected solely on the basis of a predictor index which was a previously validated, optimally weighted combination of scores on the Medical College Aptitude Test and the premedical grade-point average. The remaining two-thirds were selected by committee decision based on review of the total application file which, in addition to the aptitude test scores and academic record, included basic demographic data, information on extracurricular activities, avocational interests, work experience, letters of recommendation, personality test profiles, and interview impressions. In a previous study, it was reported that the two groups of students were undifferentiated with respect to their academic standing at the close of their sophomore year. In the present study, the actuarially selected and committee selected students were compared on class rank at the end of the junior year, total and subtest scores on part II of the National Board Examinations administered toward the close of their senior year, and type and location of internship, and practice or training status one year after graduation. The two groups were not reliably differentiated on any of these variables. Implications of the findings are discussed with respect to reliability, efficiency, and economy in the selection process and the function of the admissions committees with respect to borderline cases and issues of school policy and philosophy.
Attitude of Health Personnel Educational Measurement