Rethinking Placement Exams

Traditional placement exams are high stakes assessments on which students receive either a passing or failing grade. Those who fail are placed into costly remediation courses that delay progress. In contrast, DAACS provides students with detailed information and feedback on their preparation for college-level work, as well as resources for shoring it up. Students can build needed skills while enrolled in courses that lead to the completion of their degrees.

Assessing the Whole Student

Current research suggests that self-regulated learning, mindset, and motivation are better predictors of college success than traditional placement or entrance exams. DAACS assesses these and provides students with strategies to be a more successful college student.

Predictive Analytics

Data provided by DAACS has been shown to increase the efficacy of predictive analytic models. These data not only help institutions identify their most academically at-risk students, but also provide specific information as to why they are at risk. With this information, more targeted interventions can be developed that better serve students’ needs.

Do you want to see more?

Take the Diagnostic Assessment and Achievement of College Skills and receive personalized feedback about your college readiness in self-regulated learning, reading, writing, and mathematics.

Take DAACS

What's New

Recent research, presentations, and news from the DAACS team.

DAACS Receives StAR Award from University at Albany

By DAACS on May 17, 2019

The DAACS team received a $48,500 Strategic Allocation of Resources (StAR) award from the University at Albany to implement DAACS at the University. Students enrolling beginning in 2020 will be an integral part the onboarding process. More information from the abstract: DAACS is a fully functioning, free, online suite of diagnostic assessments of college readiness, including reading, writing, mathematics, and self-regulated learning (https://daacs.net/). DAACS provides newly enrolled students with the information and resources needed to prepare for the academic rigors of college.

Continue reading

Dr Bryer to be panelist for World Future Forum

By DAACS on April 24, 2019

Future Review Panel: Approaches to Studying Student Success in Higher Education Thursday, April 24, 11:25am to 12:10pm, Chicago This panel will highlight the work that is published in Future Review, our publication. Two of the first authors to publish in this journal will discuss their work on student success. The panel features both quantitative and qualitative research, and highlights the different ways of conceptualizing student success in higher education. Panelists will also discuss how their research can be used by practitioners in higher education, and why they chose Future Review as a venue for their research.

Continue reading

American Educational Research Association

By DAACS on April 5, 2019

Efficacy of the Diagnostic Assessment and Achievement of College Students on Multiple Success Indicators Authors: Jason Bryer; Angela M. Lui; Heidi L. Andrade; David W Franklin; Timothy J. Cleary Abstract The purpose of this study is to examine the effects and predictive power of the Diagnostic Assessment and Achievement of College Skills (DAACS) on student success. DAACS is a no-stakes, open-source, formative assessment tool designed to measure newly enrolled college students’ reading, writing, mathematics, and self-regulated learning (SRL) skills, and provide them with feedback and resources to enhance their functioning and success.

Continue reading

National Council on Measurement in Education

By DAACS on April 5, 2019

Relationship Between Intraclass Correlation and Percent Rater Agreement Authors: Jason Bryer; Guher Gorgun Abstract Inter-rater reliability (IRR) is a critical component of establishing the reliability of measures when more than one rater is necessary. There are numerous IRR statistics available to researchers including percent rater agreement, Cohen’s Kappa, and several types of intraclass correlations (ICC). Several methodologists suggest using ICC over percent rater agreement (Hallgren, 2012; Koo & Li, 2016; McGraw & Wong, 1996; Shrout & Fleiss, 1979).

Continue reading

Our Partners