|
|
||||||||
Articles |
This article is a reinterpretation of an unsuccessful attempt to develop a standard battery of aptitude measures to distinguish practicing dentists. Of 22 potential predictors used by a firm specializing in aptitude testing and career counseling, the national sample of 116 dentists tested showed few differences from the norm group, and some differences were counterintuitive. For example dentists performed no better than the norm on spatial visualization and worse than the norm on several measures of language skill and on finger dexterity. Based on these findings, this paper argues that a broad conceptualization is required when attempting to characterize the aptitudes necessary to complete dental education and to maintain a dental practice. The apparent inconsistency between these findings and successful prediction of performance in laboratory courses using available admissions instruments is explained.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
W. P. Lundergan, E. J. Soderstrom, and D. W. Chambers Tweezer Dexterity Aptitude of Dental Students J Dent Educ., August 1, 2007; 71(8): 1090 - 1097. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. R. Ranney, M. B. Wilson, and R. B. Bennett Evaluation of Applicants to Predoctoral Dental Education Programs: Review of the Literature J Dent Educ., October 1, 2005; 69(10): 1095 - 1106. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. G. Stacey and J. M. Whittaker Predicting Academic Performance and Clinical Competency for International Dental Students: Seeking the Most Efficient and Effective Measures J Dent Educ., February 1, 2005; 69(2): 270 - 280. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |