Psychology in the Schools Volume 27, July I990

A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF PRIMARY PREVENTION OF TEST ANXIETY AMONG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS:

A PHENOMENOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE AVIGDOR KLINGMAN AND MOSHE ZEIDNER

University of Haifa, Mt. Carmel, Israel

The present study assesses the face validity of a teacher-implemented program for primary prevention of test anxiety among elementary school students, as evaluated by teachers and students alike. The program was based on cognitive behavior modfica- tion principles and procedures and aimed at helping classroom students cope with evaluative school contexts. It is contended that “intervention checks” should be an intrinsic part of any primary prevention program. These intervention checks can be implemented via judgmental procedures designed to assess the validity of the pro- gram from the perspective of the major players in the intervention process, namely the teachers and their pupils. From this phenomenological perspective, the study results lend support to the feasibility of the program. Attention to this much-neglected topic (i.e., face validity) is raised, and some research tools to be employed are also sug- gested, including the use of the mapping sentence technique.

Recent trends in counseling and health psychology reveal that the medical model that has traditionally guided intervention is gradually being replaced by a more encom- passing model of psychological health education (e.g., Klingman, 1983, 1984, 1986; Klip- pel & Dejoy, 1984; Meichenbaum, 1977; Thoresen & Eagleston, 1985). Thus, in con- trast to secondary and tertiary preventive intervention involving affected populations, increasing emphasis is now being placed on anticipatory guidance and “primary preven- tion” of psychological difficulties for the general population. The aim of primary preven- tion is to intervene prior to the full-blown emergence of stressful events or anxiety-evoking situations.

Primary prevention of stress and anxiety is intended to identify and mitigate those factors that may constitute a potential crisis for the individual, while at the same time fortify the individual’s stress-coping skills (Klingman, 1986). In the framework of psychological health programs, the individual is provided with a support group environ- ment that encourages open expression of fears, doubts, and worries. The client can thereby gain greater insight into his or her own anxieties while at the same time em- pathize with similar feelings and concerns among others. Furthermore, psychological health programs aim at educating individuals with respect to the nature of psychological stress, providing them with relevant and reliable information concerning stress antecedents and consequences. In addition, individuals are encouraged to identify and experiment with alternative coping methods and techniques, thereby strengthening their sense of control and mastery over the stressful situation.

Although some severely test-anxious examinees may be in need of secondary or even tertiary intervention procedures, it is assumed that the large bulk of students who experience anxiety in test situations would benefit to the greatest extent from a primary prevention program aimed at test-anxiety inoculation.

Thanks are due to Orah Papko of the Department of Education for implementing the research project. Further inquiries or requests for reprints should be sent to Avigdor Klingman or Moshe Zeidner, School

of Education, University of Haifa, Mt. Carmel, 31999, Israel.

252

Primary Prevention of Test Anxiety 253

The past few decades have witnessed a flowering of test-anxiety training programs and procedures (Allen, Elias, & Zlotlow, 1980; Denny, 1980). There have been major shifts over the years in the popularity of various treatment approaches, as treatment fashions and orientations have swung sharply from the clinical to the behavioral and, most recently, to the cognitive perspective (Spielberger 8z Vagg, 1987; Topman & Jansen, 1984; van der Ploeg-Stapert & van der Ploeg, 1985). Thus, multifaceted cognitive- behavioral modification training programs for strengthening students’ coping skills under stressful evaluative situations have increased impressively (Baker & Shaw , 1987; Meichen- baum, 1985; Meichenbaum & Novaco, 1978). In particular, Meichenbaum’s (1977, 1985) three-phase “stress inoculation” procedure appears to have gained widespread popularity and usage.

It is noted that most programs have been clinically oriented and therapeutic in nature, typically directed at highly test-anxious subjects. Relatively few training pro- grams have been aimed at “normal” students within the framework of primary preven- tion psychological health education programs in the schools. Furthermore, most pro- grams have been implemented by mental health workers, mainly psychologists; few, if any, have attempted to use regular teaching staff as change agents and program administrators.

Moreover, and perhaps most crucial for this study, the majority of programs have used cognitive (i.e., success on cognitive ability or achievement tests) or affective (i.e., test anxiety or personality test scores) indices as major indicators of program success and feasibility. Few have examined the validity of the program from the perspective of the major players in the treatment process, namely, the clients or change agents themselves. Indeed, one aspect of the implementation of any psychological interven- tion, and a preventive one in particular, is the question of “intervention checks” (Rossi & Freeman, 1985). In this context, we refer to the degree to which clientdchange agents receive, accept, thoroughly understand, and properly act upon the intervention materials. Only a few studies report data bearing on this issue.

Recently, Nevo (1985) and Zeidner (1988) reconsidered the concept of face validity and urged that it be reinstated as a viable and useful construct for psychological research purposes. The concept of face validity, used mainly in the context of psychometrics (Nevo, 1985), may be extended and generalized to other contexts as well (Baruch Nevo, personal communication, February, 1987). Thus, in the present context, it refers to the degree to which a specific intervention program is perceived by relevant parties (e.g., the public at large, clients, therapists, etc.) to be effective in achieving its desired goals.

At present, the perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and coping behavior of both client and therapist/change agent relating to various dimensions of the treatment interven- tion program are much-neglected facets of test-anxiety research, and are in dire need of systematic empirical research. Very little is presently known about the perceived face validity of widespread treatment programs and practices. Indeed, the point of view and perspective of the key players in the therapeutic process appear to be potentially useful and invaluable inputs in assessing the subjective qualities of preventive test-anxiety programs.

In view of these gaps in the test-anxiety treatment literature, the major goal of the present exploratory research was to test the face validity, construed from a judgmental perspective (Crocker & Algina, 1984) of a multifaceted teacher-based training program for the primary prevention of test anxiety among classroom students.

254 Klingman and Zeidner

The program, briefly described below, was based on cognitive-behavior modifica- tion principles and procedures and aimed at helping classroom students cope with evaluative school contexts (e.g., tests). The training program was implemented within each class by respective homeroom class teachers.

Assumptions of the Training Program The training program implemented in our study rests on a number of assumptions

derived from the tenets of psychological health education and primary prevention. First, it is assumed that psychological education and primary prevention of test anxiety in the classroom context is preferable to the clinically oriented psychological intervention by mental health professionals that is implemented only after test anxiety has emerged as a full-blown classroom problem (Klingman, 1985, 1986). It is further assumed that professional intervention following repeated student failure or acute manifestations of test-anxiety reactions can further heighten students’ test-anxiety reactions; therefore, it would be more effective to provide students with relevant coping skills as part of a primary prevention program before acute test-anxiety levels are evoked. It is also assumed that normal classroom students can benefit from a training program when it is cognitively oriented, led by their regular teaching staff, and conducted in the supportive environ- ment of the students’ homeroom class. From the prevention conceptual framework, educational staff, who are in contact with students on a regular basis, are generally more available, approachable, and proactively involved than mental health workers when stressful situations arise in the classroom. In addition, implementation of training pro- grams and other preventive action by teaching staff may eliminate the stigma that students often associate with psychological intervention (seen by them as “therapy”) when ad- ministered by mental health professionals.

METHOD Subjects

Subjects participating in the experimental teacher-implemented cognitive behavior modification program were 248 students in grades 5 to 6, drawn from five neighborhood schools in northern Israel catering primarily to middle-class populations. The sample was about evenly distributed by sex and by grade level. The students ranged in age from 10-6 to 12-0; this specific age group was chosen for the experiment in view of the reported increase in test anxiety among students in their upper elementary school years (Phillips, 1978). The 24 female homeroom teachers participating in this research (12 experimen- tal, 12 control) were self-selected, although it is assumed that most homeroom teachers could conduct this particular program given adequate training.

Description of Teacher-Implemented Primary Prevention Program The specific treatment program implemented and assessed in this study via face

validity assessment procedures was based primarily on Meichenbaum’s cognitive modifica- tion model (Meichenbaum, 1977, 1985; Meichenbaum & Butler, 1981), which included the following three phases: (a) an educational phase, (b) an exercise and training phase, and (c) a training and application phase.

The training program was implemented within each class by homeroom class teachers during the course of five biweekly sessions which lasted about one hour each. The homeroom teachers in charge of the administration of the experimental program volun- tarily participated in a prior workshop in order to learn and practice, via role playing

Primary Prevention of Test Anxiety 255

and group simulation methods, the cognitive training program principles and procedures to be implemented among classroom students. Teachers were trained by an experienced female counselor, who supervised and monitored the experimental program.

The students’ peer group was assumed to be a potential source of social support and a contributing factor in the effectiveness of the training program. The training pro- gram’s major phases are summarized briefly below:

First session: Educational presentation. The major aim of the first session was to provide students with the conceptual framework for understanding the nature, origins, and antecedents of test anxiety. The session began with the specification of program goals and procedures. A contract was signed between the change agent (i.e., the teacher) and students regarding program duration, student attendance, confidentiality, and so forth. Students were encouraged to relate how they felt during test conditions and how they normally coped with evaluative stress and test anxiety. Perceptual, cognitive, and behavioral aspects of test anxiety were discussed, and similarities and differences in student reactions to evaluative situations were pointed out. The legitimacy of feeling anxious during important exams was emphasized, and positive versus negative methods of coping with anxiety were discussed. Students were taught to view test anxiety as a natural reaction to evaluative situations, one which they could readily modify and control.

Second session: Training in relaxation techniques and fundamental rational think- ing. The second session was primarily devoted to training students in the use of deep- breathing relaxation exercises as a major tension-reduction technique available for use during the exam. In addition, students were introduced to the topic of rational thinking and self-analysis. Particular emphasis was placed on A B C analysis (activating event, belief system, and emotional consequences) as a tool for countering irrational thoughts and beliefs (Ellis & Harper, 1975). Self-monitoring of concentration was discussed at length, and students were given practice in self-observation and focused concentration. Exercises focused on concentration and rational self-analysis with respect to negative thoughts occurring before, during, and after testing.

Third session: Coping imagery and attention-focusing skills. The third session was aimed at introducing students to the technique of coping imagery, which was practiced in concert with other techniques (e.g., positive self-statements, relaxation exercises, etc.). Students reported reactions under anxiety-evoking conditions, and the irrational thoughts underlying reactions were analyzed. In addition, students were given practice in use of positive self-statements (e.g., “you’re doing fine,” “keep calm,” etc.).

The fourth session focused on time management and work schemes. Students were provided with further practice in deep breathing, positive self-thinking, coping imagery, and their implementation in various imagined test situations. They were taught how to space exam study sessions and key test-taking strategies.

The final session was aimed at rehearsing and further strengthening those coping skills taught in previous sessions, primarily with the aid of guided coping imagery. Students were encouraged to use the acquired coping techniques in future test situations and, in conclusion, were required to summarize what they had learned during the course of the training program. Instruments and Procedures

Students in the experimental training group were administered a self-report inven- tory consisting of the following two questions: (a) Did the training program help you?

Fourth session: Time management and work schemes.

Fifth session: Summary and rehearsal.

256 Klingman and Zeidner

(yes/no). If so, please specify how; (b) Did you apply any of the test-anxiety control techniques you learned in the program during actual classroom test situations? (yesho). If so, please specify the techniques.

Additionally, teachers implementing the experimental training program were asked to respond to a feedback inventory consisting of the following three questions: (a) Do you feel the program was helpful in any way to students in your class? (yesho). If so, please specify how; (b) Which aspects of the program, in your opinion, were most effective in helping students develop and improve their test coping skills?; (c) Was the training program helpful to you in any way? (yesho). If so, please specify in which way.

A Test Anxiety Teacher Attitude Inventory, specifically constructed and validated for the purpose of this study, was also administered to teachers in the experimental group. The validity of the inventory was assessed through face validity procedures, and com- ments of five experts in the field were considered in revising the inventory. The inven- tory was designed to assess the effect of the experimental training program on teachers’ knowledge and sensitivity to test anxiety as a major classroom phenomenon. Teachers were asked to rate each of seven items on a 4-point scale (4 = very much, 1 = not at all). The items centered on the following dimensions: (a) the extent to which test anxiety is regarded as a problem among classroom students; (b) the degree to which students experience performance deficits as a result of test anxiety; (c) the extent to which class atmosphere can contribute to students’ level of test anxiety; (d) the extent to which there is a need to take action to alleviate manifestations of test anxiety among classroom students; (e) the degree to which the teacher feels he or she can modify test anxiety among students; (f) the amount of systematic information and skills the teacher has at his or her disposal in dealing with test anxiety among students; (g) the degree to which the teacher feels capable of helping test-anxious students. The total test anxiety attitude score ranges from 7 to 28, with higher scores reflecting greater awareness of test anxiety as a classroom phenomenon. For comparative purposes, the questionnaire was also ad- ministered to a control group of 12 homeroom teachers whose classes did not participate in the experiment. Each of the 24 teachers participating in the study was asked to res- pond twice (preexperimental/postexperimental) to the inventory.

It should be added that the experimental program was implemented by homeroom teachers whose classes were randomly allocated to experimental group conditions (from a pool of 24 classes). Similarly, the homeroom teachers whose classes were allocated to control conditions served as the control group.

RESULTS Student Perceptions of the Cognitive Training Program

The vast majority (80%) of the 248 students participating in the cognitive training program judged the program to be helpful in coping with anxiety in test situations; about a fifth (19%) of the students reported that the program was not helpful; the remaining students (1%) were uncertain. More specifically, the program was perceived to be helpful and effective in the following ways: (a) alleviating anxiety reactions during testing (6lOro); (b) helping examinees maintain a relaxed disposition during the examination period (24%); (c) fostering positive thinking (13070); (d) increasing examinee confidence by self- reinforcement techniques (1 2%); (e) helping examinees become organized and manage their time more efficiently during testing (7070); and (f) improving overall test attain- ment and scores (3Vo). Those who failed to view the program as helpful explained that

Primary Prevention of Test Anxiety 257

they were generally not very anxious in test situations to begin with and furthermore were already familiar with most of the techniques presented in the program.

Do students apply cognitive modification techniques, learned during training, out- side the training situation? About 69% of the students in the experimental group reported having actually applied techniques acquired during the training in classroom test situa- tions, as opposed to about 31% who reported that they had not. The most frequently used techniques reported by students were: (a) deep-breathing relaxation exercises (44%); (b) test-taking and problem-solving skills (3 1’70); (c) positive thoughts and attention focusing (29Oro); (d) self-reinforcements (23010), and (e) guided coping imagery (8%).

Teacher Perceptions of the Cognitive Training Program Was the program also viewed as beneficial and effective from a face validity point

of view by teachers who administered the program? The answer is clearly yes: Each of the 12 teachers participating in the experimental treatment program believed that the cognitive training experience was helpful to the students in enhancing coping skills and decreasing student levels of test anxiety. The following cognitive coping strategies were perceived by teachers to be most effective (in descending order of importance): (a) relaxation and deep-breathing exercises; (b) problem solving and time management; and (c) positive thinking. Interestingly, both students and teachers in the experimental program concurred in judging deep-breathing relaxation exercises and positive think- ing as the most effective techniques for anxiety reduction.

All 12 teachers participating in the implementation of the experimental program stated that the training program was helpful to them in two main ways: (a) enhancing their awareness of test anxiety as a serious classroom phenomenon; and (b) providing them with reliable information and tools, within the framework of a structured interven- tion program, designed to help alleviate test anxiety among classroom students.

Eflects of Experimental Treatment on Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Test Anxiety as a Classroom Phenomenon

Prior to the experiment, teachers in experimental (M = 16.58) and control (M = 17.83) groups were not meaningfully differentiated with respect to their attitudes toward test anxiety as a classroom phenomenon (d = - .34). During the postexperimen- tal phase, however, experimental (A4 = 21.50) and control (M = 17.42) groups were observed to be meaningfully differentiated in terms of test-anxiety awareness (d = + 1.67). Sigma scores (6) (Rosenthal & Rosnow, 1984) were used as indicators of effect size and were obtained by dividing the differences between experimental and control group means on the inventory by the average SDs of the two groups.

An ANOVA was conducted for the effects of experimental group (between-subject factor), testing period (within-subject factor), and their interaction on teachers’ test- anxiety awareness scores. The analysis shows significant effects for each of the terms in the ANOVA model, namely: experimental group F(1,22) = 25.97, p < .01; testing period, F(1,22) = 148.89,~ < .001; and Group x Period interactionF(1,22) = 130.3, p < .001. Thus it appears that pre- to postexperimental differences (Le., increments) in test-anxiety attitudes were greater for teachers in the experimental condition relative to the control condition. In fact, only in the experimental group were significant differences (p < .01) observed on the test-anxiety awareness inventory between pre- and posttest periods.

25 8 Klingman and Zeidner

DISCUSSION The two major aims of the present study were (a) to assess the face validity of a

teacher-implemented program for the primary prevention of test anxiety among classroom students, as evaluated by the primary factors in the intervention process, namely, teachers and students; and (b) to assess the program effects on teachers’ cognitive attitudes with respect to test anxiety as a classroom phenomenon. To that end, teachers in experimental and control groups were administered a feedback inventory, both prior to and immediately following the experiment, which was designed to gauge cognitive attitudes and perceptions with respect to test anxiety in the classroom setting. In addi- tion, students participating in the treatment program were asked to evaluate the effec- tiveness of the program in controlling test anxiety and the extent to which they applied specific cognitive modification techniques acquired in the program during actual classroom test situations.

On the whole, the cognitive training program appears to have some degree of face validity from both the students’ and teachers’ vantage point. Accordingly, the majority of students and teachers participating in the experimental training group perceived the training experience as effective in improving test-coping skills and alleviating test anxiety. In particular, students felt that the program succeeded in alleviating anxiety reactions during testing and facilitating a relaxed disposition during the exam period. To a lesser extent, it was felt that the program helped students think positively during the exam, enhanced student confidence, and helped examinees become organized and manage their time more efficiently during the exam period.

Furthermore, the majority of the students reported that they had actually applied the techniques acquired during training in classroom test situations, particularly those techniques stressed and exercised during the program, namely, deep-breathing relaxa- tion exercises, test-taking and problem-solving skills, positive thoughts and attention focusing, and self-reinforcements.

In conclusion, from the subjective perspective of both students and teachers, this study lends support to the feasibility of a teacher-based program for the improvement of students’ test-coping skills and subsequent test performance.

We hope that future research will pay increased attention to the much-neglected topic of test-anxiety treatment programs from the perspective of relevant participants in the treatment process. Indeed, much work needs to be done in comparing different treatment programs, not only on the basis of objective criteria (e.g., increase in criterion task performance, reduction in test-anxiety levels), but also with respect to the preferences and perceptions of the relevant participants, clients and therapists alike. To that end, future face validity studies should be based on more formal rating scales (both absolute scales and relative scales). Accordingly, when employing an absolute scale in assessing the face validity of a test-anxiety treatment program, the evaluator or rater (e.g., client, change agent, professional, general public) is asked to rate the program on a 5- (or 7- or lo-) point scale from extremely suitable to totally unsuitable for the program’s designated aims. By contrast, when employing a relative technique, judges assess the face validity of several treatment programs by comparing them to each other (e.g., rank- ing a variety of programs with respect to their relative suitability in achieving a desired goal) .

Furthermore, it is assumed that a treatment program that is perceived as being valid for the purpose intended by the clients undergoing treatment may also serve to enhance client motivation and co-operation during treatment as well as to increase the program’s

Primary Prevention of Test Anxiety 259

chances for acceptance in the public eye. Thus, the client’s (or change agent’s) perspec- tive with respect to the program under consideration may serve as important future in- puts when assessing the subjective appeal and quality of differing test-anxiety treatment programs.

In view of recent attempts to reinstate face validity as a viable and useful construct for psychological research purposes (Nevo, 1985; Zeidner, 1988), Guttman’s mapping sentence technique (Shye, 1978) can be implemented to systematically determine the face validity of a test-anxiety intervention program.’ In addition, future research subjects could rate programs on a variety of dimensions (besides perceived suitability of goals), such as perceived long-term value, perceived efficiency in terms of time and organiza- tion, and perceived rapport with counselor, and a profile of responses could be obtain- ed with respect to a particular program. Multidimensional scaling, e.g., Multidimen- sional Scaling Scalogram Analysis of Partial Order Scalogram Analysis (Kanter, 1988), could be used to identify particular clients or subgroups for whom the program appears to be perceived as particularly favorable or unfavorable.

REFERENCES ALLEN, G. J., ELIAS, N. J., & ZLOTLOW, S. F. (1980). Behavioral interventions for alleviating test anxiety:

A methodological overview of current therapeutic practices. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety: Theory, research and applications @p. 150-186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

BAKER, S. B., & SHAW, M. C. (1987). Improving counseling through primaryprevention. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

CROCKER, L., & ALGINA, J . (1984). Introduction to classicaland modern test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

DENNY, D. R. (1980). Self-control approaches to the treatment of test anxiety. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety: Theory, research and applications (pp. 209-244). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

ELLIS, A., & HARPER, R. (1975). A new guide to rational living. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. KANTER, D. (Ed.). (1988). Facet theory: Approaches to social research. New York: Springer. KLINGMAN, A. (1988). Psychological education: Curriculum intervention of school counselors within a primary

prevention model. Humanistic Education and Development, 4, 172-1 82. KLINGMAN, A. (1984). Health-related school guidance: Behavioral medicine within primary prevention perspec-

tive. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 62, 576-580. KLINGMAN, A. (1985). Mass inoculation in a community: The effects of primary prevention of stress reac-

tion. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 323-332. KLINGMAN, A. (1986). Five levels of intervention: School psychology and guidance counseling in Israel. Pro-

fessional Psychology, 17, 69-74. KLIPPEL, J. A., & DEJOY, D. M. (1984). Counseling psychology in behavioral medicine and health psychology.

Journal of Health Psychology, 31, 219-227. MEICHENBAUM, D. N. (1977). MEICHENBAUM, D. N. (1985). MEICHENBAUM, D. N., 8r BUTLER, L. (1980). Towards a conceptual model for the treatment of test anxiety:

Implications for research and treatment. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety, theory, research and application (pp. 187-298). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Stress inoculation: A preventive approach. In S. Spielberger & I. G. Sarason (Eds.). Stress and anxiety (Vol. 5 , pp. 317-330). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

Cognitive behavior modification. New York: Plenum. Stress inoculation training. New York: Pergamon.

MEICHENBAUM, D. N., & NOVACO, R. (1978).

NEVO, B. (1985). PHILLIPS, B. N. (1978).

Sciences Press. ROSENTHAL, R., & ROSNOW, R. L. (1984). Essentials of behavioral research. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Face validity revisited. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22, 287-293. School stress and anxiety: Theory, research and intervention. New York: Human

‘A detailed mapping sentence proposed as a heuristic guide for detailing the universe of possible obser- vation for assessing the face validity of a test-anxiety intervention technique can be obtained upon request from the authors.

260 Klingman and Zeidner

ROSSI, P. H., & FREEMAN, H. E. (1985). SHYE, S. (1978).

SPIELBERGER, C. D., & VAGG, P. R. (1987).

Evaluation: A systematic approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Theory construction and data analysis in the behavioral sciences (A volume in honour of

Louis Guttman). San Francisco: Jossey Bass. The treatment of test anxiety: A transactional process model.

In R. Schwarzer, H. M. van der Ploeg, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. 5 , pp. 179-186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

THORESON, C. E., & EAGLESTON, J. R. (1985). Counseling for health. The Counseling Psychologist, 13, 15-87. TOPMAN, R. M., & JANSEN, T. (1984). ‘‘I really can’t do it, anyway”: The treatment of test anxiety. In H.

M. van der Ploeg, R. Schwarzer, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. 3, pp. 243-251). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

A multifaceted behavioral treatment pro- gram of test anxiety. In H. M. van der Ploeg, R. Schwarzer, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. 4, pp. 43-52). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

ZEIDNER, M. (1988). Sociocultural differences in examinees’ attitudes towards scholastic ability exams. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25, 67-76.

VAN DER PLOEG-STAPERT, J., & VAN DER PLOEG, H. M. (1985).

Psychologv in fhe Schools Volume 27, July 1990

THE EFFECTS OF CHRONOLOGICAL AGE, GENDER, AND DELAY OF ENTRY ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND RETENTION:

IMPLICATIONS FOR ACADEMIC REDSHIRTING MARY BRIDGET CAMERON BARRY J . WILSON

Racine Unified School District, Racine, Wisconsin

University of Northern lo wa

School records for 313 students were reviewed to determine the effects of age of entry and gender on later academic achievement and grade retention. Twelve of these students were of legal age for school entry but were redshirted. Our findings indicated statistically significant but relatively small achievement differences between oldest and youngest children when cognitive ability scores were controlled. Redshirts, however, did not appear to gain any advantage in achievement as a result of delaying school entry.

The intent of the present study was to determine the effects of age of entry and gender on academic success in a medium-sized midwestern school district. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether standardized test scores and rentention in grade were affected by the chronological age of the child at entry or the interaction of entry age and gender. We were particularly interested in the performance of students who were of legal age for school entry but who were kept out of schools by their parents to im- prove “readiness.”

Many parents and educators today are sympathetic to arguments presented by authorities such as Ilg and Ames (1965), who argued that many children would be more likely to succeed in school if they were older when they entered school. Parents in our local districts are sometimes advised by preschool teachers, physicians, and other parents to delay school entry when their child’s birth date makes the child “young” for his or her class, particularly when the child is male. This practice can be described as “academic

Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Fran-

Requests for reprints should be sent to Barry J. Wilson, Dept. of Educational Psychology, University cisco, March 27, 1989.

of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0607.