Psychometric Screening as a Sustainable Enrollment Management Tool: Toward Reducing Educational Mismatch and Advancing SDG 4.4

Universities admit students on thin evidence. Where admission rests on an examination score and the judgment of a committee, mismatch between an applicant’s profile and the demands of a degree program surfaces later as disengagement, attrition, and wasted institutional resources. This paper treats that outcome as a problem of decision quality and frames admission as selection risk management, by analogy with personnel selection in human resource management, where psychometric evidence is long established as a way of reducing the cost of a poor match. We set out the managerial chain connecting screening to sustainable human capital formation under SDG 4.4, state which link this study tests and which remain hypotheses, and report the evidentiary step any such system presupposes: whether the instrument in use measures anything dependable. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of two blocks completed by Generation Z applicants at a Central Asian university (abilities, 45 items, N = 839; personality, 60 items, N = 807) retained seven factors in each block. Reliability is weak: only six of the fourteen retained factors reach 0.70 on Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω, and eight fall below it. Confirmatory fit was poor for the ability block (CFI = 0.789, SRMR = 0.117) and good for the personality block (CFI = 0.962, SRMR = 0.062), though in the latter the factors intercorrelate up to 0.895, which limits their discriminant interpretation. The instrument therefore requires revision before subscale-level use. The principal contribution is managerial: an institutional integration model specifying how screening evidence enters admission and advising decisions, with an explicit account of the evidential conditions a university must satisfy before acting on such instruments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sustainability
Published
2026-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/su182010452
Primary Topic
Medical Education and Admissions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Psychometric Screening as a Sustainable Enrollment Management Tool: Toward Reducing Educational Mismatch and Advancing SDG 4.4

Yershat Sapazhanov, Grzegorz Załęski, Robert Szarota, Shakhmar Sarsenbay et al.
Sustainability
Medical Education and Admissions
article

Psychometric Screening as a Sustainable Enrollment Management Tool: Toward Reducing Educational Mismatch and Advancing SDG 4.4

Yershat Sapazhanov, Grzegorz Załęski, Robert Szarota, Shakhmar Sarsenbay, Bobir Razhametov
article en

Abstract

Universities admit students on thin evidence. Where admission rests on an examination score and the judgment of a committee, mismatch between an applicant’s profile and the demands of a degree program surfaces later as disengagement, attrition, and wasted institutional resources. This paper treats that outcome as a problem of decision quality and frames admission as selection risk management, by analogy with personnel selection in human resource management, where psychometric evidence is long established as a way of reducing the cost of a poor match. We set out the managerial chain connecting screening to sustainable human capital formation under SDG 4.4, state which link this study tests and which remain hypotheses, and report the evidentiary step any such system presupposes: whether the instrument in use measures anything dependable. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of two blocks completed by Generation Z applicants at a Central Asian university (abilities, 45 items, N = 839; personality, 60 items, N = 807) retained seven factors in each block. Reliability is weak: only six of the fourteen retained factors reach 0.70 on Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω, and eight fall below it. Confirmatory fit was poor for the ability block (CFI = 0.789, SRMR = 0.117) and good for the personality block (CFI = 0.962, SRMR = 0.062), though in the latter the factors intercorrelate up to 0.895, which limits their discriminant interpretation. The instrument therefore requires revision before subscale-level use. The principal contribution is managerial: an institutional integration model specifying how screening evidence enters admission and advising decisions, with an explicit account of the evidential conditions a university must satisfy before acting on such instruments.

SustainabilityVol. 18(20)
Narxoz University (KZ), National-Louis University (PL)
Quality education
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Medical Education and Admissions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.