ANALYSIS OF FOURTH GRADE TESTING

Three hundred and ninety‐nine Grade 4 Brisbane children were given a battery o1 general ability and achievement tests. Means and standard deviations allowed construction of 15‐point scales for a Queensland Grade 4. A correlation matrix included indices concerning sub‐tests of general ability and achievement tests. Comparisons with original A.C.E.R. co‐efficients were made. The matrix was factor sub‐tests of general ability and achievement tests. Comparisons with analysed and rotated, three factors emerging ‐‐ verbal, performance and computational. A canonical correlation was performed and three significant elements emerged ‐‐ a verbal, a computational (or integrative or automatic sequential) and a problem‐solving element.     

IMPLICATIONS OF CRITERION-REFERENCED MEASUREMENT1,2

During the past several years measurement and instructional specialists have distinguished between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced approaches to measurement. More traditional, a norm-referenced measure is used to identify an individual's performance in relation to the performance of others on the same measure. A criterion-referenced test is used to identify an individual's status with respect to an established standard of performance. This discussion examines the implications of these two approaches to measurement, particularly criterion-referenced measurement, with respect to variability, item construction, reliability, validity, item analysis, reporting, and interpretation.