Re: Criterion-referenced tests and arguments against state testing

[George Cunningham <gkc@LOUISVILLE.EDU>]

Rick,

I am flattered that you created a web-site devoted to me in order to
establish that there have been differences of opinion about the meaning of
measurement terms over the years.  I don't usually respond to any of your
posts because they are generally incomprehensible.  I have a hard and fast
rule of never responding to Victor even though he seems to spend an
inordinate amount of time dissecting what I write.  He seems to have some
sort of anger issues which he apparently feels he can work out by attacking
people on this list.  I will continue to respond to polite questions about
measurement issues, an area where I believe I have something to contribute.
Anyone who doesn't care for my analysis is, as always,  free to make liberal
use of their delete key.

George K. Cunningham
University of Louisville

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List
> [mailto:ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU]On Behalf Of Rick Parkany
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 7:12 PM
> To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Criterion-referenced tests and arguments against state
> testing
>
>
> Victor:    I'm with you on this one. It seems to me, and
> according to one of the
> better texts I've found on the topic, that this whole business of George
> Cunningham's inability to see the points we are making is, once
> again, due to his
> quite rigid and inflexible pigeon holing behaviors and an
> inexplicable tendency
> to be preoccupied with taxonomies rather than process/content.
>
> Let's see. Now, I certainly don't consider myself to be an
> expert--not on this
> august list, at any rate (ahem...). But, I have spent time
> inquiring concerning
> these testing protocols in my long and tortuous career as an
> educator, program
> designer/developer, and teacher of learners (Cradle-Grave) and
> teachers, alike...
>
> ...instead of engaging the fray, once more w/my own ideas (I'm
> laying low while
> Ken recovers and abstains in solidarity w/his struggles and
> pains...and my own:
> that of being continually misread by him...), I'd rather just
> share this WEB site
> I developed to make my point w/George and to suggest to Victor
> that this summary
> of mine will do, as well, to counter his points.
>
> The Relationship between Criterion, Domain-Referenced and Norm-Referenced
> Testing:
> http://www.borg.com/~rparkany/Standards/DRT/DomainReferencedTesting.html
>
> BTW:     Victor, could you summarize your points in a paragraph
> or two? *My brain
> hurts* and seems *to be full right now* (after Monty Python) and
> the major points
> were hard to locate...    ;-} rap.
>
> Ref:
> Anastasi, Anne & Urbina, Susana (1997). Psychological Testing.
> 7th ed. (pp.
> 76ff.)
>
> Victor Steinbok wrote:
>
> > Earlier I posted most of the quotations and comments below under a
> > reply to George C on another thread. I received a request to re-post
> > them under a more appropriate title and without the personal junk.
> >
> > After searching through several books, I have found no references to
> > the distinction between the criterion-referenced tests (CRT) and
> > standards-based tests (SBT) as George Cunningham has described them
> > in several earlier posts (with some help from Art Burke).
> > Furthermore, I have found the labels to be far more flexible than
> > George claimed.
> >
> > Walt Haney has recently released a paper that suggests that item
> > selection on MCAS resembles that of an NRT far closer than a pure CRT
> > (or SBT, for that matter), as items are included based on their
> > discrimination value rather than their content validity. This seems
> > to directly contradict the claim George made last month.
> >
> > At 10:48 AM -0500 1/29/02, George Cunningham wrote:
> > >There is no way that criterion- and norm-referenced assessments can be
> > >combined.  If they are combined you don't have criterion-referenced
> > >assessment.
> > >
> > >The main difference between standards based and
> norm-referenced assessment
> > >is how the cut-scores are set.  If they are set without any
> consideration of
> > >the resulting pass-rates they are standards-based.  If the
> cut-scores are
> > >set based on their expected impact on pass rates they are norm
> referenced.
> > >Massachusetts and Virginia are states that come closest to being
> > >standards-based.  Texas is the best example of norm-referenced standard
> > >setting.
>
> ...SNIP...--
> "Dein Wachstum sei feste und lache vor Lust!
> Deines Herzens Trefflichkeit
> Hat dir selbst das Feld bereit',
> Auf dem du bluehen musst." JS Bach: Bauern Kantata
> Richard A. Parkany: SUNY@Albany
> Prometheus Educational Services
> http://www.borg.com/~rparkany/
> Upper Hudson & Mohawk Valleys; New York State, USA
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
> to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.