Norms[1]

A norm-referenced test / NRT is a type of test , assessment , or evaluation which yields an estimate of the position of the tested individual in a predefined population, with respect to the trait being measured. This estimate is derived from the analysis of test scores and possibly other relevant data from a sample drawn from the population. The term normative assessment refers to the process of comparing one test-taker to his or her peers .Norm-referenced assessment can be contrasted with criterion-referenced assessment and ipsative assessment .

In contrast, norm-referenced tests (NRTs) are made to compare test takers to each other. On an NRT driving test, test-takers would be compared as to who knew most or least about driving rules or who drove better or worse. Scores would be reported as a percentage rank with half scoring above and half below the mid-point (see NRT fact sheet).

Criterion-referenced tests (CRTs) are intended to measure how well a person has learned a specific body of knowledge and skills. Multiple-choice tests most people take to get a driver's license and on-the-road driving tests are both examples of criterion-referenced tests. As on most other CRTs, it is possible for everyone to earn a passing score if they know about driving rules and if they drive reasonably well

By contrast, a test is criterion-referenced when provision is made for translating the test score into a statement about the behavior to be expected of a person with that score. The same test can be used in both ways. Robert Glaser originally coined the terms norm-referenced test and criterion-referenced test .

ipsative assessment which is assessment against yourself, or more particularly against your own "personal best" performance. It is more relevant to performance coaching, special needs education and therapy than to most mainstream teaching .

Standards-Referenced Tests A recent variation of criterion-referenced testing is "standards-referenced testing" or "standards based assessment." content standards (or "curriculum frameworks") which describe what students should know and be able to do in different subjects at various grade levels. performance standards that define how much of the content standards students should know to reach the "basic" or "proficient" or "advanced" level in the subject area. Tests are then based on the standards and the results are reported in terms of these "levels," which, of course, represent human judgement.

Norm-referenced tests compare people to each other. Criterion-referenced tests compare a person’s performance to a specified standard. Norm-referenced tests are especially useful in selecting relatively high and low members of a group. Criterion-referenced tests are useful in specifying those who meet or fail to meet a standard of performance. A good item on a norm-referenced test is one that some pass and some fail. An item that everybody (or most) passed would be eliminated from a norm-referenced test. On the other hand, on a criterion-referenced test being used to evaluate instruction, such an item might be very valuable.

Test Scores Tests are used to measure behavior. Measurement is a comparison procedure. In norm-reference testing, comparisons are made to the performance of other people. In criterion-referenced testing, comparisons are made with a standard of performance

A frequency distribution graphically depicts how many people received what scores on a test. The vertical axis on the graph shows the "how many" people, the horizontal axis shows the "what scores

statistics for describing the set of scores that make up a frequency distribution are the mean and the standard deviation.

The mean (M ) is an average. All of the scores (Xs) are summed and then divided by the number of scores (N). This tells us where the "middle" of the frequency distribution is. M = Sum Xs N

The standard deviation (SD) is a measure of the degree to which scores in a distribution deviate from the mean. It can be thought of as the average of the deviations from the mean The standard deviation tells us how far the scores in a distribution spread out from the mean on the average

The mean and the standard deviation of a distribution can be used to convert each score in the distribution to standard scores (SS) . The raw scores are expressed as a deviation from the mean, and then they are divided by the standard deviation. SS = x -M SD

The sign of a standard score tells you immediately whether the score is above or below the mean. Most raw scores will fall between +3 and -3 on a standard score scale. Standard scores provide one kind of "consistent frame of reference" for comparing scores of individuals within a distribution, and between distributions involving different measurements.

The most common approach to comparing scores in criterion-referenced testing is to compute the percent right . These scores tell how close one comes to meeting the objective the test was designed to measure

Standard scores discard the absolute level of performance in looking at score distributions. Percent right scores retain this information and are generally more informative when one is concerned with teaching mastery or competency

Norm Referenced Given a set of scores, a mean and standard deviation can be computed to describe the frequency distribution for those scores. The mean and standard deviation can then be used to express raw scores in standard score form. Standard scores readily tell where a score falls in a frequency distribution relative to other scores.

Criterion Referenced Given a set of scores, we can compute a mean and standard deviation, but it is unlikely that the latter would be used if computed. A frequency distribution can be plotted if desired. Standard scores would not be used. Instead, percent right scores would be computed to see how many students met a criterion of say 85 or 90 percent right

NORMS IN PSYCHOCLINCAL ASSESSMENT

two types of tests that are used to assess personality are projective and objective tests

derive their name from the psychoanalytic concept of projection , the mechanism whereby psychological states or processes in the self are seen as pertaining to an object in the outside world. Projection is most commonly regarded as a defence mechanism, a means whereby the ego protects itself from anxiety, associated with unpleasant or unacceptable thoughts and feelings, by attributing them to others.

This aspect of projection, however, is not part of the rationale of projective techniques, which can be used without necessarily accepting the tenets of psychoanalytic theory. A more helpful definition of projection in this context is the process whereby the individual 'projects' something of himself or herself into everything he or she does, in line with Gordon Allport's concept of expressive behaviour. The aim of projective techniques is, then, to provide stimuli or situations, to which variations in response may be interpreted in accordance with a set of rules.

In all of these, as well as in the Rorschach and the TAT, it is possible to achieve some measure of quantification of the data, and so to claim that measurement has taken place. Measurement, however, is not a primary concern of projective psychology, a fact reflected in the choice of the term 'techniques' rather than 'tests' in the title of this entry.

Interpretative hypotheses are, of course, attached to Rorschach variables, and to other projective 'indicators'. In some cases, as in the formulation of a set of 'signs' of brain damage, criteria for validation are available, and would appear, in that particular case, to have been met. In others, particularly when a form of response relates to experience rather than to behaviour, demonstration of validity presents more serious problems

In the cognate field of reliability, test–retest reliability presupposes personality to be static, and in statistical terms can be applied only to single-category scores, whereas the projective standpoint has always been that a protocol must be interpreted as a whole.

Projective tests involve questions that are open-ended and relatively unstructured which allows the person being tested to have more freedom to respond appropriately. Inkblot tests are a major example of projective tests. These tests are highly unstructured and the responses and outcomes can be determined and interpreted in various ways. Responses are scored based on what shape is seen on the inkblot as well as what pattern or theme is noticeable in the individual's choices

Objective tests are very different from projective tests. These tests are very structured questionnaires involving multiple choice and true or false questions. These tests are scored in a basic manner based on the assumption that people generally agree on the scores. These tests leave people very little freedom and choice when responding.

Because scoring is very straight-forward and each answer receives a certain amount of points based on a point scale, objective tests are a lot more valid and reliable than projective tests. However, a major downfall to objective tests is that people can lie and fake their answers. An individual could easily check off all of the desirable answers containing traits that they wish they had to make them look like a better person.

LlE SCALE FAKING GOOD FAKING BAD

In all of these projectives it is possible to achieve some measure of quantification of the data, and so to claim that measurement has taken place. Measurement, however, is not a primary concern of projective psychology, a fact reflected in the choice of the term 'techniques' rather than 'tests' in the title of this entry.

Attempts to make projective testing conform to psychometric standards have in general met with relatively little success; many projectivists indeed believe that such an aim is illusory. Projective techniques are properly regarded as an aid to, rather than an instrument of, diagnosis or other decision-making process . They may be found useful in counselling, in psychotherapy, particularly of the type known as client centred, and in some forms of personnel selection — in short, in any situation in which 'understanding' is regarded as relevant.

Though tens of thousands of Rorschach tests have been administered by hundreds of trained professionals since that time (of a previous review), and while many relationships to personality dynamics and behavior have been hypothesized, the vast majority of these relationships have never been validated empirically [ sic ], despite the appearance of more than 2,000 publications about the test

"More than 50 years of research have confirmed Lee J. Cronbach's (1970) final verdict: that some Rorschach scores, though falling woefully short of the claims made by proponents, nevertheless possess "validity greater than chance" (p. 636). [...] "Its value as a measure of thought disorder in schizophrenia research is well accepted. It is also used regularly in research on dependency, and, less often, in studies on hostility and anxiety. Furthermore, substantial evidence justifies the use of the Rorschach as a clinical measure of intelligence and thought disorder." [77]

Supporters of the Rorschach inkblot test believe that the subject's response to an ambiguous and meaningless stimulus can provide insight into their thought processes, but it is not clear how this occurs. Also, recent research shows that the blots are not entirely meaningless, and that a patient typically responds to meaningful as well as ambiguous aspects of the blo ts

Reber (1985) describes the blots as merely ".. the vehicle for the interaction .." between client and therapist, concluding: ".. the usefulness of the Rorschach will depend upon the sensitivity, empathy and insightfulness of the tester totally independently of the Rorschach itself.

" illusory correlation association between two events

"keeping psychological tests out of the public domain."

from a legal standpoint, the Rorschach test images have in fact been in the public domain for many years in most countries, particularly those with a copyright term of up to 70 years post mortem auctoris . They have been in the public domain in Hermann Rorschach's native Switzerland since at least 1992 (70 years after the author's death, or 50 years after the cut-off date of 1942), according to Swiss copyright law . [99][100] They are also in the public domain under United States copyright law [101][102] where all works published before 1923 are considered to be in the public domain. [

Controversy ensued in the psychological community in 2009 when the original Rorschach plates and research results on interpretations were published in the "Rorschach test" article on Wikipedia . [116] Hogrefe & Huber Publishing, a German company that sells editions of the plates, called the publication "unbelievably reckless and even cynical of Wikipedia" and said it was investigating the possibility of legal actiion

Norms[1]

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Norms[1] (20)

More from Milen Ramos (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Norms[1]