This document discusses reliability and dependability in language testing. It defines reliability as the consistency of test results and notes that reliability is necessary but not sufficient for validity. The document discusses approaches to estimating reliability such as internal consistency and the standard error of measurement. It also discusses how reliability relates to validity and the importance of clearly defining the constructs being measured by a test. Overall, the document emphasizes that reliability and validity are important properties for ensuring language tests provide meaningful results for their intended purposes and contexts.
Validity in Psychological Testing refers to the test measure what it claims to measure. The presentation discusses categories in validating procedures such as construct identification, criterion prediction and content description in psychological testing.
What makes a good testA test is considered good” if the .docxmecklenburgstrelitzh
What makes a good test?
A test is considered “good” if the following can be said about it:
· The test measures what it claims to measure. For example, a test of mental ability does, in fact, measure mental ability and not some other characteristic.
· The test measures what it claims to measure consistently or reliably. This means that, if a person were to take the test again, the person would get a similar test score.
· The test is job-relevant. In other words, the test measures 1 or more characteristics that are important to the job.
· By using the test, more effective decisions can be made about individuals.
· The degree to which a test has these qualities is indicated by 2 technical properties: reliability and validity.
Test Reliability
Reliability refers to how consistently a test measures a characteristic. If a person takes the test again, will he or she get a similar test score or a much different score? A test that yields similar scores for a person who repeats the test is said to measure a characteristic reliably.
How do we account for an individual who does not get exactly the same test score every time he or she takes the test? Some possible reasons are the following:
· Test taker's temporary psychological or physical state. Test performance can be influenced by a person's psychological or physical state at the time of testing. For example, differing levels of anxiety, fatigue, or motivation may affect the applicant's test results (unsystematic error).
· Environmental factors. Differences in the testing environment, such as room temperature, lighting, noise, or even the test administrator can influence an individual's test performance (unsystematic error).
· Test form. Many tests have more than 1 version or form. Items differ on each form, but each form is supposed to measure the same thing. Different forms of a test are known as parallel forms or alternateforms. These forms are designed to have similar measurement characteristics, but they contain different items. Because the forms are not exactly the same, a test taker might do better on 1 form than on another.
· Multiple raters. In certain tests, scoring is determined by a rater’s judgments of the test taker’s performance or responses. Differences in training, experience, and frame of reference among raters can produce different test scores for the test taker.
These factors are sources of chance or random measurement error in the assessment process. If there were no random errors of measurement, the individual would get the same test score, the individual's “true” score, each time. The degree to which test scores are unaffected by measurement errors is an indication of the reliability of the test. But, while psychometrics can give you a lot of this information, it is important to ask the client about how they experienced the process of taking the test. This will allow you to detect any potential unsystematic errors.
When selecting an assessment, you want to remember that r.
Validity in Psychological Testing refers to the test measure what it claims to measure. The presentation discusses categories in validating procedures such as construct identification, criterion prediction and content description in psychological testing.
What makes a good testA test is considered good” if the .docxmecklenburgstrelitzh
What makes a good test?
A test is considered “good” if the following can be said about it:
· The test measures what it claims to measure. For example, a test of mental ability does, in fact, measure mental ability and not some other characteristic.
· The test measures what it claims to measure consistently or reliably. This means that, if a person were to take the test again, the person would get a similar test score.
· The test is job-relevant. In other words, the test measures 1 or more characteristics that are important to the job.
· By using the test, more effective decisions can be made about individuals.
· The degree to which a test has these qualities is indicated by 2 technical properties: reliability and validity.
Test Reliability
Reliability refers to how consistently a test measures a characteristic. If a person takes the test again, will he or she get a similar test score or a much different score? A test that yields similar scores for a person who repeats the test is said to measure a characteristic reliably.
How do we account for an individual who does not get exactly the same test score every time he or she takes the test? Some possible reasons are the following:
· Test taker's temporary psychological or physical state. Test performance can be influenced by a person's psychological or physical state at the time of testing. For example, differing levels of anxiety, fatigue, or motivation may affect the applicant's test results (unsystematic error).
· Environmental factors. Differences in the testing environment, such as room temperature, lighting, noise, or even the test administrator can influence an individual's test performance (unsystematic error).
· Test form. Many tests have more than 1 version or form. Items differ on each form, but each form is supposed to measure the same thing. Different forms of a test are known as parallel forms or alternateforms. These forms are designed to have similar measurement characteristics, but they contain different items. Because the forms are not exactly the same, a test taker might do better on 1 form than on another.
· Multiple raters. In certain tests, scoring is determined by a rater’s judgments of the test taker’s performance or responses. Differences in training, experience, and frame of reference among raters can produce different test scores for the test taker.
These factors are sources of chance or random measurement error in the assessment process. If there were no random errors of measurement, the individual would get the same test score, the individual's “true” score, each time. The degree to which test scores are unaffected by measurement errors is an indication of the reliability of the test. But, while psychometrics can give you a lot of this information, it is important to ask the client about how they experienced the process of taking the test. This will allow you to detect any potential unsystematic errors.
When selecting an assessment, you want to remember that r.
Topic: Qualities of a Good Test
Student Name: Amna Mishal
Class: B.Ed. (Hons) Elementary
Project Name: “Young Teachers' Professional Development (TPD)"
"Project Founder: Prof. Dr. Amjad Ali Arain
Faculty of Education, University of Sindh, Pakistan
Reliability refers to the consistency with which a test can be scored, that is, consistency from person to person, time to time or place to place .It means that tests are to be constructed, administered and scored in such a way that the scores obtained on a test on a particular occasion are likely to be very similar to those which would have been obtained if it had been administered with the same students with the same ability, but at a different time
Faith & ReasonFaith is not opposed to reason, but is sometime.docxmecklenburgstrelitzh
Faith & Reason
“Faith is not opposed to reason, but is sometimes opposed to feelings and appeareances.” Tim Keller
How do faith and reason coexist for the Christian disciple? Do faith and reason oppose each other, work together, or end up at the same end goal from completely unrelated paths?
In Ephesians ch. 4, Paul writes:
Ephesians 4:11-15 New King James Version (NKJV)
11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the [a]edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ—
Faith and knowledge /reason will always feed off one another as we grow in Christ.
Throughout the rest of this semester we will be discussing our faith and how we think through issues related and influenced by our faith.
Christian Reflections – Reflection paper 3-4 pages (1,050-1,400 words) APA format, include references.
To what extent is religious faith objective (i.e., based on reasons or evidence that should be obvious to others) and/or subjective (i.e., based on personal reasons that are not necessarily compelling to others)?
1) In what ways and to what extent do you believe that faith:
· Is derived from what we consider to be true and reasonable?
· Goes beyond what reason and evidence dictate?
· Goes against what is reasonable?
2) What is the role of feelings and emotions in religious faith?
· Does faith depend upon them?
· To what extent should they embraced or controlled?
1
Promoting Reliability
Both MacMillan and Dar (see below) provide suggestions on how promote reliability in classroom assessments. Doing the things mentioned
below can help control both external and internal sources of error which in turn helps bolster reliability of test scores.
McMillan’s (2006, p.51) suggestion on how to help bolster or promote reliability in the classroom assessments:
Motivated students to put forth their best efforts on assessment
Use sufficient number of items or tasks. A minimum of 5 items is needed to assess a single trait or skill
Construct items, scoring criteria, and tasks that clearly differentiate students on what is being assessed, and make the criteria
public
Make sure scoring procedures for constructed-response items are consistently applied to all students
Use independent raters or observers to score a sample of student responses, and check consistency with your evaluations
Build in as much objectivity into scoring as possible and still maintain the integrity of what is be.
Thesis Summary by Amir Hamid Forough Ameri
The Relationship Between Extraversion/Introversion
and Iranian EFL Learners’
Language Learning Strategy Preferences
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdfkaushalkr1407
The Roman Empire, a vast and enduring power, stands as one of history's most remarkable civilizations, leaving an indelible imprint on the world. It emerged from the Roman Republic, transitioning into an imperial powerhouse under the leadership of Augustus Caesar in 27 BCE. This transformation marked the beginning of an era defined by unprecedented territorial expansion, architectural marvels, and profound cultural influence.
The empire's roots lie in the city of Rome, founded, according to legend, by Romulus in 753 BCE. Over centuries, Rome evolved from a small settlement to a formidable republic, characterized by a complex political system with elected officials and checks on power. However, internal strife, class conflicts, and military ambitions paved the way for the end of the Republic. Julius Caesar’s dictatorship and subsequent assassination in 44 BCE created a power vacuum, leading to a civil war. Octavian, later Augustus, emerged victorious, heralding the Roman Empire’s birth.
Under Augustus, the empire experienced the Pax Romana, a 200-year period of relative peace and stability. Augustus reformed the military, established efficient administrative systems, and initiated grand construction projects. The empire's borders expanded, encompassing territories from Britain to Egypt and from Spain to the Euphrates. Roman legions, renowned for their discipline and engineering prowess, secured and maintained these vast territories, building roads, fortifications, and cities that facilitated control and integration.
The Roman Empire’s society was hierarchical, with a rigid class system. At the top were the patricians, wealthy elites who held significant political power. Below them were the plebeians, free citizens with limited political influence, and the vast numbers of slaves who formed the backbone of the economy. The family unit was central, governed by the paterfamilias, the male head who held absolute authority.
Culturally, the Romans were eclectic, absorbing and adapting elements from the civilizations they encountered, particularly the Greeks. Roman art, literature, and philosophy reflected this synthesis, creating a rich cultural tapestry. Latin, the Roman language, became the lingua franca of the Western world, influencing numerous modern languages.
Roman architecture and engineering achievements were monumental. They perfected the arch, vault, and dome, constructing enduring structures like the Colosseum, Pantheon, and aqueducts. These engineering marvels not only showcased Roman ingenuity but also served practical purposes, from public entertainment to water supply.
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS ModuleCeline George
Bills have a main role in point of sale procedure. It will help to track sales, handling payments and giving receipts to customers. Bill splitting also has an important role in POS. For example, If some friends come together for dinner and if they want to divide the bill then it is possible by POS bill splitting. This slide will show how to split bills in odoo 17 POS.
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
We all have good and bad thoughts from time to time and situation to situation. We are bombarded daily with spiraling thoughts(both negative and positive) creating all-consuming feel , making us difficult to manage with associated suffering. Good thoughts are like our Mob Signal (Positive thought) amidst noise(negative thought) in the atmosphere. Negative thoughts like noise outweigh positive thoughts. These thoughts often create unwanted confusion, trouble, stress and frustration in our mind as well as chaos in our physical world. Negative thoughts are also known as “distorted thinking”.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxEduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher presents at the OECD webinar ‘Digital devices in schools: detrimental distraction or secret to success?’ on 27 May 2024. The presentation was based on findings from PISA 2022 results and the webinar helped launch the PISA in Focus ‘Managing screen time: How to protect and equip students against distraction’ https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/managing-screen-time_7c225af4-en and the OECD Education Policy Perspective ‘Students, digital devices and success’ can be found here - https://oe.cd/il/5yV
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptx
Reliability and dependability by neil jones
1. Reliability and Dependability
by Neil Jones
The Routledge Handbook of Language Testing
by
Glenn Fulcher and Fred Davidson
Prepared By: Amirhamid Foroughameri
ahfameri@gmail.com
November 2015
2. Reliability as an aspect of test quality
• Reliability and validity are classically cited as the two most
important properties of a test.
• Bachman (1990) identified four key qualities – validity, reliability,
impact and practicality.
• He proposed that in any testing situation validity and reliability
should be maximised to produce the most useful results for test users,
within practical constraints that always exist.
• Here, reliability will be presented rather as an integral component of
validity, and approaches to estimating reliability as potential sources
of evidence for the construct validity of a test.
3. Measurement
• The idea that quantification is the way to understanding was
memorably expressed by Kelvin in 1883:
• … when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express
it in numbers you know something about it; but when you cannot
measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind.
• (Kelvin, quoted by Stellman, 1998: 1973)
4. Does this apply to the case of language proficiency?
The answer could be No for two reasons:
• First, it suggests that language proficiency is an enduring real
property that resides in a person’s head and can be quantified, like
their height or weight.
• Second the metaphor implies that language proficiency, like
temperature, has a single unique meaning, and can be precisely
quantified.
We cannot take a one-size-fits-all approach to language
assessment.
5. The concept of reliability
• Reliability equals consistency
• Reliability in assessment means something rather different to its everyday use as a
synonym of ‘trustworthy’ or ‘accurate’.
• However, in testing reliability has the narrower meaning of ‘consistent’.
• A reliable test is consistent in that it produces the same or similar result on repeated use;
that is, it would rank-order a group of test takers in nearly the same way.
• But the result need not be a correct or accurate measure of what the test claims to
measure.
• Just as a train service can run consistently late, a test may provide an incorrect result in a
consistent manner.
• High reliability does not necessarily imply that a test is good, i.e., valid.
• Nonetheless, a valid test must have acceptable reliability, because without it the results
can never be meaningful.
• Thus a degree of reliability is a necessary but not sufficient condition of validity.
6. • Reliability and error
• When a group of learners takes a test their scores will differ, reflecting
their relative ability.
• Reliability is defined as the proportion o f variation in scores caused by
the ability measured, and not by other factors.
• This proportion is typically described as a correlation (or correlation-like)
coefficient.
• Depending on the type of reliability being analysed, what is correlated
with what will change.
• A perfectly reliable test would have a reliability coefficient (r) of 1.
• The variability caused by other factors is called error.
7.
8. Replications and generalizability
‘A person with one watch knows what time it is; a person with two
watches is never quite sure.’
Thus Brennan (2001: 295) introduces a presentation of reliability
from the perspective of replications.
Information from only one observation may easily deceive, because
unverifiable, while to get direct information about consistency (i.e.,
reliability) at least two instances are required.
Replications in some form are necessary to estimate reliability.
9. Even more importantly, Brennan argues, ‘they are required for an
unambiguous conceptualization of the very notion of reliability.’
Specifying exactly what would constitute a replication of a
measurement procedure is necessary to provide any meaningful
statement about its reliability.
The individual variation in test-takers from one day to another is
difficult to measure, because the test is taken only once.
Thus its impact is very likely ignored, leading to an overestimate of
reliability, unless we can do specific experiments to replicate the
testing event in a way that will provide evidence.
10. • Reliability and dependability
• Dependability is a term sometimes used (in preference to reliability) to refer to the
consistency of a classification – that is, of a test-taker receiving the same grade or score
interpretation on repeated testing.
• The way the term is used relates to the distinction made between norm-referenced and
criterion referenced approaches to testing.
• Taken literally, norm-referencing means interpreting a learner’s performance relative to other
learners, i.e., as better or worse, while criterion-referencing interprets performance relative to
some fixed external criterion, such as a specified level of a proficiency framework like the
CEFR.
• The term dependability is used in a criterion-referencing context where the aim is to classify
learners, for example as masters or non-masters of a domain of knowledge.
11. • But if dependability relates to a particular criterion-referenced approach
to interpretation we should not conclude that reliability relates only to
norm-referenced interpretations.
• It is true that reliability is defined in terms of the consistency with which
individuals are ranked relative to each other, but in many testing
applications it is no less concerned with consistency of classification
relative to cut-off points that have well-defined criterion interpretations.
Item response theory has the particular advantage that it models a
learner’s ability in terms of probable performance on specific tasks.
Henning (1987: 111) argues that IRT reconciles norm- and criterion-
referencing.
12. • The standard error of measurement
• The standard error of measurement (SEM) is a transformation of
reliability in terms of test scores, which is useful in considering
consistency of classification.
• While reliability refers to a group of test-takers, the SEM shows the
impact of reliability on the likely score of an individual: it indicates how
close a test-taker’s score is likely to be to their ‘true score’.
One difference often cited between CTT and IRT is that CTT SEM is a
single value applied to all possible scores in a test, while the IRT SEM is
conditional on each possible score, and is probably of greater technical
value.
However, as Haertel (2006: 82) points out, CTT also has techniques for
estimating SEM conditional on score.
13. Internal consistency as the definition of a trait
• It is important to note that internal consistency is conceptually quite
unrelated to the definition of reliability.
• Think of a short test consisting of items on, say: your shoe size,
visual acuity, the number of children you have, and the distance from
your house to work. Assume that with appropriate procedures each of
these can be found without error, for a group of candidates. The
reliability of this error-free test will be a perfect 1.
• But these items are completely unrelated to each other, and so an
internal consistency estimate of their reliability would be about zero.
For this reason too, it is impossible to put a name to this test, that is,
to say what it is actually a test of.
14. Internal consistency as the definition of a trait
• Now suppose the test contained, say, items on shoe size, height,
gender. This time it is likely that on administering the test the
internal consistency estimate of reliability would be found to be
considerably higher than zero.
• The difference is that this time the items are related to each other.
• Study them and you could probably name what it measures:
something like ‘physical build’.
• So the trait which a test actually measures is whatever explains its
internal consistency.
15. Reliability and validity
• Validity nowadays tends to be judged in terms of whether the uses
made of test results are justified (Messick, 1989). This implies a
complex set of arguments that go well beyond the older and purely
psychometric issue of whether the test measures what it is believed to
measure.
16. Reliability and validity
• Coherent measurement and construct definition
• In the trait-based, unidimensional approaches, conceptions of validity and
reliability emerge as rather closely linked. They both relate to the same notion of–
of focusing in on ‘one thing’ at a time, coherent measurement.
• Typically this means identifying skills such as Reading, Writing, Listening and
Speaking as distinct traits, and testing them separately.
• Each of these traits requires definition: what do we understand by ‘Reading’ or
‘Listening’ ability, and how is it to be tested?
• Such construct definition provides the basis of a validity argument for how test
results can be interpreted.
• Defining constructs encourages test developers to identify explicit models of
language competence, enables useful profiling of an individual learner’s strengths
or weaknesses, and helps to interpret test performance in meaningful terms.
17. • Focusing on specific contexts
• The conclusion is thus that the trait-based measurement
models presented here enable approaches to language
proficiency testing which can work well, achieving a useful
blend of reliability, validity and practicality.
• However, there is a condition: each testing context must be
treated on its own terms, and tests designed for one context
may not be readily comparable with tests designed for
another context.
18. • Mislevy (1992: 22) identifies four possible levels at which tests can be compared:
• Equating – the strongest level: refers to testing the same thing in the same way, e.g. two
tests constructed from the same test specification to the same blueprint. Equating such
tests allows them to be used interchangeably.
• Calibration – refers to testing the same thing in a different way, e.g. two tests
constructed from the same specification but to a different blueprint, which thus have
different measurement characteristics.
• Projection – refers to testing a different thing in a different way, e.g. where constructs
are differently specified. It predicts learners’ scores on one test from another, with
accuracy dependent on the degree of similarity. It is relevant where both tests target the
same basic population of learners.
• Moderation – the weakest level: can be applied where performance on one test does not
predict performance on the other for an individual learner, e.g. tests of French and
German.
19. Issues with reliability
In practice language testing seeks to achieve both reliability and validity within
the practical constraints which limit every testing context.
The aim should be to optimise both, rather than prioritise one over the other.
If reliability is prioritised, then indeed it may conflict with validity.
Internal consistency estimates of reliability make it possible to drive up the
reliability of tests over time, simply by weeding out items which correlate less
highly with the others.
This, as Ennis (1999) points out, is potentially a serious threat to the validity of a
test, as it leads to a progressive narrowing of what is tested, without explicit
consideration of how the content of the test is being modified.
A classic way of narrowing the testing focus is to restrict the range of task types
used and select items primarily on psychometric quality – the discrete item
multiple-choice test format which Spolsky questioned.
20. Trait-based measures versus cognitive models
The trait-based measurement approach is most useful in summative
assessment, where at the end of a course of study the learner’s
achievements can be summarised as a simple grade or proficiency
level.
Formative assessment, which aims to feed forward into future
learning, needs to provide more information, not simply about how
much a learner knows, but about the nature of that knowledge.
As Mislevy (1992: 15) states: ‘Contemporary conceptions of
learning do not describe developing competence in terms of
increasing trait values, but in terms of alternative constructs.’