Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Review of Educational Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Becker, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Articles

Coaching for the Scholastic Aptitude Test: Further Synthesis and Appraisal

Betsy Jane Becker

Michigan State University

Analyses of results of studies documented in 23 reports on coaching for the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) indicated that, on average, coaching can help increase SAT scores. However, considerable variability in results for 48 studies reflected the fact that not all coaching is necessarily effective and that all studies of coaching do not provide similar views of coaching’s effectiveness. Results of published and unpublished studies were analyzed separately. Characteristics related to the magnitudes of coaching effects included date of publication of the study, whether the study was sponsored by the Educational Testing Service and used as a comparison group, whether instruction included test practice and attention to test-taking skills, and whether homework was assigned to students. Coaching effects were stronger for the SAT Mathematical subtest. Published comparison studies gave consistent results with coached groups exceeding controls by 0.09 standard deviations on SAT-V and 0.16 on SAT-M. Studies of coaching were found to be rather poorly reported and designed without much attention to the issues discussed in reviews of the coaching literature.

Review of Educational Research, Vol. 60, No. 3, 373-417 (1990)
DOI: 10.3102/00346543060003373


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
WORLD BANK RES OBSHome page
H.-A. Dang and F. H. Rogers
The Growing Phenomenon of Private Tutoring: Does It Deepen Human Capital, Widen Inequalities, or Waste Resources?
World Bank Res. Obs., September 1, 2008; 23(2): 161 - 200.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eval RevHome page
D. C. Briggs
Meta-Analysis: A Case Study
Eval Rev, April 1, 2005; 29(2): 87 - 127.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
D. C. Briggs
Causal Inference and the Heckman Model
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 2004; 29(4): 397 - 420.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Eval RevHome page
L. S. Aiken, S. G. West, D. E. Schwalm, J. L. Carroll, and S. Hsiung
Comparison of a Randomized and Two Quasi-Experimental Designs in a Single Outcome Evaluation: Efficacy of a University-Level Remedial Writing Program
Eval Rev, April 1, 1998; 22(2): 207 - 244.
[Abstract] [PDF]



RER home page AER home page EPA home page JEB home page RRE home page