[IPAC-List] Rescaling exam scores

Dennis Doverspike dennisdoverspike at gmail.com
Mon Oct 5 17:59:20 EDT 2015


I an unclear why the distribution of scores would make much of a difference
or why you would think standardization would make that much of a
difference.  Unless you use normalized z scores, standardization is an
interval rescaling, and thus would do very little to change the underlying

Now, standardizing and then converting to say a mean of 70 and SD of 10,
would mean the weight assigned to veteran's preference would be pretty
consistent over test administrations.  However, if your raw scores already
use a cutoff of 70 and a maximum score of 100, then I would not think that
standardizing scores would make that much of a difference in the equality
of weights across test administrations.

So maybe I misunderstand what you are doing or trying to accomplish.

Standardization can be easily accomplished using most statistical packages
or excel, and it does have some benefits. But I am not sure that it will
achieve what you want it to accomplish in terms of the weights allocated to
veteran's status.


On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Partain, Steven C. <Steven.Partain at tvfr.com>

> Our agency has recognized the variation of impact of veterans’ preference
> (for our state: 5 points for veterans and 10 points for disabled veterans)
> on civil service exams depending on the distribution of scores.  I’m toying
> with the idea of rescaling all exam scores to standardize distributions and
> thus standardize the impact of preference.  My statistical background,
> unfortunately, is a few decades stale.
> Does anyone have experience with this sort of rescaling?  I’ll eventually
> figure it out with my google research, but thought maybe one of you does
> this routinely and has a suggested method/formula.
> I’m also interested in any feedback on the concept as it relates to
> preference.
> Thanks,
> *____________________________________________________*
> *Steven Partain | HR Manager*
> Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue
> Direct: 503-259-1292
> www.tvfr.com
> _______________________________________________________
> IPAC-List
> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list

Dennis Doverspike, PhD., ABPP
Licensed Psychologist, #3539 (OHIO)
Independent Consultant
Professor of Psychology, University of Akron
dennisdoverspike at gmail.com

The information is intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain confidential, privileged and/or a work product
for the sole use of the intended recipient. No confidentiality or privilege
is waived or lost by any errant transmission. If you receive this message
in error, please destroy all copies of it and notify the sender. If the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. In the case of E-mail or electronic
transmission, immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system
and notify the sender. E-mail and fax transmission cannot be guaranteed to
be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted,
lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist9.pair.net/pipermail/ipac-list/attachments/20151005/693fa10d/attachment.html>

More information about the IPAC-List mailing list