Dyer Finds Grades Falling Short of Abilities; More Efficient Advising Could Correct Situation

Grades of College students often fall far short of their abilities. According to the "Dyer Report," recently issued by the University, two important reasons for this are an over-burdened program, and a poor choice in the field of concentration. An efficient, accurate system of advising at the College, it states, could easily correct these errors.

The "Dyer Report" tries to provide such a system.

Released early in September by Henry S. Dyer, Director of the Office of Tests, this pamphlet is formally called "The Proper Use of Objective Test Scores: A Handbook for Harvard Advisers." Unpublicized and virtually unknown outside the administration and the faculty, this little handbook has great importance for both freshman advisers and students.

The Report tries to interpret various test scores, to give them proper weight, and to analyze their significance. It aims at destroying the idea that "the interpretation of test scores is a difficult and technical matter which should be left to 'experts.'" And it hopes to give advisers a clear understanding of test results so that they may use them effectively in guiding students.

The average Harvard student, between the time of application for admission and the end of his Freshman year, takes about 19 objective examinations. When the data from all these exams are collated and analyzed, the adviser has a powerful aid in helping the student to choose his courses, and especially, his field of concentration.

The Report is quick to point out that the results of such investigations can never be completely accurate. They do, however, help the adviser to find a "proper balance between blind faith and complete skepticism."

Each Freshman Adviser receives a Summary Card for his advisees, containing school record, admission test scores, and school rank. He also gets a Course Placement Recommendation Slip, which bases specific course recommendations on placement exam grades. A proper interpretation of these materials, at which the Report aims, may result in proper guidance. It should prevent over-loading or incorrect emphasis.

Another item that appears on the Summary Card is a figure called "PRL," or Predicted Rank List. This number gives a general confidential estimate of the student's academic capability and promise.

Although the PRL was introduced for admissions and scholarship purposes, the Dyer Report finds it of considerable help to the advisers.

The Predicted Rank List is a weighted combination of College Board test scores with rank in the secondary-school class. About 50 percent of the weight is given to the rank-in-class, 25 percent to College Board Scholastic Aptitude scores, and 25 percent to College Board Achievement scores.

"In the final analysis," the Report says, "test scores are simply numerical observations, and their only real value lies in the fact that accumulated experience shows them to be of some use in classifying students either as probable succeeders or probable non-succeeders in various fields of learning." This is the function of PRL. The average of the weighted scores is expressed in a form which predicts Rank List standing in the College.

For the Class of 1954 the Predicted Rank List gave a fairly good indication of what Group the student is likely to make. Almost 37 percent were predicted exactly, while 81.6 percent were no more than one Group away from that predicted.

An accident that can very easily be prevented by the advisor is over-loading a student. The advisor may be fairly certain that a student with a high PRL of 2.5, for example, can carry a 5-course program without difficulty. On the other hand, he must be careful not to burden a studena with a PRL of 5.0 with a heavy load.

An important feature of the PRL is its use in sugesting a field of concentration. The Report lists the PRL's of several classes of seniors according to their fields of concentration. It shows that in Physics, 67.2 percent of the men had PRL's of 3.5 or better (honors grades); Mathematics had 65.2 percent; Chemistry 48.8 percent; Engineering Sciences, 44 percent; and History and Lit. 39.7 percent. With these figures, an advisor may discourage a mediocre student from entering a field where competition would be overwhelming.

Both President Conant and Provost Buck praised the Dyer Report, acknowledging its value and its significance. They feel the proposed system could mean a more efficient method for helping students, with happier results for their futures.