No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Problem. This study assessed the predictive validity of criterion-referenced tests in a military setting with cutoff scores set by the Angoff and conventional score-setting methods.;Procedure. Thirty-six instructors and thirty-six specialists assessed each test item for job relevance and the probability that a minimally competent person would answer each question correctly, resulting in a new test cutoff score. Intragroup variability and interrater reliability of judgments were calculated. Test predictive validity assessment compared classroom test scores, supervisory rating scores, and skill qualification test scores of 100 job performers based on the two score-setting methods. Sample sizes varied from 17 to 100. Behaviorally anchored rating scale was used to estimate soldier performance effectiveness. Hypotheses were tested using analysis of variance, a correlation procedure by Ebel, t-test, and Pearson Product-Moment correlation. Null was accepted or rejected at.05 level of significance.;Results. Findings follow: (1) intragroup variability and interrater reliability of judges' estimates were statistically significant; (2) strengths of correlation coefficients for classroom test scores (CTS) and supervisory rating scores (SRS) under Angoff method exceeded r values for scores under conventional method; (3) strength of correlation coefficient for CTS and skill qualification test (SQT) scores under conventional method exceeded r value for scores under Angoff method; (4) correlation coefficients for CTS and SRS were statistically significant for Angoff "accepts" but not for Angoff "rejects" in three of four job performance areas, and means of SRS of the two groups of job performers were significantly different; and (5) correlation coefficient for CTS and SQT scores was statistically significant for Angoff "accepts" but not for Angoff "rejects" and means of SQT scores of the two groups of job performers were significantly different.;Conclusions. The Angoff cutoff score-setting method provides an effective means for setting criterion-referenced test cutoff scores. The Angoff and present score setting methods yield significantly different test standards. The score derived by the empirical method is a better measure of minimum job requirements of an entry-level performer, thereby enhancing the predictive validity of the classroom test. Recommendations for future research are included.

This study investigated a method to compare the effect of verbal language disability on measures of intelligence of young handicapped children. The purpose was to discover whether differences exist in the measures of intelligence when the verbal language requirements of an intelligence test are systematically varied. Two standardized tests that vary in the verbal stimulus response requirements were administered to 102 children ages 2-10 years classified as special education students in Hampton, Virginia.;Children were grouped according to patterns of performance on these tests: (a) LIPS 8+ > MSCA, (b) LIPS (DBLTURN) MSCA, (c) MSCA 8+ > LIPS, where 8 = ('(+OR-))2 SEm (p < .05). A Pearson's Correlation Coefficient (r) was used to compare test results. The significance of the similarities and differences of the groups was tested using a Z statistic.;It was hypothesized that measures of intelligence of many young handicapped children are biased when testing procedures require verbal information processing. Results indicated that 65.6% of the handicapped population sampled had IQ scores that were greater then two standard errors of measurement and MA's that were 6-12 months higher on the Leiter than the McCarthy. Nineteen % of the sample had IQ scores and MA's that were approximately equal. Seven % had higher McCarthy GCI and MA's. The differences between the first two groups were significant at the .05 level z = 2.37.;The results indicated that verbal language disabilities significantly influenced intelligence test scores for many young handicapped children. In addition, the two tests, when used together, differentiated the children's information processing and learning styles. This data is directly applicable to teaching and remediation strategies.

No description available.