Norm Referenced And Criterion Referenced Measurement Pdf
File Name: norm referenced and criterion referenced measurement .zip
- Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Test in EFL Classroom
- Norm-Referenced Test
- Professional Testing, Inc
Criterion-referenced tests and assessments are designed to measure student performance against a fixed set of predetermined criteria or learning standards —i. In elementary and secondary education, criterion-referenced tests are used to evaluate whether students have learned a specific body of knowledge or acquired a specific skill set. For example, the curriculum taught in a course, academic program, or content area.
Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Test in EFL Classroom
The field of criterion-referenced testing has developed quickly since the first papers on the topic by Glaser and Popham and Husek Glaser, and later, Popham and Husek, were interested in assessment methods that could provide information on which to base a number of individual and programmatic decisions arising in connection with specific instructional objectives or competencies.
Norm-referenced tests were judged to be inappropriate because they provide information that facilitates comparisons among examinees on broad traits or constructs. These tests were not intended to measure specific objectives. And even if items in a norm-referenced test could be matched to objectives, typically there would be too few test items per objective to permit valid criterion-referenced test score interpretations.
Journal of Experimental Education , , 45 , 4—9. Google Scholar. Criterion-referenced measurement: The state of the art. Baltimore, Md. Journal of Educational Measurement , b, 17 , — CrossRef Google Scholar. Campbell, D. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Psychological Bulletin , , 56 , 81— Cox, R. A comparison of item selection techniques for norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago, Cronbach, L. Test validation. Thorndike Ed. Washington, D. Fitzpatrick, A. The meaning of content validity. Applied Psychological Measurement , , 7, 3— Glaser, R. Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcomes.
American Psychologist , , 18 , — Gray, W. A comparison of Piagetian theory and criterion-referenced measurement. Review of Educational Research , , 48 , — Haladyna, T.
The role of instructional sensitivity in the empirical review of criterion-referenced test items. Journal of Educational Measurement , , 18 , 39— Hambleton, R. Test score validity and standard-setting methods. Berk Ed. Advances in criterion-referenced testing technology. Gutkin Eds. New York: Wiley, Validating the test scores. Application of item response models to criterion-referenced test item selection. Journal of Educational Measurement , , 20 , — Guidelines for evaluating criterion-referenced tests and test manuals.
Journal of Educational Measurement , , 15 , — Toward an integration of theory and method for criterion-referenced tests. Journal of Educational Measurement , , 10 , — A framework for viewing the process of standard setting. Evaluation and the Health Professions , , 6 , 3— Criterion-referenced testing and measurement: A review of technical issues and developments. Review of Educational Research , , 48 , 1— Kane, M. The validity of licensure examinations. American Psychologist , , 37 , — Kirsch, I.
Construct validity of functional reading tests. Journal of Educational Measurement , , 17 , 81— Linn, R. Issues of validity in measurement for competency-based programs.
Sanders Eds. Issues of validity for criterion-referenced measures. Applied Psychological Measurement , , 4 , — Lord, F. Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, Mass.
Madaus, G. The courts, validity, and minimum competency testing. Boston, Mass. Messick, S. The standard problem: Meaning and values in measurement and evaluation. American Psychologist , , 30 , — Millman, J. Criterion-referenced measurement. Popham Ed. Berkeley, Calif. Popham, W. An approaching peril: Cloud referenced tests. Phi Delta Kappan , , 56 , — Englewood Cliffs, N.
Implications of criterion-referenced measurement. Journal of Educational Measurement , , 6 , 1—9. Roid, G. A technology for item writing.
New York: Academic Press, Rovinelli, R. On the use of content specialists in the assessment of criterion-referenced test item validity. Dutch Journal of Educational Research , , 2 , 49— Subkoviak, M. Estimating reliability for the single administration of a mastery test. Journal of Educational Measurement , , 13 , —
Without a frame of reference, a raw score by itself does not tell us how much a student knows or what he or she can or cannot do within a content area. A test score must be referenced or compared to something to give meaning to it. For example, a student receives a score of 88 on a test with no other information provided. There are four frames of references for interpreting test scores are explained: Ability, growth, norm, and criterion referenced interpretations. The table below summarizes the four types of frames of reference for interpreting test scores.
Patricia C. Montgomery, Barbara H. The purposes of this article are 1 to compare the similarities and differences between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests and 2 to summarize how each should be used in the assessment of developmental performance in children. Specific developmental assessments, the populations they address, and the information they provide are described briefly. The need for additional criterion-referenced tests in physical therapy is discussed, and an example of how task analysis can be applied to movement or motor skills in the development of a criterion-referenced test is provided.
Professional Testing, Inc
Norm-referenced refers to standardized tests that are designed to compare and rank test takers in relation to one another. Norm-referenced tests report whether test takers performed better or worse than a hypothetical average student, which is determined by comparing scores against the performance results of a statistically selected group of test takers, typically of the same age or grade level, who have already taken the exam. Test developers use a variety of statistical methods to select norming groups, interpret raw scores, and determine performance levels. Norm-referenced scores are generally reported as a percentage or percentile ranking. For example, a student who scores in the seventieth percentile performed as well or better than seventy percent of other test takers of the same age or grade level, and thirty percent of students performed better as determined by norming-group scores.
In this case, the objective is simply to see whether the student has learned the material. It is argued that the proper focus for content validity is on the items of a test rather than on examinee responses to those items. Although the Big Five has served as an impetus on the study of personality by industrial-organizational and personality psychologists, it seems fair to say that selection specialists have been somewhat disappointed in the criterion-related validity of the Big Five dimensions. These alternatives in-clude testing whether the latent variable correlations are significantly different from one another Milberg et al.