Abstract
A modified ranking system proved advantageous to a more traditional voting system in guiding admissions in several unexpected areas including the (a) elimination of confounding cross talk as a selection determinant, (b) maximization of regulated discussion concerning each applicant, (c) protection of each selector's privilege to keep private his or her valuation of selection criteria, (d) elimination of ad lib procedures to break voting impasses, and (e) promotion of greater objectivity in selections. It was hypothesized that the two methods for selecting students, ranking versus voting, would yield highly similar results. In 3 proximate years, two separate lists of selected applicants were compiled; one using the ranking method and the other using the voting method. Cohen's correction for agreement of proportions (kappa) yielded coefficients at .89,. 77, and .87, respectively, all significantat p = .(0001. These findings indicated excellent agreement existed between the two selection methods. Furthernore, neithermethodcompronused the selection of disadvantaged students.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
