2013 ETS Proficiency Profile Comparative Data Guide for Unproctored Administrations The annual Comparative Data Guide (CDG) contains tables of scaled scores and percentiles for institutional means and individual student scores drawn directly from test takers across the nation. The CDG can assist you in interpreting the scores from the ETS Proficiency Profile by helping you determine how your students' skills compare with the skills of students at similar institutions. The report provides descriptive statistics based on the number of students that have completed an unproctored version of the ETS Proficiency Profile between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2013. Information about an institution gathered through ETS Proficiency Profile administrations cannot be released in any form attributable to or identifiable with an individual institution. The anonymity of each institution s performance is maintained by reporting only the aggregate performance of the selected reference group. are descriptions of the various tables provided in this guide: Institutional s Total Score/ Distributions The distributions in these tables present the number of institutions at each mean score level. These tables provide a way to compare the Total Score and means for your institution with those of other participating institutions. These tables show the mean of means (or the average of the mean scores for those institutions/programs selected) as well as the standard deviations of those means. Individual Students Total Score/ Distributions The distributions in these tables may be used to interpret results by determining what percent of those taking the test at the selected institutions attained scores below that of a particular student. Each table shows scaled score intervals for Total Score and s separately. By looking up the Total Score or and reading across the row to the corresponding number in the column headed, the percent of individuals scoring below any interval can be determined. Summary of Proficiency Classifications This table presents the percentage of students classified as Proficient, Marginal, and Not Proficient for each skill dimension and level. This table provides a way to compare the proficiency levels at your institution with the selected test taker population. Descriptions of the competencies and abilities measured at each Proficiency Level can be found at http://www.ets.org/proficiencyprofile/scores/proficiency_classifications/. The following considerations should be kept in mind when interpreting comparative data: This data should be considered comparative rather than normative because the institutions included in the data do not represent proportionally the various types of higher education institutions and programs. The data are drawn entirely from institutions that choose to use the ETS Proficiency Profile. Such a self-selected sample may not be representative of all institutions or programs. The number of students tested and sampling procedures vary from one institution to another. Therefore, it is impossible to verify that the students tested at each institution are representative of all the institution s students in that program. Only those institutions testing 30 or more students in a college class were included in the analyses for that college class. with fewer than 30 test takers at that class level are excluded from these calculations. The score distribution used to compute the individual student level statistics has been modified, to prevent the statistics from being dominated by a few very large institutions. If an institution contributed more than 3800 students to this data set, the score of each of its students has been weighted by the fraction 3800/n, where n is the number of students from that institution. For example, if an institution tested 7600 students, the score of each of its students would receive a weight of 3800/7600 = 1/2. In computing the statistics, each of its students would count only half as much as a student from an institution that tested 3800 or fewer students. Therefore, an institution testing 7600 students would influence the statistics just as much as if it had tested only 3800 student For more information about this report or other ways the ETS Proficiency Profile can help your program, contact an ETS Advisor at highered@ets.org or call 1-800-745-0269. The following tables include tests taken as of June 30, 2013. Copyright 2014 by Educational Testing Service. All rights reserved. ETS, the ETS logo and LISTENING. LEARNING. LEADING. are registered trademarks of Educational Testing Service (ETS).
Four-year Institution Types across All Grades Institution List Data includes students from domestic institutions who tested between July 2008 through June 2013. ALBANY STATE UNIVERSITY, GA AMERICAN INTERCONTINENTAL UNIVERSITY - ONLINE, IL AMERICAN PUBLIC UNIVERSITY, WV AMERICAN SENTINEL UNIVERSITY, CO AQUINAS COLLEGE - MI, MI ASHFORD UNIVERSITY, IA ATHENS STATE UNIVERSITY, AL BAUDER COLLEGE, GA BLOOMSBURG UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, PA BRENAU UNIVERSITY, GA CAPELLA UNIVERSITY, MN CHARTER OAK STATE COLLEGE, CT COLLEGE OF THE OZARKS, MO COLORADO MESA UNIVERSITY, CO COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY - GLOBAL CAMPUS, CO COLUMBIA COLLEGE - MO, MO COVENANT COLLEGE, GA DALLAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY, TX DEVRY UNIVERSITY, IL DONNELLY COLLEGE, KS EAST STROUDSBURG UNIVERSITY, PA EASTERN UNIVERSITY, PA ECPI UNIVERSITY, NC ENDICOTT COLLEGE, MA EVERGLADES UNIVERSITY, FL EXCELSIOR COLLEGE, NY FERRIS STATE UNIVERSITY, MI FERRUM COLLEGE, VA FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY, FL HARRISON COLLEGE - INDIANAPOLIS, IN HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY, NC HOUGHTON COLLEGE, NY HOUSTON BAPTIST UNIVERSITY, TX INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, IN JACKSONVILLE STATE UNIVERSITY, AL KAPLAN UNIVERSITY, IL KUTZTOWN UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, PA LANDER UNIVERSITY, SC LEE UNIVERSITY, TN LETOURNEAU UNIVERSITY, TX LIBERTY UNIVERSITY, VA LIMESTONE COLLEGE, SC LOUISIANA COLLEGE, LA MIDLAND UNIVERSITY, NE MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY, MS MISSOURI SOUTHERN STATE UNIVERSITY, MO MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY, MO MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY, MT MOUNT OLIVE COLLEGE, NC NEUMANN UNIVERSITY, PA NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NJ NEWBERRY COLLEGE, SC NORTH CAROLINA WESLEYAN COLLEGE, NC NORTHEASTERN STATE UNIVERSITY, OK OHIO CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY, OH OTTAWA UNIVERSITY, KS PATRICK HENRY COLLEGE, VA PATTEN UNIVERSITY, CA PRESBYTERIAN COLLEGE, SC PROVIDENCE COLLEGE, RI QUEENS UNIVERSITY OF CHARLOTTE, NC QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY, CT REGENT UNIVERSITY, VA SAINT LEO UNIVERSITY, FL SAINT MARY-OF-THE-WOODS COLLEGE, IN SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY, TX SEATTLE UNIVERSITY, WA SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, SC SOUTH UNIVERSITY - SAVANNAH, GA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY, FL SOUTHERN CATHOLIC COLLEGE, GA STERLING COLLEGE, KS STRAYER UNIVERSITY, DC TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY - CORPUS CHRISTI, TX TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY - SAN ANTONIO, TX TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY - TEXARKANA, TX THOMAS EDISON STATE COLLEGE, NJ TOURO COLLEGE - CA, CA TROY UNIVERSITY, AL TUSCULUM COLLEGE, TN UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK, AR UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI, OH UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON - DOWNTOWN, TX UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN, IL UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND - UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, MD UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS, TN UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA - RENO, NV UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA, FL UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA, IA UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX, AZ UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA - AIKEN, SC UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA - TAMPA, FL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI, MS UNIVERSITY OF ST. FRANCIS, IL UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT TYLER, TX WALDEN UNIVERSITY, MN WASHBURN UNIVERSITY, KS WAYLAND BAPTIST UNIVERSITY, TX WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY, MI WESTERN INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY, AZ WESTERN TEXAS COLLEGE, TX WORCESTER STATE COLLEGE, MA Total Number of Total Number of Students 102 151,516 Only those institutions testing 30 or more students in a college class were included in the analyses for that college class. ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 2
Distribution of Institutional Total Scores All Students, Four-Year July 2008 through June 2013. Number of Standard Deviation 102 441.04 9.65 Total Score 470 to 500.00 2 98 469 to 469.99 0 98 468 to 468.99 0 98 467 to 467.99 0 98 466 to 466.99 0 98 465 to 465.99 0 98 464 to 464.99 0 98 463 to 463.99 0 98 462 to 462.99 1 97 461 to 461.99 0 97 460 to 460.99 1 96 459 to 459.99 1 95 458 to 458.99 0 95 457 to 457.99 0 95 456 to 456.99 2 93 455 to 455.99 1 92 454 to 454.99 0 92 453 to 453.99 1 91 452 to 452.99 1 90 451 to 451.99 4 86 450 to 450.99 2 84 449 to 449.99 0 84 448 to 448.99 3 81 447 to 447.99 1 80 Total Score 446 to 446.99 3 77 445 to 445.99 4 74 444 to 444.99 7 67 443 to 443.99 8 59 442 to 442.99 4 55 441 to 441.99 5 50 440 to 440.99 3 47 439 to 439.99 7 40 438 to 438.99 3 37 437 to 437.99 5 32 436 to 436.99 3 29 435 to 435.99 6 24 434 to 434.99 1 23 433 to 433.99 2 21 432 to 432.99 2 19 431 to 431.99 4 15 430 to 430.99 4 11 429 to 429.99 1 10 428 to 428.99 1 9 427 to 427.99 2 7 426 to 426.99 4 3 425 to 425.99 0 3 400 to 424.99 3 0 ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 3
Distribution of Institutional s All Students, Four-Year July 2008 through June 2013. Skill Number of Standard Deviation Critical Thinking 102 110.98 2.44 Reading 102 116.97 2.70 Writing 102 113.82 1.92 Mathematics 102 112.39 2.73 Humanities 102 115.09 2.20 Social Sciences 102 113.22 2.25 Natural Sciences 102 114.54 2.20 Critical Thinking 125 to 125.99 0 100 124 to 124.99 0 100 123 to 123.99 0 100 122 to 122.99 0 100 121 to 121.99 0 100 120 to 120.99 1 99 119 to 119.99 1 98 118 to 118.99 0 98 117 to 117.99 0 98 116 to 116.99 2 96 115 to 115.99 0 96 114 to 114.99 5 91 113 to 113.99 6 85 112 to 112.99 20 66 111 to 111.99 14 52 110 to 110.99 17 35 109 to 109.99 15 21 108 to 108.99 11 10 107 to 107.99 8 2 106 to 106.99 2 0 Reading 125 to 125.99 2 98 124 to 124.99 0 98 123 to 123.99 0 98 122 to 122.99 0 98 121 to 121.99 2 96 120 to 120.99 7 89 119 to 119.99 11 78 118 to 118.99 14 65 117 to 117.99 16 49 116 to 116.99 13 36 115 to 115.99 11 25 114 to 114.99 10 16 113 to 113.99 9 7 112 to 112.99 4 3 111 to 111.99 3 0 110 to 110.99 0 0 109 to 109.99 0 0 108 to 108.99 0 0 107 to 107.99 0 0 106 to 106.99 0 0 ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 4
Writing 125 to 125.99 0 100 124 to 124.99 0 100 123 to 123.99 0 100 122 to 122.99 0 100 121 to 121.99 0 100 120 to 120.99 0 100 119 to 119.99 2 98 118 to 118.99 1 97 117 to 117.99 1 96 116 to 116.99 7 89 115 to 115.99 11 78 114 to 114.99 31 48 113 to 113.99 17 31 112 to 112.99 15 17 111 to 111.99 10 7 110 to 110.99 4 3 109 to 109.99 2 1 108 to 108.99 1 0 107 to 107.99 0 0 106 to 106.99 0 0 Mathematics 125 to 125.99 0 100 124 to 124.99 0 100 123 to 123.99 0 100 122 to 122.99 1 99 121 to 121.99 0 99 120 to 120.99 1 98 119 to 119.99 1 97 118 to 118.99 2 95 117 to 117.99 2 93 116 to 116.99 3 90 115 to 115.99 5 85 114 to 114.99 5 80 113 to 113.99 13 68 112 to 112.99 19 49 111 to 111.99 24 25 110 to 110.99 7 19 109 to 109.99 10 9 108 to 108.99 6 3 107 to 107.99 3 0 106 to 106.99 0 0 Humanities 125 to 125.99 0 100 124 to 124.99 0 100 123 to 123.99 0 100 122 to 122.99 2 98 121 to 121.99 0 98 120 to 120.99 0 98 119 to 119.99 2 96 118 to 118.99 2 94 117 to 117.99 10 84 116 to 116.99 21 64 115 to 115.99 13 51 114 to 114.99 21 30 113 to 113.99 12 19 112 to 112.99 15 4 111 to 111.99 2 2 110 to 110.99 2 0 109 to 109.99 0 0 108 to 108.99 0 0 107 to 107.99 0 0 106 to 106.99 0 0 Social Sciences 125 to 125.99 0 100 124 to 124.99 0 100 123 to 123.99 0 100 122 to 122.99 0 100 121 to 121.99 0 100 120 to 120.99 2 98 119 to 119.99 0 98 118 to 118.99 0 98 117 to 117.99 2 96 116 to 116.99 6 90 115 to 115.99 7 83 114 to 114.99 20 64 113 to 113.99 20 44 112 to 112.99 14 30 111 to 111.99 11 20 110 to 110.99 16 4 109 to 109.99 2 2 108 to 108.99 2 0 107 to 107.99 0 0 106 to 106.99 0 0 ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 5
Natural Sciences 125 to 125.99 0 100 124 to 124.99 0 100 123 to 123.99 0 100 122 to 122.99 0 100 121 to 121.99 2 98 120 to 120.99 0 98 119 to 119.99 0 98 118 to 118.99 5 93 117 to 117.99 3 90 116 to 116.99 13 77 115 to 115.99 20 58 114 to 114.99 19 39 113 to 113.99 15 25 112 to 112.99 11 14 111 to 111.99 7 7 110 to 110.99 6 1 109 to 109.99 1 0 108 to 108.99 0 0 107 to 107.99 0 0 106 to 106.99 0 0 ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 6
Distribution of Individual Students Total Scores All Students, Four-Year July 2008 through June 2013. Number of Students Standard Deviation 106,162* 438.4 19.9 ile Scaled Score 90 th 468 75 th 451 50 th 436 25 th 424 10 th 415 Scaled Score 500 >99 499 >99 498 >99 497 >99 496 >99 495 >99 494 99 493 99 492 99 491 99 490 99 489 99 488 98 487 98 486 98 485 98 484 98 483 97 482 97 481 96 480 96 479 96 478 95 477 95 476 94 Scaled Score 475 94 474 93 473 93 472 92 471 92 470 92 469 91 468 90 467 89 466 89 465 89 464 88 463 87 462 86 461 85 460 85 459 83 458 82 457 82 456 82 455 78 454 78 453 78 452 77 451 74 Scaled Score 450 74 449 73 448 72 447 69 446 68 445 68 444 64 443 63 442 63 441 60 440 58 439 57 438 55 437 52 436 50 435 49 434 45 433 43 432 43 431 38 430 37 429 35 428 33 427 29 426 29 Scaled Score 425 26 424 24 423 23 422 20 421 19 420 17 419 14 418 14 417 13 416 10 415 10 414 8 413 7 412 7 411 5 410 4 409 4 408 3 407 3 406 2 405 1 404 1 403 1 402 1 401 <1 400 0 *The score distribution used to compute these statistics has been modified, to prevent the statistics from being dominated by a few very large institutions. If an institution contributed more than 4500 students to this data set, the score of each of its students has been weighted by the fraction 4500/n, where n is the number of students from that institution. For example, if an institution tested 9000 students, the score of each of its students would receive a weight of 4500/9000 = 1/2. In computing the statistics, each of its students would count only half as much as a student from an institution that tested 4500 or fewer students. Therefore, an institution testing 9000 students would influence the statistics just as much as if it had tested only 4500 students. ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 7
Distribution of Individual Students s All Students, Four-Year July 2008 through June 2013. Number of Students Critical Thinking Reading Writing Mathematics Humanities Social Sciences Natural Sciences 106,162* 106,162* 106,162* 106,162* 106,162* 106,162* 106,162* Score 110.3 116.4 113.3 111.6 114.5 112.7 114.0 Standard Deviation 6.3 7.5 5.3 5.9 6.6 6.4 6.3 ile Critical Social Natural Reading Writing Mathematics Humanities Thinking Sciences Sciences 90 th 120 127 120 120 124 122 122 75 th 114 123 117 115 120 117 119 50 th 109 116 113 110 113 112 113 25 th 106 111 110 107 109 107 110 10 th 103 107 106 105 106 104 106 Skills s: of Students Each Scaled Score Scaled Score Critical Thinking Reading Writing Mathematics 130 >99 97 >99 >99 129 >99 96 >99 >99 128 >99 94 >99 >99 127 99 89 >99 98 126 98 86 >99 97 125 98 85 99 97 124 97 79 99 95 123 94 75 95 92 122 94 70 94 92 121 91 66 91 92 120 88 62 86 86 119 87 60 81 86 118 84 52 80 85 117 83 50 73 80 116 80 50 62 76 115 76 40 59 72 114 71 35 53 70 113 70 34 41 64 112 61 33 39 54 111 56 24 28 53 110 54 19 24 45 109 43 18 22 34 108 42 17 13 30 107 30 8 12 17 106 24 8 8 13 105 19 6 5 6 104 11 3 3 4 103 9 2 2 3 102 4 1 1 1 101 2 1 <1 1 100 0 0 0 0 ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 8
Context-Based s: of Students Each Scaled Score Scaled Score Humanities Social Sciences Natural Sciences 130 >99 >99 >99 129 99 >99 >99 128 97 >99 >99 127 96 99 99 126 94 97 95 125 92 95 95 124 88 95 92 123 85 93 91 122 84 89 87 121 79 85 81 120 74 85 76 119 73 80 72 118 66 78 71 117 60 67 63 116 55 65 62 115 53 60 51 114 51 58 50 113 46 58 44 112 32 42 41 111 30 42 30 110 29 34 23 109 24 33 21 108 16 31 20 107 11 18 11 106 5 12 6 105 4 10 6 104 2 7 5 103 1 1 2 102 <1 1 2 101 <1 <1 1 100 0 0 0 *The score distribution used to compute these statistics has been modified, to prevent the statistics from being dominated by a few very large institutions. If an institution contributed more than 4500 students to this data set, the score of each of its students has been weighted by the fraction 4500/n, where n is the number of students from that institution. For example, if an institution tested 9000 students, the score of each of its students would receive a weight of 4500/9000 = 1/2. In computing the statistics, each of its students would count only half as much as a student from an institution that tested 4500 or fewer students. Therefore, an institution testing 9000 students would influence the statistics just as much as if it had tested only 4500 students. ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 9
Summary of Proficiency Classifications All Students, Four-Year July 2008 through June 2013. Total Number of Students Weighted Number of Students 151,516 106,162* of Students Classified Skill Dimension and Level Classified as Proficient Classified as Marginal Classified as Non-Proficient Critical Thinking 4% 10% 86% Reading, Level 2 25% 16% 59% Reading, Level 1 49% 20% 31% Writing, Level 3 5% 19% 77% Writing, Level 2 15% 28% 57% Writing, Level 1 48% 30% 22% Mathematics, Level 3 4% 10% 85% Mathematics, Level 2 17% 21% 63% Mathematics, Level 1 36% 24% 41% *The score distribution used to compute these statistics has been modified, to prevent the statistics from being dominated by a few very large institutions. If an institution contributed more than 4500 students to this data set, the score of each of its students has been weighted by the fraction 4500/n, where n is the number of students from that institution. For example, if an institution tested 9000 students, the score of each of its students would receive a weight of 4500/9000 = 1/2. In computing the statistics, each of its students would count only half as much as a student from an institution that tested 4500 or fewer students. Therefore, an institution testing 9000 students would influence the statistics just as much as if it had tested only 4500 students. ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 10
Demographic Summary All Students, Four-Year in Demographic Category Age Unweighted Data Weighted Data* Under 20 18% 23% 20 to 29 40% 42% 30 to 39 23% 19% 40 to 49 13% 12% 50 to 59 5% 4% 60 or more <1% <1% Gender Unweighted Data Weighted Data* Male 38% 39% Female 62% 61% Ethnicity Unweighted Data Weighted Data* American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian/Asian American/Pacific Islander 1% 1% 3% 3% African American 20% 20% Black Hispanic 1% 1% Hispanic 7% 6% Latin American 1% 1% White 62% 63% Other 5% 5% Best Language Unweighted Data Weighted Data* English 83% 83% Other Language 13% 14% Both Equal 3% 3% ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 11
Enrollment Status Unweighted Data Weighted Data* Full Time 82% 81% Part Time 18% 19% Credit Hours Transferred Unweighted Data Weighted Data* Not a Transfer 55% 54% 0-15 Hours Transferred 8% 7% 16-30 Hours Transferred 9% 9% >30 Hours Transferred 29% 30% Hours Worked for Wages Unweighted Data Weighted Data* None 23% 25% 1-15 Hours 16% 18% 16-30 Hours 16% 17% >30 Hours 46% 40% Cumulative GPA Unweighted Data Weighted Data* 3.50 4.00 40% 38% 3.00 3.49 34% 36% 2.50 2.99 19% 20% 2.00 2.49 6% 6% 1.00 1.99 1% 1% Less than 1.00 <1% <1% *The score distribution used to compute these statistics has been modified, to prevent the statistics from being dominated by a few very large institutions. If an institution contributed more than 4500 students to this data set, the score of each of its students has been weighted by the fraction 4500/n, where n is the number of students from that institution. For example, if an institution tested 9000 students, the score of each of its students would receive a weight of 4500/9000 = 1/2. In computing the statistics, each of its students would count only half as much as a student from an institution that tested 4500 or fewer students. Therefore, an institution testing 9000 students would influence the statistics just as much as if it had tested only 4500 students. ETS Proficiency Profile 2013 Comparative Data Guide (Unproctored Administrations) Page 12