Research in Higher Education

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 71–84

Lies, damn lies, and statistics revisited a comparison of three methods of representing change

  • Gary R. Pike
AIR Forum Issue

DOI: 10.1007/BF00991972

Cite this article as:
Pike, G.R. Res High Educ (1992) 33: 71. doi:10.1007/BF00991972


Numerous authors have argued that change is fundamental to the education process, and that the measurement of change is an essential element in efforts to assess the quality and effectiveness of postsecondary education. Despite widespread support for the concept of studying student growth and development, many researchers have been critical of existing methods of representing change. Intended for assessment practitioners and educational researchers, this study examines three methods of measuring change: (1) gain scores, (2) residual scores, and (3) repeated measures. Analyses indicate that all three methods are seriously flawed, although repeated measures offer the greatest potential for adequately representing student growth and development.

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gary R. Pike
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Assessment Research & DevelopmentUniversity of TennesseeKnoxville