The Relationship Between SAT Scores and Retention to the Second Year - 2008 SAT Validity Sample

Sep 14, 2026

Uploaded by Jake

The study examines how SAT performance relates to second-year college retention, using a national validity sample built from first-time first-year students entering in fall 2008 across 129 participating institutions. SAT scores are analyzed alongside high school GPA (HSGPA) and a range of student and institutional characteristics. Results show positive associations between SAT performance and retention rates even after controlling for HSGPA, with incremental predictive value within HSGPA bands. Controlling for SAT performance narrows or eliminates retention differences across subgroups.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages10

Reading Time25 min

AccessFree to download

Executive Summary

Research design and samples (2006–2008)

Findings: SAT performance and retention

Institutional characteristics and student demographics

Interpretation and subgroup effects

The Relationship Between SAT® Scores and Retention to the Second Year: 2008 SAT Validity Sample By Krista D. Mattern and Brian F. Patterson Executive Summary The College Board formed a research consortium with four-year colleges and universities to build a national higher education database with the primary goal of validating the revised SAT® , which consists of three sections: critical reading (SAT-CR), mathematics (SAT-M) , and writing (SAT-W), for use in college admission. A study by Mattern and Patterson (2009) examined the relationship between SAT scores and retention to the second year of college. The sample included first-time first-year students entering college in fall 2006, with 106 of the original 110 participating institutions providing data on retention to the second year. Results showed that SAT performance was related to retention, even after controlling for HSGPA. The following year, previously participating as well as new colleges and universities were invited to provide first-year performance data on the first-time first-year students who entered college in the fall of 2007. For the 2007 sample, a total of 72 of the original 110 institutions and 38 new institutions provided data. The 110 institutions in the 2007 sample contained 216,081 students. A replication of the Mattern and Patterson study (2009) was conducted with the new cohort and similar results were found (Mattern & Patterson, 2011) . Similarly, previously participating as well as new colleges and universities were invited to provide first-year performance data on the first-time first-year students who began in the fall of 2008. For the 2008 cohort of students, a total of 129 institutions provided data on a total of 246,652 students. Students without SAT scores, self-reported high school grade point average (HSGPA), or retention data were removed from analyses, resulting in a final sample size of 173,963 students. Replicating the analyses of the previous two reports (Mattern & Patterson, 2009; 2011), the tables below are based on the 2008 sample , and the findings are largely the same as those found in the earlier reports. Results show that SAT performance is positively related to second-year retention rates, even after controlling for student and institutional characteristics. This was also true within HSGPA bands, showing that SAT scores provide incremental value over highschool grades in predicting retention. Furthermore, controlling for SAT performance is seen to reduce and in some cases eliminate the differences in retention rates between student and institutional subgroups that are otherwise observed. Table 1. Distribution of Institutional Characteristics | Subgroup / Characteristic | | Percentage | | --- | --- | --- | | U.S. Region | Midwest | 17 | | | Mid-Atlantic | 23 | | | New England | 15 | | | South | 14 | | | Southwest | 11 | | | West | 21 | | Control | Public | 44 | | | Private | 56 | | Size
(Number of Undergraduates) | Small (750 to 1,999) | 20 | | | Medium (2,000 to 7,499) | 42 | | | Large (7,500 to 14,999) | 16 | | | Very Large (15,000 or more) | 23 | | Selectivity | < 50% | 21 | | | 50–75% | 57 | | | > 75% | 23 | Note: Number of institutions = 129. • The sample of 129 institutions was diverse with respect to U.S. region , control, size, and selectivity, and was largely representative of the target population. Total Returning Nonreturning Number of Students 177,560 151,958 25,602 | Subgroup / Characteristic | | | Percentage of Students | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Gender | Female | 54.2 | 54.5 | | | 53.0 | | | Male | 45.8 | 45.5 | | | 47.0 | | Race/ Ethnicity | American Indian | 0.5 | 0.5 | | | 0.7 | | | Asian | 10.4 | 11.0 | | | 7.1 | | | Black/African American | 6.8 | 6.5 | | | 8.1 | | | Hispanic | 8.7 | 8.4 | | | 10.2 | | | Other | 2.6 | 2.6 | | | 2.6 | | | White | 68.7 | 68.7 | | | 68.8 | | | No Response | 2.4 | 2.3 | | | 2.5 | | Hou

FAQs

What is the main research question of this study?

The study evaluates the relationship between SAT scores and students’ retention to the second year of college.

How does the analysis account for high school performance?

Findings hold even after controlling for HSGPA, and SAT scores provide incremental predictive value within HSGPA bands.

What does controlling for SAT performance do to subgroup differences in retention?

Controlling for SAT performance reduces and in some cases eliminates retention-rate differences between student and institutional subgroups.

Sep 14, 2026

Uploaded by Jake