At times called a philosophy and other times called a process, cutting score methodology is an issue routinely encountered by Industrial/Organizational (I/0) psychologists. Published literature on cutting score methodology appears much more frequently in academic settings than it does in personnel settings where the potential for lawsuits typically occurs more often. With the passage of the 1991 Civil Rights Act, it is no longer legal to use within-group scoring. It has now become necessary for personnel psychologists to develop more acceptable selection methods that fall within established guidelines. Designating cutoff scores with the Angoff method appears to suit many requirements of personnel departments. Several procedures have evolved that suggest enhancing the accuracy and reliability of the Angoff method is possible. The current experiment investigated several such procedures, and found that rater accuracy methods significantly enhance cutoff score reliability and accuracy.

Large-scale assessment results for schools, school boards/districts, and entire provinces or states are commonly reported as the percentage of students achieving a standard – that is, the percentage of students scoring above the cut score that defines the standard on the assessment scale. Recent research has shown that this method of reporting is sensitive to small changes in the cut score, especially when comparing results across years or between groups. This study extends that work by investigating the effects of reporting group size on the stability of results. For each of ten group sizes, 1000 samples with replacement were drawn from the May 2009 Ontario Grade 6 Assessment of Reading, Writing and Mathematics. The results showed that for small group sizes – analogous to small schools – there is little confidence and that extreme caution must be taken when interpreting differences observed between years or groups.

Large-scale assessment results for schools, school boards/districts, and entire provinces or states are commonly reported as the percentage of students achieving a standard – that is, the percentage of students scoring above the cut score that defines the standard on the assessment scale. Recent research has shown that this method of reporting is sensitive to small changes in the cut score, especially when comparing results across years or between groups. This study extends that work by investigating the effects of reporting group size on the stability of results. For each of ten group sizes, 1000 samples with replacement were drawn from the May 2009 Ontario Grade 6 Assessment of Reading, Writing and Mathematics. The results showed that for small group sizes – analogous to small schools – there is little confidence and that extreme caution must be taken when interpreting differences observed between years or groups.