[IPAC-List] Norms

[Patrick McCoy]

Based on what i have heard, it would seem reasonable to run the
analyses each way, and if the results are similar, the approach does not
matter much.   If the results do vary, however, it will be necessary to
make a decision on the approach to use.
 Since the purpose of the analyses is to produce norms that will
provide a rough indication of how test takers might  fare, the approach
based on most recent score or the average of the scores seems to make
the most sense.  One of the reasons underlying my thinking is that the
test takers in a process/competition will not all be first timers. 
Consequently, using only first scores would be misleading.  Also, the
re-test interval is six months or more, so there could be some real
changes in the ability.
I’m not sure what I would do if the purpose were to look at adverse
impact, however, or to determine validity.  Luckily that’s not the
focus. Phew!!
Thank you to everyone for your thoughtful responses.
Pat McCoy
Ottawa Canada



>>> "Patrick McCoy" <Patrick.McCoy at psc-cfp.gc.ca> 2014/01/08 12:49 PM

>>>

I am currently running off some normative data on a test (means and
frequency distributions) to see how people are doing on it and to see
what proportion pass at various cutoff scores.
 
My question concerns how to handle the issue of candidates taking the
same test more than once.  One option would be to use only the first
test score.  Another would be to use all scores.  A third option would
be to use only the most recent score.
 
My tendency would be to use the most recent score or all scores, and I
suspect that the results from these two approaches will be quite similar
in most instances.  Does that make sense or am I missing something?
 
Your thinking on this would be appreciated!
 
 
Pat McCoy
Ottawa Canada
 
 
 


> 

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not
authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this
e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete
the message and any copies. 

> 

Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en
titre et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou
soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute
divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est
interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes
pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu
par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et
supprimer le courriel et les copies. 


>

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not
authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this
e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete
the message and any copies.
 >
Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en titre
et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou
soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute
divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est
interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes
pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu
par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et
supprimer le courriel et les copies.      

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://nine.pairlist.net/pipermail/ipac-list/attachments/20140108/39199257/attachment.html