Ch 12

Overview of Standardized Tests

  • Standardized tests are widely utilized in various settings including education, civil service, and military applications.

Comparison of Group and Individual Ability Tests

Individual Tests

  • Definition: A testing mode where one subject is tested at a time.

  • Details:

    • Responses are recorded by an examiner.

    • Scoring requires considerable skill from the examiner.

    • Examiners have flexibility to elicit maximum performance (with adherence to standardization) to ensure an accurate assessment.

Group Tests

  • Definition: A testing mode where many subjects are tested simultaneously.

  • Details:

    • Subjects record their own responses.

    • Scoring is typically straightforward and objective, allowing for ease in evaluation.

Key Differences

  • Individual tests provide more nuanced information about the subject, such as responses to frustration or perceived failure.

  • Group tests are generally more cost-efficient and can be applied in broader contexts including education and military settings.

Advantages of Individual Tests

  • Detailed Insights:

    • Individual tests can reveal how a person responds to challenges, including frustration or failure experiences.

  • Internal Norms Development:

    • Experienced examiners have the ability to create “internal norms” based on the individual’s past performance.

  • Information Beyond Interviews:

    • Individual tests can provide valuable insights that might not emerge during an interview, especially with nonverbal communicators or those unable to express themselves verbally.

Advantages of Group Tests

  • Efficiency:

    • More cost-effective as they reduce the time needed for both administration and scoring.

  • Objectivity/Reliability:

    • Group tests tend to have higher objectivity and can be more reliable than individual tests due to standardized scoring methods.

  • Broad Applications:

    • Utilized across educational levels and in military and industrial settings for screening and selection processes, as well as mental and vocational assessments.

Characteristics of Group Tests

  • Formats:

    • Most commonly involve pencil (or booklet) and paper, with increasing prevalence of computerized testing.

  • Question Types:

    • Typically structured as multiple-choice questions.

    • Can be verbal, nonverbal, or a combination of both.

    • Often group similar question types together for scoring purposes.

Cautions When Using Group Tests

  • Score Interpretation Caution:

    • Scores should never be evaluated in isolation or perceived as absolute measures of ability.

  • Low Scores Skepticism:

    • Be cautious of low scores; verify the accuracy of assumptions regarding subjects.

  • Discrepancy Signals:

    • Significant discrepancies in scores should be viewed as warning signals prompting further investigation.

  • Professional Referral Encouraged:

    • When in doubt about the interpretation of results, it is advisable to refer to a qualified professional who can explore the results more comprehensively.

Group Tests in Education: Kindergarten Through 12th Grade

Types of Tests

Achievement Tests vs. Aptitude Tests

Achievement Tests

Aptitude Tests

1. Evaluate known sets of experiences

1. Evaluate unknown/uncontrolled sets

2. Measure course training effects

2. Measure potential profit from training

3. Heavy reliance on content validation

3. Rely on predictive criterion validation

Stanford Achievement Test

  • Purpose: Measures K-12 student achievement across various subjects.

  • Subtests Include:

    • Spelling

    • Reading comprehension

    • Word skills

    • Language arts

    • Social studies

    • Science

    • Mathematics

    • Listening comprehension

  • Norms: Excellent norming procedures; it is a criterion-referenced test.

Test Performance Reporting

Example: Stanford Achievement Test Report

  • Format:

    • Includes performance comparisons to national peers.

  • Percentile Bands:

    • For instance, a student in the 70th percentile performed as well as or better than 70% of students nationally in that subject.

Individual Subtest Analysis for “Julius”

  • Mathematics:

    • Assesses problem-solving skills and fluency with arithmetic operations.

    • Performance indicates a need for improvement as the score is in the Below Average range.

  • Language:

    • Measures writing mechanics and effectiveness. The score is also in the Below Average range, indicating the need for supportive activities.

  • Spelling:

    • Positive performance (Above Average), emphasizing the use of phonetic principles.

  • Science:

    • Below Average score; suggested activities to enhance interest include hands-on experiments.

  • Social Studies:

    • Performance in the Below Average range; reading maps and discussing current events is encouraged.

Metropolitan Achievement Test (MAT)

  • Focus Areas:

    • Reading: Vocabulary, word recognition, and comprehension.

    • Mathematics: Number concepts, computation, and problem-solving.

    • Spelling: Dictation and grammar skills.

    • Science: Measures knowledge across life sciences and physical sciences.

    • Social Studies: Covers geography, history, economics, and political science.

  • Norming: Sample stratified by school size, affiliation, and socioeconomic status.

  • Reliability Coefficients: Ranges from .90 to .96, indicating strong reliability.

  • Alternate Versions: Available in Braille, large print, and audio formats.

Kuhlmann-Anderson Test (KAT)

  • Overview: Group intelligence test for K-12 levels.

  • Characteristics:

    • Primarily nonverbal testing, especially at lower levels.

    • Designed to be accessible for individuals with physical disabilities and non-native English speakers (though still requires exploration).

    • Output includes verbal, quantitative, and total scores.

    • Results are expressed in percentile bands or deviation IQs akin to confidence intervals.

  • Psychometric Properties: Excellent standardization and testing principles employed.

Henmon-Nelson Test (H-NT)

  • Scope: Suitable for all grade levels.

  • Output: Produces a single score with two sets of norms based on age or grade distribution of raw scores.

  • Administration Time: Takes about 30 minutes to complete 90 items.

  • Reliability: High reliability statistics; however, its validity is reduced for specific populations as it utilizes a one-dimensional model of intelligence.

Cognitive Abilities Test (COGAT) Form 7

  • Purpose: Measures fluid intelligence, providing three scores—verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal.

  • Reliability: Estimates range from low to high .90’s.

  • Bias Prevention: Special precautions were taken to guard against bias in test design.

  • Predictive Power: Good predictor of giftedness, future academic performance, and verbal underachievement.

College Entrance Tests

The New (2016) SAT

  • History: In use since 1926, noted for fluctuating norm levels across editions.

  • Structure: Comprises verbal and mathematical components, includes an optional essay.

  • Critique: Although it increased average scores after renorming in 1994, it has not addressed inherent biases favoring certain demographic groups.

The American College Test (ACT)

  • Updates: Most recent in 2005; particularly beneficial for non-native English speakers.

  • Scoring Range: Scores span from 1 to 36, averaging 16 among high school students and 19 among college aspirants.

  • Correlational Validity: Effective correlation with SAT scores, both serving as predictors of college GPA when considered alongside high school GPA.

Graduate and Professional School Entrance Tests

Graduate Record Examination Aptitude Test (GRE)

  • Usage: Key assessment for graduate school admission.

  • Components: Verbal and quantitative sections; norms have means of 500 with standard deviations of 100.

  • Critique: Adequate psychometric properties but less impressive than SAT, with moderate correlations to GPA in various studies.

Limitations of GRE

  • Moderate predictive correlation with GPA, some studies report negative correlations.

  • Overestimates younger student's future achievement, while underestimating that of older students.

Miller Analogies Test

  • Objective: Assess scholastic aptitude using a verbal format.

  • Test Structure: Involves discerning logical relationships of escalating difficulty levels.

  • Correlation: Shows good correlation with GRE, though predictive validity can vary, especially by age group.

Law School Admission Test (LSAT)

  • Function: Evaluates candidates for professional law degree programs.

  • Format: Incorporates time pressures and includes three problem types—reading comprehension, logical reasoning, and analytical reasoning.

  • Bias Concerns: Remains an area of discussion due to potential biases in grading and admissions practices.

Nonverbal Group Ability Tests

Raven Progressive Matrices

  • Nature: Renowned nonverbal assessment tool identifying missing components of logical patterns through 60 items of escalating complexity.

  • Impact: Strong psychometric capabilities, particularly beneficial for diverse cultural backgrounds and populations with non-traditional experiences.

Goodenough-Harris Drawing Test (G-HDT)

  • Task: Participants are asked to draw a whole person; scoring is reliant on the drawing's components.

  • Applicability: Easily administered, cost-effective, and relevant for younger test subjects, often incorporated in testing batteries.

The Culture Fair Intelligence Test

  • Discussion: An attempt to measure intelligence across cultural groups uniformly, despite differing emphases placed by cultures on distinct knowledge areas.

  • Popularity vs. Efficacy: Although popular for its intent, its effectiveness compared to other tests is debated; psychometric properties vary based on age group.

Standardized Tests in U.S. Civil Service System

General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB)

  • Description: Assesses various skills from general intelligence to manual dexterity.

  • History: First standardized in 1952, but may require revisions to remain current.

  • Norming Practice: Previously utilized within-group norming, which compared Black Americans only with one another, a method deemed illegal today.

Standardized Tests in the U.S. Military

Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)

  • Administration: Over one million candidates tested annually.

  • Target Group: Primarily designed for junior and senior high school students, as well as those who have graduated.

  • Components: Comprises 10 subtests spanning general science to electronics information, producing three academic composites, four occupational composites, and an overall composite score indicating strong psychometric quality.

  • Testing Format: Now conducted in an adaptive computer-based format for enhanced versatility.