Description of Test

Name: Mathematics Competency Test Author(s): Vernon, P.E.; Miller, K.M.; Izard, J.F. Publisher: Australian Council for Educational Research Copyright Dates: 1995-1996 Kind of Test: Achievement (Mathematics) Level: Ages 11 to Adult Forms: None Number of Items: 46 Time Required: 40 minutes

Reliability

Types of Reliability: The test manual does not state which methods were used for calculating the reliability. Range of Reliability Coefficients: .65 (subscale) - .94 (total test) Level for Determining Reliability Figures: Test manual does not give these details. Number of cases for whom reliability is reported: 839 Range of Standard Errors of Measurement: .95 (subscale) – 2.55 (total test)

Validity

Content: Addressed by stating the content on the MCT is similar to other standardized Mathematics tests. Concurrent: A .80 correlation with the ACER Test of Employment Entry Mathematics Construct: No information about construct validity. Predictive: The test does not claim to be a predictor; it is simply an achievement exam. Face: No information about face validity.

General Summary

The MCT is a somewhat underdeveloped test created in the UK and Australia and published by the Australian Council for Education. Its purpose is to test students and adults and assess their mathematical achievement. However, there are several problems with this test. The size of the group used to norm the test is quite small (839), many of the reliability figures are lower than they should be, and the validity evidence is quite limited for this examination. The reviewer stated that the MCT cannot be recommended and that there are several other tests that provide much more accurate and reliable information. Description of Test

Name: Developing Cognitive Abilities Test Second Edition Author(s): Wick, John W.; Beggs, Donald L.; Mouw, John T. Publisher: American Testronics Copyright Dates: 1980-1991 Kind of Test: Intelligence (Scholastic Aptitude) Level: Grades 1-12 Forms: C-D, E, F, G, H, I-J, K, L Number of Items: 81 Time Required: 83-90 minutes (C-D); 60(70) minutes

Reliability

Types of Reliability: Does not say which types are used to calculate reliability. Range of reliability coefficients: .88 - .96 Level for determining reliability figures: Does not say which grade levels were used. Number of cases for whom reliability is reported: 300,000+ Range of Standard Errors of Measurement: None are given.

Validity

Content: The content is not based on curriculum but rather ties academic knowledge into Bloom’s Taxonomy to test a student’s knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, and synthesis of the material. Concurrent: This test when compared to the National Achievement Test has a correlation ranging from .70 to .85 Construct: The DCAT is based on the concept of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Predictive: Appears to be a good predictor of students’ future academic success. Face: No information provided.

General Summary

The DCAT was developed to measure the general cognitive ability or intelligence that contributes to academic performance and appears to do a good job of measuring what it claims to. The reviewer was excited about this test and said that it was a great test for finding a student’s strengths and weaknesses. However, he does state that the spatial ability section does not have a very solid correlation with other spatial ability exams and therefore does not measure the spatial abilities of the student very effectively. Unfortunately the DCAT has been out of print since 1999. Description of Test

Name: Multidimensional Aptitude Battery-II Author(s): Jackson, Douglas N. Publisher: Sigma Assessment Systems Inc. Copyright Date: 1984-1998 Kind of Test: Aptitude (General) Level: Ages 16 and over Forms: None Number of Items: 328 Time Required: 100 minutes

Reliability

Types of Reliability: Test-Retest, Split-Half Range of Reliability Coefficients: .70 - .96 (subscales); .96 - .98 (full test) Split-Half subscales: .67 - .90 Test-Retest: .83 - .97 (subscales); .97 (full test) Level for determining reliability figures: 15-20 years old Number of cases for whom reliability is reported: 515 Range of Standard Errors of Measurement: None reported

Validity

Content: Modeled after the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. Concurrent: Correlation between the MAB-II and the WAIS-R was used to provide concurrent validity. The correlation coefficients range from .44 to .89. Construct: No information given. Predictive: From the tests performed the reviewer indicated that the MAB-II is a good predictor of the general cognitive ability of an individual. Face: No information given.

General Summary

The MAB-II is designed to measure the general cognitive ability or intelligence of an individual. The reliability figures are solid after many types of reliability tests have been performed. The validity evidence seems somewhat sparse relying mostly on the fact that there is a fairly strong correlation between it and other general aptitude examinations. One of the great things about the MAB-II is that it is much easier to administer and score than many other general aptitude exams and still provides similar results to exams that require a trained professional to administer and score the exams. This makes the MAB-II a desirable testing choice for anyone looking for reliable and valid intelligence data but does not have the time or resources to have a trained professional come and administer the examination. Description of Test

Name: PLAN Author(s): American College Testing Publisher: American College Testing Copyright Date: 1989-1992 Kind of Test: Interest Level: 10th Grade Forms: None Number of Items: 60 (Interest Inventory) Time Required: 60-70 minutes (Interest Inventory and other student assessments)

Reliability

Types of Reliability: Does not specify which types were used to calculate reliability. Range of Reliability Coefficients: .61 - .88 Level for determining reliability figures: 8th, 10th, and 12th grades Number of cases for whom reliability is reported: 15,878 Range of Standard Errors of Measurement: 1.72 – 2.39

Validity

Content: The PLAN test was critical examined numerous times and the test material taken from general curriculums in the school systems. Also underwent a thorough review by teachers, specialists, and experts in the content field. Concurrent: There is a .56 - .71 correlation between the four subtests of the PLAN which is used to show that examinees who do well on one test tend to do well on another. Construct: No information given. Predictive: No information given. Face: No information given.

General Summary

The PLAN test is generally regarded as an achievement test; it does include an interest inventory as part of the package. The PLAN test consists of a pre-ACT examination, a Study Power Assessment, a Needs Assessment, and an Interest Inventory. The purpose of this test is to provide 10th grade students with a pretest for the ACT and also use that knowledge about their education and the knowledge provided by the interest inventory and other assessments to give the student information about themselves that can be helpful in selecting a college or a career path while still in high school. The test seems to be thoroughly backed by solid reliability and validity scores, however, it is still suggested that college-bound students gain much more from this than those who do not plan to attend college. Description of Test

Name: 16PF Adolescent Personality Questionnaire Author(s): Schuerger J.M. Publisher: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing Inc. Copyright Date: 2001 Kind of Test: Personality Level: Ages 11-22 Forms: None Number of Items: 205 Time Required: 54-65 minutes

Reliability

Types of Reliability: Test-Retest, Equivalent Form Range of reliability coefficients: .64 - .83 (equivalent form), .44 - .95 (test-retest) Level for determining reliability figures: 11-22 years old Number of cases for whom reliability is reported: 1,460 Range of standard errors of measurement: 2.00

Validity

Content: Much of the content is based on the 16PF test for adults and the High School Personality Questionnaire. Concurrent: Correlation between the APQ and the original 16PF was between .53 and . 81, compared to the HSPQ the correlation was between .17 and .74 Construct: No information given. Predictive: No information given. Face: No information given.

General Summary

The APQ is largely based on the 16PF Questionnaire and the High School Personality Questionnaire with 44% of the APQ questions coming from these two exams. The APQ is designed to measure normal personality of adolescents, problem-solving abilities, preferred work activities, and to identify problems in areas known to be problematic to adolescents. The APQ is also a good indicator of learning styles and the results are very helpful in developing an individualized education program. One critique is that the APQ could be more effective if they incorporated the more current version of Holland’s typology rather than the terms he used 30 years ago. Another is that much of the validation evidence is outdated and the validity should be tested again for the APQ.