[IPAC-List] Asking assistance for on-line cognitive testing

[Anthony Boyce]

Hello Harry,

A more efficient alternative to parallel forms may be a computerized adaptive test (CAT), followed by a proctored verification test (V-CAT) directly linked to the candidate's unproctored test.  CAT and V-CAT provide the specific advantages of a shorter test during the unproctored administration, a shorter test for verification, and a specific hypothesis test of whether the candidate testing in the proctored setting has the same ability level as the candidate completing the test in the unproctored setting (though I suppose you could construct this type of hypothesis test with parallel forms as well).  

A couple large firms have this capability off-the-shelf (e.g., Aon Hewitt and SHL), and I believe some smaller firms are beginning to develop it as well.

--Tony

Anthony S. Boyce, Ph.D.  |  Senior Consultant
Aon Hewitt  |  Talent & Rewards
1120 20th Street NW  |  Suite 600  |  Washington, DC 20036
m +1.810.908.9129  |  f +1.847.953.0607
anthony.boyce at aonhewitt.com  |  aonhewitt.com

Aon is the Principal Sponsor of Manchester United.



-----Original Message-----
From: Harry.Brull at pdinh.com [mailto:Harry.Brull at pdinh.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 1:17 AM
To: IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
Subject: [IPAC-List] Asking assistance for on-line cognitive testing

And in-person follow-up/verification.
A client wants to do basic skills/cognitive testing for railroad police.
They want to initially test on-line and then bring continuing candidates in for re-testing under proctored conditions;

I would think the ideal solution would be parallel form exams.
Question: Does anyone know of a publisher/vendor who offers this?

Thanks in advance,
Harry Brull

------------------------------------------------
Harry Brull | Senior Vice-President

1.612.414.8998 direct

Harry.brull at pdinh.com

PDI Ninth House
Global Leadership Solutions

8157 Buck Run
Salida, CO 81201
Visit our new website! www.pdinh.com

https://www.facebook.com/PDINinthHouse
http://twitter.com/pdininthhouse
http://www.linkedin.com/company/pdi

-----Original Message-----
From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org
[mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org] On Behalf Of Jamie Madigan
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 11:13 AM
To: IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
Subject: [IPAC-List] Goals for "proficiency" in a competency?

Looking for some perspectives and benchmarks related to the use of competency models. My agency has set the (perhaps lofty) goal of ensuring that "95% of its employees have the competencies needed to successfully perform this job." This is a long-term goal that was set before my time, and I'm wondering if it's a bit extraordinary to expect that 95% of employees be proficient in all job related competencies. 
 
I was wondering if there was research or if other agencies/organizations could tell what their goals in this area are and how they were set long range.
 
 
Jamie Madigan
Jamie.Madigan at nara.gov
314-801-0878

Confidentiality Notice: All information in this communication, including any files or attachments, is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or trade secret information entitled to protection and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by return email and delete this communication from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.