1. Review of AERA/APA/NCME Test Standards Revision
Barbara S. Plake
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Co-Chair, Committee for Revision of Test Standards

2. Joint Committee Members
Lauress Wise, Co Chair
Barbara Plake, Co Chair
Linda Cook, ETS
Fritz Drasgow, University of Illinois
Brian Gong, NCIEA
Laura Hamilton, Rand Corporation
Jo-Ida Hansen, University on MN
Joan Herman, UCLA
Michael Kane, Bar Examiners

3. Joint Committee Members
Michael Kolen, University of Iowa
Antonio Puente, UNC-Wilmington
Paul Sackett, University of MN
Nancy Tippins, Valtera Corporation
Walter (Denny) Way, Pearson
Frank Worrell, Univ of CA- Berkeley

4. Scope of Revision
Based on comments each organization received from invitation to comment
Summarized by the Management Committee in consultation with the Co-Chairs
Wayne Camara, Chair, APA
Suzanne Lane, AERA
David Frisbie, NCME

5. Four Substantive Areas for Revisions
Technology
Accountability
Workplace
Access
Plus attention to format issues

6. Theme Teams Working teams Cross team collaborations Chapter Leaders
Focusing of bringing into chapters content related to themes in coherent and meaningful ways

7. Presentation: Four Substantive Areas
Access – Linda Cook
Accountability – Brian Gong
Technology – Denny Way
Workplace – Laurie Wise

8. Format Issues Organization of Chapters
Consideration of ways to identify of “Priority Standards”
More parallelism between chapter
Tone
Complexity
Technical language

9. Timeline First meeting January, 2009
Three year process for completing text of revision
Open comment/Organization reviews
Projected publication Summer, 2012

10. Revising our Test Standards: Access for All Examinee Populations
Presentation to the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association
San Diego, CA
Linda Cook, ETS

11. Overview
Standards related to Access appear throughout many of the chapters but are concentrated in
Chapter 9: Testing Individuals of Diverse Linguistic Backgrounds
Chapter 10: Testing Individuals with Disabilities
Comments on Access were received by the management committee and summarized for the committee charge

12. Elements of the Charge
Five of the elements of the charge focused on accommodations/modifications
Impact/differentiation of accommodation and modification
Appropriateness for ELL and EWD
Appropriateness for variety of groups, e.g., pre-K, older populations
Flagging
Comparability/validity
One element focused on adequacy and comparability of translations
One element focused on Universal Design

13. Key Access Issues Included in our Charge - 1
Impact/differentiation of accommodations/modifications
Appropriate ways to determine or establish the impact of accommodations/modifications on inferences, interpretations, uses of scores
How do you differentiate clearly between what is an accommodation and what is a modification?

14. Key Access Issues Included in our Charge - 2
Appropriateness of accommodations for English-language learners and examinees with disabilities
Selecting the appropriate accommodation for the individual
Who should select the accommodation?
What evidence should the selection be based on?
Administering the appropriate accommodation
What evidence is available to determine impact on test scores, given purpose of the test?
how effective is the accommodation?
Alternative assessments/modified achievement standards

15. Key Access Issues Included in our Charge - 3
Appropriateness of accommodations for a wider variety of groups
Pre-K
Older populations
Number of older adults with cognitive impairments is rising
Tested to determine mental status changes
There are many complexities associated with testing this population
Combined effects of medical problems, medication side effects, multiple sensory deficits, testing environment

16. Key Access Issues Included in our Charge - 4
Flagging
Current treatment needs to be updated to reflect changes in practice since 1999 standards
Most testing organizations no longer flag
Decisions about flagging should be based on empirical evidence

17. Key Access Issues Included in our Charge - 5
Comparability and validity of inferences made based on scores from accommodated or modified tests
Foundational issues such as comparability and validity need to be addressed in foundational chapters
If sample sizes do not support analyses such as DIF, other evidence of validity should be pursued

18. Key Access Issues Included in our Charge - 6
Adequacy and comparability of translations (language to language and language to symbol, e.g., Braille)
Evidence needed to demonstrate adequacy of translation and comparability of scores from translated tests
Fluency, rather than primary language should be used to describe target population for a test
Quality of translation/adaptation needs to be emphasized
Interaction of language proficiency and construct needs to be considered

19. Key Access Issues Included in our Charge - 7
Universal Design
1999 Standards focus too much on accommodations and modifications and not enough on building accessibility features into design and development process

20. Revising our Test Standards: Issues for Accountability
Presentation to the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association
San Diego, CA
Brian Gong, Center for Assessment

21. Overview
There has been a dramatic expansion of the use of tests for various forms of accountability and other uses related to educational policy-setting.
The Joint Committee has been charged with considering how these uses in accountability should impact revisions to the Standards
As with the other themes, comments on the standards that related to accountability were compiled by the Management Committee and summarized in their charge to the Joint Committee

22. Overview
Standards related to accountability currently appear throughout; accountability also is especially relevant to Chapter 13 (Educational Testing and Assessment) and Chapter 15 (Testing in Program Evaluation and Public Policy)
Under No Child Left Behind, there has been a dramatic increase in the use of tests for accountability. In such cases, test results have important consequences for third parties such as school administrators and teachers, although not always for the examinees themselves.
Federal peer review procedures have required assurances of reliability and validity that often go beyond requirements of the current Test Standards. Attention to the overall technical quality of tests and score interpretation is required. High school tests are used as a graduation requirement and there have been questions about how the current Standards should be interpreted in these cases. In general, the validity and reliability of individual and aggregated scores used for accountability purposes need to be addressed.

23. Key Accountability Topics Included in our Charge
Validity and reliability requirements
Issues with scores, scaling, and equating
Policy and practice
Formative and interim assessments

24. 1. Validity and Reliability Requirements
Use of a single test (whether or not scores resulting from retesting or repeat testing are sufficient for using more than one score for high stakes decisions) as the sole source of high stakes decisions (e.g., graduation, promotion).
How test alignment studies should be documented and used to demonstrate the validity of score interpretations regarding mastery of required content standards.

25. 1. Validity, Reliability, and Reporting Requirements - continued
Provide additional guidance on score accuracy, especially when used to classify individuals or groups into performance regions or other bands on a score scale.
Validity and reliability requirements for reporting individual or aggregate performance on subscales (skills or diagnostics) and for instructing users in appropriate interpretations of such scores or data (e.g., as they impact between or within student and school comparisons, validity considerations in subscore interpretation).
Incorporating error estimates and interpretive guidance in score reports, including subscores and diagnostic reporting for individuals and groups.

26. 2. Issues with Scores, Scaling, and Equating
Growth modeling, gain scores, and other methods of estimating aggregated performance or growth based on individual or school/district performance and characteristics.
Issues or requirements when linking assessments (e.g., concordances, linkages and equating)

27. 3. Policy and Practice
How to balance privacy concerns for individual examinees, teachers, and administrators while meeting information needs for policy-makers.
Issues related to the appropriate role of practice and test preparation, especially in contrast to admissions testing or credentialing.

28. 4. Addressing formative and interim assessments
Distinguishing among commercial formative and benchmark assessments (as well as item banks), their appropriate uses, and validation evidence required in interpreting scores from them.

29. Revising our Test Standards: Technological Advances
Presentation to the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association
San Diego, CA
Denny Way, Pearson

30. Overview
Technological advances are changing the way tests are delivered, scored, interpreted and in some cases, the nature of the tests themselves
The Joint Committee has been charged with considering how technological advances should impact revisions to the Standards
As with the other themes, comments on the standards that related to technology were compiled by the Management Committee and summarized in their charge to the Joint Committee

31. Key Technology Issues Included in our Charge
Reliability & validity of innovative item formats
Validity issues associated with the use of:
Automated scoring algorithms
Automated score reports and interpretations
Security issues for tests delivered over the internet
Issues with web-accessible data, including data warehousing

32. Resources for Consideration
Guidelines for Computer-Based Testing, Copyright 2002 Association of Test Publishers (ATP)
International Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet Delivered Testing, Copyright 2005 International Test Commission (ITC)

33. Reliability & Validity of Innovative Item Formats
What special issues exist for innovative items with respect to access and elimination of bias against particular groups? How might the standards reflect these issues?
What steps should the standards suggest with regards to “usability” of innovative items?
What issues will emerge over the next five years related to innovative items/test formats that need to be addressed by the standards?

34. Automated Scoring Algorithms
What level of documentation/disclosure is appropriate and tolerable for automated scoring developers/vendors?
What sorts of evidence seem most important for demonstrating the validity and “reliability” of automated scoring systems?
What issues will emerge over the next five years related to automated scoring systems that need to be addressed by the standards?

35. Automated Score Reports and Interpretation
Use of computer for score interpretation
“Actionable” reports (e.g., routing students and teachers to instructional materials and lesson plans based on test results)

36. Security issues for tests delivered over the internet
Two aspects of this topic are of concern:
protecting privacy and threats to validity due to breach of security.
Protecting examinee privacy
Considerations likely to affect standards related to test administration and responsibilities of test users

37. Web-Accessible Data, including Data Warehousing
Applicability of general technology standards?
Security
Interoperability
Revision to commentary vs. drafting additional standards

38. Revising our Test Standards: Issues for Work-Place Testing
Presentation to the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association
San Diego, CA
Laurie Wise, HumRRO

39. Overview
Standards for testing in the work place are currently covered in Chapter 14 (one of the testing application chapters)
Work-place testing includes employment testing as well as licensure, certification, and promotion testing.
Comments on standards related to work place testing were received by the Management Committee and summarized in their charge to the Joint Committee.

40. Key Work-Place Testing Issues Included in our Charge
Validity and reliability requirements for certification, licensure, and promotion tests.
Issues when tests are administered only to small populations of job incumbents.
Requirements for tests for new, innovative job positions that do not have incumbents or job history to provide validity evidence.
Assuring access to licensure, certification, and promotion tests for examinees with disabilities that may limit participation in regular testing sessions?
Differential requirements for certification and licensure and employment tests.

41. 1. Validity and Reliability Requirements
Some specific issues:
Documenting and communicating the validity and reliability of pass-fail decisions in addition to the underlying scores
How cut-offs are determined
How validity and reliability information is communicated to relevant stakeholders

42. 2. Issues with Small Examinee Populations
Including:
Alternatives to statistical tools for item screening
Assuring fairness
Assuring technical accuracy
Alternatives to empirical validity evidence
Maintaining comparability of scores from different test forms

43. 3. Requirements for New Jobs
Issues include:
Identifying test content
Establishing passing scores
Assessing reliability
Demonstrating validity

44. 4. Assuring Access to Employment Testing
See also separate presentation on fairness
Issues include:
Determining appropriate versus inappropriate accommodations
Relating testing accommodations to accommodations available in the work place

45. 5. Certification and Licensure versus Employment Testing
Currently, two sections in the same chapter
Examples of relevant issues:
Differences in how test content is identified and validated
Differences in test score use
Who oversees testing:
Private company versus professional board/organization