{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024017467248908297, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002183406113537118, 'mean_word_length': 6.0, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Predicting the Academic Achievement of Disadvantaged College Bound Students.

In the study of the effectiveness of traditional methods of evaluation (high school GPA and SAT scores) and subjective methods of evaluation (self, peer, parent, counselor, and teacher perceptions) in predicting the academic performance of 47 disadvantaged college freshmen, traditional methods proved inadequate. Among the subjective methods, peer prediction was found to be significantly related to the disadvantaged student's academic performance. Counselors achieved the dubious distinction of having the poorest "track record" in estimating the academic performance of the students. Study results suggest that the more hours disadvantaged students attempt, the higher their achieved GPA. This finding tends to refute the assumption that disadvantaged students perform tetter academically when they carry reduced class loads. (Author)