Language
Country/Area
No result found
The secrets behind the scores: How to understand the relationship between normative tests and achievement?
In the world of educational assessment, norm-referenced tests (NRTs) play an integral role. Such tests are designed to assess where an individual stands within a particular group, relative to the trait they are measuring. For example, psychological tests or entrance exams often use this method to measure students' abilities and potential.
Normative tests allow candidates to see how they perform compared with their peers, which is a motivating factor for many people.
Many college admissions exams and national school tests use norm-referenced tests. For example, the SAT and the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) both compare student performance to a normative sample. Candidates' results are usually expressed as percentiles, which means that each candidate can see where they stand among the whole, rather than just knowing whether they have achieved a minimum standard.
How Norm Testing Works
Norm-referenced tests use a relative scoring method, which is actually a curve scoring method. The "curve" here refers to the bell curve, which shows the probability density of a normal distribution. Test scores will be converted based on students' relative performance according to a pre-set score distribution. For example, 80% of students might be assigned a grade in the B range, with only the top 20% receiving an A.
In this way, the school can ensure that the distribution of grades in each class reaches a certain standard.
Normalized tests have their share of criticisms, however. The main problem is that the selected reference group may not be representative of the current target population. According to some studies, even classic norms may become outdated or inapplicable.
Advantages and limitations of normative testing
The primary advantage of normative tests is that they provide information about how an individual performs relative to his or her peers. However, a serious limitation of this approach is that it relies on a reference group that may not truly reflect the population being assessed. This may result in some groups' scores not being a true reflection of their actual abilities.
Reliance on old norms can lead to misleading results because these templates may not accurately reflect an individual's actual situation.
For educators, understanding students' relative performance is only part of assessment. This also shows the necessity of two other assessment methods: self-benchmarked assessment and criterion-referenced assessment. Compared to normative testing, self-benchmarking shifts the standard from the performance of others to the individual's previous performance, which allows the individual to be more aware of his or her own progress.
ConclusionUltimately, while norm-referenced testing has its value within institutions, educators and policymakers should carefully consider its limitations and its integration with other forms of assessment. In today's diverse learning and assessment environment, how can we better understand students' true abilities and potential?
