xt79zw18ps4p https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt79zw18ps4p/data/mets.xml Kentucky. Department of Education. Kentucky Kentucky. Department of Education. 1965-03 bulletins English Frankford, Ky. : Dept. of Education This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed in accordance with U. S. copyright laws. Educational Bulletin (Frankfort, Ky.) Education -- Kentucky Educational Bulletin (Frankfort, Ky.), "The Standardized Testing Program", vol. XXXIII, no. 3, March 1965 text
volumes: illustrations 23-28 cm. call numbers 17-ED83 2 and L152 .B35. Educational Bulletin (Frankfort, Ky.), "The Standardized Testing Program", vol. XXXIII, no. 3, March 1965 1965 1965-03 2022 true xt79zw18ps4p section xt79zw18ps4p

1’?
2

THE

STANDARDIZED

TESTING PROGRAM

e
5
U
_
n
.w
t
a
H
.5
.m
m
Ia
An
_
g
.m
n
n
[a
P

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This bulletin became a reality through the efforts of many

people. The following deserve recognition for their contributions
in planning and writing this bulletin.

Mrs. Justine Campbell, Counselor, Carroll County Schools

Mr. Ordie Davis, Asst, Director, School Relations, University
of Kentucky

Mr. John R. Durham, Counselor, Middleburg High School

Mr. E. O. Eiken, Counselor, duPont Manual High School, Louis-
ville City Schools

Mr. Ben X. Freeman, Director, Pupil Personnel Services, Louis-
ville City Schools

Mrs. Ruth Fuller (the late), Western State College

Mr. William C. Foutch, Counselor, Campbell County High School

Mr. Cecil Haven, Counselor, Allen County High School

Mrs. Agnes Hopper, Counselor, Williamsburg High School

Mrs. Josephine King, Counselor, Carter County Schools

Dr. Curtis Phipps, Dean of Students, Georgetown College

Sister Lucile Raley, Counselor Educator, Catherine Spalding
College

Dr. Travis Rawlings, Dean, Midway Junior College

Mr. Charles Sanders, Louisville City Schools

Mr. Paul Seyfrit, Dean of Men, Eastern State College

Dr. James Snowden, Department of Education, Eastern State
College

For assistance from the Division of Publications and Informa-

tlon goes a word of appreciation.

For Butler County, Edmonson County, \Varren County and

Barren County schools appreciation is expressed for the use of pic-
tures which were included in the bulletin.

SDecial recognition is given to Mr. Wayne Ashley, Division of

Gulclance Services, who gave generously of his time in the planning,
Wmmg and editing of this bulletin.

Finally, appreciation is expressed to Dr. Ralph Tesseneer,

Murray State College, who did the final editing of this bulletin.

Kearney Campbell, Director
Division of Guidance Services

FOREWORD

Evaluation is an indispensable part of every sound educational
program. While there are several tools of evaluation in education—
the standardized test has become one of the most important.

To develop a good testing program and to make effective use
of test results in guidance, instruction, and administration, all school
personnel should have a basic understanding of the standardized
test. Those responsible for administering and using standardized
tests should become better acquainted With techniques and pro-
Cedures for interpreting and using standardized tests.

It is hoped that the suggestions contained in this bulletin will

be of assistance to school personnel throughout the State who use

the results of standardized tests in guidance, instruction, and
administration.

Harry M. Sparks
Superintendent of Public Instruction

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section I The Standardized Testing Program ............ 1
" Need for Tests in Education ............... 2
Information Tests Can Provide ............ 2
A Basic Testing Program ................. 4
Section 11 Planning the Testing Program ................. 8
Testing Committee ....................... 8
Steps in the Testing Program ............. 9
Determining the Purpose ................. 10
Guiding Principles for a Testing Program. . . 11
Section III Types of Tests and Inventories ................ 14
Test of Maximum Performance ............ 14
Achievement Tests ................... 14
Mental Ability, Intelligence or
Scholastic Aptitude Tests ......... 15
Aptitude Tests ...................... 16
Tests of Typical Performance .............. 16
Personality Tests ..................... 16
Interest Inventories ...................... 17
External Tests ........................... 17
The American College Test ............ 18
The College Entrance Examination
Board Test ...................... 18
College Qualification Tests ............ 18
General Aptitude Test Battery ........ 19
National Merit Scholarship
Qualifying Test .................. 19
Section IV Selection of Tests ............................. 20
Test Selection Criteria .................... 20
Characteristics of a Satisfactory Measuring
Instrument. .......................... 20
Validity ................................. 21
Reliability ............................... 22
Usability ................................ 22
Sources of Aid in Selection ................ 22
Mental Measurements Yearbook .......... 22
Periodicals .............................. 23

Other Aids .............................. 23

Section V Administration of Tests ....................... 25

Principles of Test Administration .......... 25
Test Administration .................. 25
Time of Testing ...................... 26
Test Schedules ....................... 2T
Achieving Test Readiness ............. 27
Student. Readiness .................... 28
Examiners Role ...................... 29

Section VI Scoring Tests and Recording the Results ......... 30

Scoring Tests ............................ 30
Hand Scoring ........................ 30
Machine Scoring ..................... 31

Recording Test Results ................... 32

Section VII Interpretation of Test Results ................. 34

Types of Interpretation ................... 3;3

The Meaning of Scores .................... 36
Raw Score ........................... 37
Percentile ........................... 3’
Grade Equivalents ................... 37
Intelligence Quotients ................ 35
Standard Scores ..................... 35

Adequate Norms Make Scores Meaningful... 38

Test Scmes are Subject to Error ....... 4“
Pi esentation of. Test Data . . . . . .. - 40
Presentation Depends on T) pe of TESL-
.lnterpreting' Intelligence Test
Scores ........................
ll

Interpretation of Interest Inventor)"
interpretation of Multi-factor

Aptitude Test ............... 45
Interpretation of Personality T95t~ 4"]
Section VIII Using Test Results ........................... 4?
Testing for Understanding Children. . 4 . . . u 41
Testing for Use, in the Guidance Program. . .. 4‘
Testing for Use in Curriculum and

Instruction ..........................

’l‘
ment
nized
affirm
using
many
have (
tury.
testing

SECTION I
THE STANDARDIZED TESTING PROGRAM

The use of standardized tests as psychological tools for measure-
ment of various components of behavior has become Widely recog-
nized and accepted. The majority of educators and psychologists Will
affirm that the schools can do a better job for their students by
using the various test and measurement devices. They can serve
many purposes in education. They have served many purposes and
have changed to a great extent since the beginning of the last cen-
tury. Noteworthy events from the historical background of the
testing movement would include:
1. early survey of Boston School Children stimulated by criticisms
of schools by Horace Mann in early 1800’s
emphases placed on measurement by early pioneers, Galton and
Cattell
. contributions to the testing field by E. L. Thorndike and his
students at the close of the 19th century

. significant contributions in intelligence testing by the French
Psychologist, Alfred Binet

. development of group intelligence tests and rating scales for use

by the Army in World War I which gave tremendous impetus to
testing in schools

. widespread use of tests by all branches of the armed forces during
World War II

use of tests by Veterans Administration in their advisory centers

. provisions of the National Defense Education Act for testing of
secondary school students

continuous improvement and development in test construction
from their earliest beginnings to today.

Ed A statement from Chauncey and Dobbin, “Testing, It’s Place in
u

. cation Today”, will illustrate current thought for use of tests
”1 GGUcational measurement.
intexwlzgn tests are taken as they are intended to be taken as
hardes mg 39b samples on which the student can try out his
Ellie-“hon skills, the process is stimulating for most students and
testiiia le for many: Learning is a satisfying experience; and as
Satisfg‘ 13 the proving part of that experience, it, too, can be
Satiszéng and enJoyable. More important though, than the

tions it gives directly to students, is the guidance that

good testing gives to the teacher, the counselor, the admissions
officer, and the student himself.1

NEED FOR TESTS IN EDUCATION

During the 1960’s there is a continued and growing interest in
testing and testing techniques at the national, state and local level.
Many local districts are developing their own tests and testing
programs. National and state testing progrms are, being expanded
and offered to local districts, in addition to, or as a part of their
local programs. The expansion of the National Defense Education
Act of 1958 has provisions which makes it possible for districts to
test all pupils in the elementary, secondary schools and in junior
colleges.

The tremendous increase in school enrollment at all levels in
the past. few years accompanied by an increase in the holding power
of the schools and the demands of a highly technical age have 1113th
it increasingly difficult to develop and maintain an effective ed11-
eational program for all boys and girls. School personnel are obli‘
gated more today than ever before to study their students thorough'
ly, and change the curricula accordingly, to meet the needs 0f the

students.
/

INFORMATION TESTS CAN PROVIDE

An excellent discussion of testing program purposes a
contribution testing can make is found in the publication, “A Pro-
posed 12 Year Testing Program.”

“Tests can provide much of the information needed to:

—understand the pupil better

—guide his learning and achievement

—evaluate his achievement in terms of his ability

—discover and guide his interests

—adjust to and provide for individual differences

—help each student understand himself

—give the student background for course selectio
planning.2 .

e in Educﬂ‘

n and Career

1 Henry Chauncey and John E. Dobbin, Testing: It’s Plac
tion Today. Harper 8: Row, Publishers, 1963 p. 184.

2 Kent Area Guidance Council, A Proposed 12 Year Testing program
Ohio Scholarship Tests, State Department of Education, 1959, P- 1'

nd the '

eateg

(
purpt
the t(
test I
DOSes.
Systei
0f tes
Systei

’1
study
DOpul
result
Couns
Streng
used :
ers m
10 (ha

3 l
Cente:
Athen

t in
vel.

ing :
ded .

neir
tion
3 to
1ior

s in
wet
lﬂde
adu-
)bli—
1gb-

the

the ;
Pro-

areel‘

luca‘

mm:

Purposes for which tests are used are outlined in three broad
categories by Hill.

1. For instruction

—diagnostic, the study of pupils strengths and weaknesses in re—
lation to learnings desired

——p1acement, the study of pupil growth for the purpose of placing
the child in the most helpful learning situations.

2. For guidance
—for help in the selection of courses and subjects
—for help in making choices related to vocational planning

——for help in counseling and group guidance regarding educa—
tional and vocational planning and in assisting pupils to meet
personal and social problems.

3. For administration

—to provide data helpful in determining the efficiency of the
school system as a whole

.for help in determining promotion policies

—for help in determining policies regarding the grouping of
pupils for instruction3

Obviously tests have many and various uses, and if used for the
PUrpose of making specific contributions to the total school program,
the testing programs may differ with each school system. The same
test may be used in different schools for the same or different pur-
Poses, and at the same time different tests may be used in different
S3’stems for the same purpose. This will point out the versatile nature
0f tests and the necessity for purposeful testing as a service to the
Sl’stem in achieving and improving the schools objectives.

The administrator may use a survey battery of achievement to
study performance trends in subject matter areas of their student
POPUIation for curricular revision. The principal may use the same
results as an aid in the grouping of students for instruction. The
Counselor may use the results to aid the student in evaluating his
StreIlg‘ths and weaknesses. Results from the same battery may be
used in conference with parents to interpret student progress. Teach-
Crs may use the results to assess effectiveness of teaching methods or

to diagnose student weaknesses. At the same time the testing director

C 3George E. Hill. The Staff Evaluate the School’s Testing Program.
Aigter for Educational Research, College of Education, Ohio University,
ens, Ohm, Pupil Services Series, 1960 No. 1, p. 4.

may use the results to furnish data for compilation of local norms,
or for comparison with a larger population.

There are many other ways that tests and measurement devices
can be helpful to the school system. Characteristics unique to each
school or system, the necessity of testing for a purpose, readiness of
faculty to use the results, and many other factors necessitate a pro-
gram to fit a system designed to serve a function based upon sound
educational objectives.

A BASIC TESTING PROGRAM

To define testing programs in terms that would describe the
large school systems, as well as the small independent systems re-
quires a broad definition in very general terms. Findley in the NSSE
Yearbook, 1963, defines it as:

. consisting of the systematic use, at more than one level and
in more than one area, of one or more tests Where the selection,
administration, recording, and interpretation of the tests are all
planned and conducted in close accord with the major objectives
of the educational program.4

Attempting to outline a minimum or maximum testing program
applicable to all systems would be impossible. From attempts to
develop a testing program conforming to the definition above Will
come a framework which passes through a minimal state of develop‘
ment, upon which the development of an expanded program willbe
possible. A minimum testing program becomes a base beyond which
the school system may go, as qualified personnel, facilities, and
other criteria may determine.

Recognizing that there are certain needs common to all syStems
many authorities in educational measurement have listed a minimum
program, not intended to identify the program for the school; bl” to
serve as a guide to identification of needs common to all and to Indy
cate successful testing patterns which have served to provide Com‘
monly needed information about each student. .

The problems facing educators are complicated by a more In-
formcd and concerned public, pressured by the rapidity of change!
and further complicated by the basic belief inherent in a democratlc

4 Warren G. Findley. The Impact and Improvement of SchOOZ Testing
Programs. NSSE Yearbook LXII, Part II, 1963, p. 3.

SOClel
choic

cey,
point
cator

memﬂD‘s—hm

i
are l
indiv
right
is me
and t
temai
in ha
PSycl
tion
Objec

I
admit
istere
most

\
5 l

Servi<
6 .

Harps

'ms,

ices
ach
; of
m-
hid

the

, to
will
lop-
l he

iich .

and

31115

111111,

t to
1di-
cm-

1%
atic

ting

society, that each student has the right to make his own decisions or
choices.

The following statements from an annual report by Henry Chaun-
cey, President of the Educational Testing Service, illustrates this
point and implies an ever increasing obligation on the part of edu-
cators to provide assistance to each student:

“In an American educational system, the student is offered
a number of choices about himself and his career as he progresses
through school, choices that he is encouraged to make, and,
hopefully, is equipped to make. The variety and number of
choices are characteristic of American Education, as is the free-
dom of the student to make the choices himself. Almost without
exception, the educational systems of other nations in the west-
ern culture have only one of two choice points in the career of
the student, and almost always the choices are made for him
by someone else.

Here as in so many human endeavors, the extent of free
choice is sometimes limited by unequal school standards, by
variable home and community environments, and by the lost
development of potential in the early childhood and elementary
school years. But the fact remains that the framework for free
choice and a great variety of higher educational opportunities,
are open to the American student.”5

AS they meet and cope with this challenge of change, educators
{JI‘GIbecoming more aware that purposeful action must be taken,
1I‘ldlvidual needs must be better met, and that the individuals basic
l‘lghts must be recognized and assured. Prerequisite to all of these
IS more and better information about each student, the curriculum,
and the instructional program accompanied by continuous and sys-
tematic evaluation which affirms that sound educational objectives
glharmony With sound educational philosophy are being reached.
~-Sy0holog1cal tests and inventories can make a valuable con-tribu-
tlofl 1n assisting the total educational program in achieving its
0bJeetives.

_A_S POinted out by Willey and .Andrewsﬁ, schools should not
mister any more tests than necessary. An extra test, admin-
mo rted’ then filed and-forgotten is a waste of time which could be

S profitably used in developing ways and means to interpret

adm
iste

5
Servicihauncey’ Henry. Annual Report, 1962—63. Educational Testing

a .
ar Wllley and Andrews. M odern Methods and Techniques in Guidance-
per 8; Bros, Publishers, NE, 1955, p- 157-

available test scores and place them in the hands of individuals
who can use them to help students help themselves.

The following minimum testing program for guidance follows
a pattern of testing for ability and achievement at the elementary,
junior and senior high school. It is designed to provide needed
information for guidance purposes.

Time of
Grade Administration Type of Test
First Beginning of Year Reading Readiness
Second
Third Beginning of Year Mental Ability
End of Year Achievement tests
Fourth Beginning of Year Diagnostic reading test
Fifth
Sixth End of Year Achievement tests
Seventh End of Year Mental ability
Eighth End of Year Achievement tests
Ninth Beginning of Year Mental ability
End of Year Achievement tests
Tenth Beginning of Year Interest test
Eleventh End of Year Achievement tests
Twelfth End of Year Achievement tests

Tests of mental ability and achieVement are recommended at

the levels usually considered as transition points in the school life ;

of the student. As mental ability and tests of achievement normally
have high positive correlation coefficients, duplicative testing is
avoided by placing them at different levels in the minimum Pro'
gram. A11 interest inventory is recommended at the beginning 0f
the tenth grade as the student reaches a point of greater specialize

tion. Special aptitude and personality measurement devices are ‘
not meluded in the above program; however, many schools may .

want to include them if they can administer and use them

As there is a greater need for a general ability score early 1”
the student’s school life, many authorities recommend general abllltV

testing at the end of Kindergarten or at the beginning of the ﬁrst ;

grade 111 addition to the mental ability test recommended above at

the beginning of the third grade Others because of 10W Correlation ‘

coefficients of ea1ly ability scores with those obtained later T600111
mend the use of Reading Readiness and Reading Achievement at

the fl]
as eul

S
instru
ment
for gr
crease
vices,
forma
progr:
ability
sevent
tery a
ing cc
Test :
pupil’:
in ind
Althm
0f per
may t

M
mum
the pi
planui
plete 1

the first and second grade level. The mental ability test should be
as culture free as possible and not loaded With reading.

Schools with broad achievement testing programs for guidance,
instructional, and administrative purposes administer an achieve-
ment battery at the end of each grade level. In this case the need
for group mental ability testing at the upper grade levels will de-
crease, and the addition of special aptitude and personality de—
vices, supplemented by individual intelligence tests Will change the
format of the above minimum program. The suggested minimum
program could be expanded considerably by shifting levels of mental
ability tests, including an achievement battery at the fifth and
seventh grade, and by substituing a multi-factor aptitude test bat-
tery at the ninth grade for the achievement battery. Aptitude test-
ing could then be enriched by using the USES General Aptitude
Test Battery at the twelfth grade. Problem checklists used as
pupil’s statements of their problems or concerns can be of value
in individual work with students and are used by many schools.
Although research data is consistently discouraging as to the value
0f personality tests or inventories in group Wide assessment, they
may be added if qualified personnel to use them are available.

Many authorities in measurement recommend a basic or mini-
mum testing program similar to the one listed above. Determining
the Program needed in any particular school will require careful

Planning and coordination as it develops from a minimum to a com—
plete testing program.

SECTION II
PLANNING THE TESTING PROGRAM

Testing, like many other aspects of education will not be ade-
quate Without proper organization and planning. To insure an
effective program the school administrator must assume the central
point of responsibility. Spence1 has suggested that a good testing
program should be supplementary not duplicative, usable not con
fusing, economical not burdensome, comprehensive not sporadiC,
suggestive not dogmatic, progressive not static. Several questionS,
answered affirmatively, will provide a start toward initiating or
revising a testing program that could be described by the positive
aspect of the above phrases. Some of these questions are:

1. Do we have a well defined philosophy of education under-
stood by the staff?

2. Do We have a well defined philosophy of measurement under—
stood by the staff?

3. Is the role of measurement as it relates to the attainment of
educational goals and objectives clarified?

4. Do we need a standarized testing program?

5. Does the program need to be planned and coordinated to
meet the needs of the system?

A negative answer to any or all of the above questions will pin-
point the necessity for a system—wide testing committee to determ1116
the needs to be served, to assure full cooperation and participation
of the entire staff, and to develop an organizational pattern or design-

Testmg Committee. Composition of the committee may differ

ns exist-
com-
indi-

With each school system as it must function under the conditio
ing in the system. Representatives of the entire staff are re
mended participants. These may be representatives from the
vidual elementary and secondary school guidance or testing Com’
mittees and the system-Wide testing coordinator designated '60 00'

ordinate the development and operation of the total program.
No blueprint or universal application can be given ’60 those
planning a testing program, but a committee contemplating SuCha

lementaw

1Ralph E. Spence, A Comprehensive Testing Program for E 1933

Schools, Teachers College Record, Volume 34, pp. 279-284, Jan.

DI‘Ograi
for ad]
test an
standa]
System.

S tr
qllestio:
keep te
throng}
Stanley
tional l

l.
2.
3.
4

\
2 C.
Prentio

059
1 a

I ' ,9
“Planning the Standardized Testing Program

. ' ' ersonnel
program should give consideration to these factors, eXft’EEage 111‘s with
for administering the testing program, experieilice oinmunity toward
test and testing techniques, attitude 0f SChOOl an e

. - ' e school or
standardized tests, and present and prev1ous POhCIeS 0f th
system.

Steps in the testing program. Inability or failure to :zisliiistl’zg
QUeStion, “Where do we start?” has resulted m_ mar? s or staGeS
keep testing in its proper perspective. The followingds :1) Ross 3:1(1
through which a complete program must pass hSte y

- - ' a func-
Stanley2 are included to assist the commlttee in developing
tional program.

1. Determining the purpose of the program
2. Selecting the appropriate test or tests
3. Administering the tests

4. Scoring the tests

- ls,
2C. C. Ross and Julian C. Stanley, Measurement in Todays SChOO
Prentice Hall, Inc. N. J., 1960, p. 212.

Analyzing and interpreting the scores

5
6. Applying the results
7 Retesting to determine the success of the program
8

Making suitable records and reports.

Planning should begin with a study or review of the school’s

educational objectives and the translation of these objectives into .

specific behavior patterns. Vague generalizations should be changed
to concrete and attainable educational goals. Standardized tests
should be selected to provide the data which are best obtained
through the testing programs and plans made to secure other data
by more appropriate techniques. Planning should include prepara-
tion of a detailed outline of the ways in which tests results will be
used, how scores will be made available for use, and the asm’stmzct
to be provided for those Who will be using them.3

Determining the purpose. After translation of educational goals
into working hypotheses, relating of these to the system-wide philos-
ophy of measurement, isolation of those which testing can assist in
obtaining, and determining of those which other techniques can be
more helpful, the committee will have a list of purposes for a testing
program, common to systems who ascribe to identical goals, and
unique to their own system.

The following is an example of how a general objective can he

hypothesized and how purposeful testing can make a significant 0011' ,

tribution toward its attainment.

Objective: Preparation of each student for effective American
citizenship.

This is a general objective of courses in social studies III the "1'
structional program.

Hypothesized this statement could read:

Hypothesis: The social studies program helps students ‘60 ac-
quire knowledge and skills essential for good cltl-
zenship.

Purpose for Testing: Periodic assessment at selected grad?
levels of standardized achievement test l°‘
1. identify students strengths and weaknesses in the area

. d,
3State Department of Education, The Testing Sermce, Hartfor

Connecticut, June 1959, p. 3.

C
zation
tives.
same ;
tests 1
a desi:

T
the de
is a gt
progr:
group
grams

A
above
with :
result
the g1
ford,
Desigi

2. provide information for curicular revision or modiﬁca-
tion

3. evaluate effectiveness of teaching methods being used

4. assist student in evaluation of their progress

5. provide comparative data with a larger population in—
dicating the degree of understanding in the area being

0,0” tested.

into ‘

nged , Command of the fundamental processes is a very broad generali-

tests ‘ zation commonly found in the schools statement of goals and objec-

Lined tives. This encompasses all areas of the curriculum. For each area the

data same and many other purposes could be listed for which standardized

)ara- tests of achievement can make a contribution toward realization of

11 be a desired goal.

fame To provide for the student such assistance as may be needed for
the development of his aptitudes and the full utilization of his abilities
is a general guidance objective for which assistance from the testing

393“ Program is needed. Testing may serve other purposes providing

1110.3- group data needed for planning curricular and instructional pro-

“; grams.

:ting After the purpose is determined, the other seven stages listed

and ahove must be planned. The succeeding chapters are concerned
Wlth selection, administration, scoring, interpreting and using test

b results in the school program. The major focus is upon testing in
,n 9

the guidance program. The State Department of Education, Hart—
con- , ford, Connecticut, in a bulletin entitled, “The Testing Service: A
Deﬁgn for Program Development listed the following principles:

Guiding Principles for a Testing Program

,6 in- 1- Since tests provide data about pupils and the school program,
the testing program should be planned as an integral part of
the educational process. Tests should be used as an aid to

planning and carrying out instructional activities, but they

Should not determine the curriculum. They are its servants

_ rather than its master.

2- Testing should be used as an aid to pupil self—understand—
mg and to vocational and educational planning. But testing

e E in itself is not guidance nor should decisions in guidance be

- - 3 made on the basis of tests alone.

a , ' TeStS ShOUId be selected to meet the needs of the local
:lcihOOL The school staff should participate in considering

tfoldl theegse needs and the ways in which tests can contribute to

realization of educational objectives. The nature and

10.

11.

12.

13.

purposes of testing should be understood also by the stu-
dent body and interested persons in the community, especially
parents.

Testing should be planned to include measurement of sev—
eral pertinent aspects of pupil ability and achievement. The
testing program should not consist of isolated segments.

The quantity and type of testing should be limited by the
time and ability of the staff to use the results. What counts
is not how many tests are given but what use is made of
the results. A testing program should not attempt to do so
many things that none of them is done well. The purpose
most important to the school should have priority. Other
purposes may be left for later development.

Tests given to all pupils in a grade should be supplemented
by additional tests for selected pupils and groups as needed.

Evaluation is a continuous process and tests should be ad—
ministered at several grade levels. Test information should
be available when it will be used, especially at critical and
transition periods in the life of each pupil.

A test should be used only for those purposes for which it
is valid. There must be an understanding of what a test
can do and what it cannot do. Test scores should be in-
terpreted in relation to other evaluative data. The signifi-
cance of the results of any test is dependent on many factors
and relationships.

Tests should be interpreted and used only by competent
persons. The level of competence required depends on the
test and the use to be made of it. Test scores should be
made available only to persons who can make proper use
of this information. Interpretations of the meaning of the
test results can be made to others who are entitled to this
information. The confidential nature of test information
should be respected.

Provision should be made for recording test data cumula"
tively and in a way that Will make such data useful. This
takes time, clerical help, and professional knowledge 01
tests.

The testing program should be under the direction of a per-
son who has the knowledge, skill, time, and the assistance
needed to assure its proper functioning.

The testing program should be evaluated regularly to de-
termine whether the tests are serving the purposes for WhICh
they were selected, and to determine whether these purposes
continue to be important. ,

The perfect testing program has not yet been developed'
Expectations must be kept as a realistic level. The best
guarantee of a good program is a plan for continuous de-

and

thrm
ing 1
at w
local
discr
in th
Succ

ing,

velopment which includes modest objectives and sound pur—
poses designed to meet specific needs.4

Careful consideration of the preceding principles individually
and collectively by the committee will promote orderly progression
through the remaining steps or stages in developing a complete test-
ing program. The types of test to be given and the grade levels
at which they will be used to meet the