Intelligence and Measurements Assessment Testing

Intelligence and Measurements

Assessment Testing

In today's classroom, students find themselves constantly being tested in standardized and other forms of assessment testing. Unknown to the children themselves, these assessment models are based on years of development in psychological theory which has evolved to show the many multitudes of different types of intelligences. Using aspects of these theories, modern assessment such as the California Achievement Tests, the Bristol Achievement Tests, the Multiple Intelligences Development Assessment Scales, and Emotional Competence Inventory these tests measure various degrees of intelligences.

There are several major definitions of intelligence which have helped influence the methodology of assessment testing as educators know it today. Charles Spearman, the founder of the two factor theory, was one of the first to understand that raw values can actually be transformed into scores which can create real meaning. Although his two factor theory was never widely accepted, it later lead the way to the findings in the multiple intelligence theories which then influenced assessment tests like the MIDAS test. Another major theory is that of Jean Piaget's cognitive theories which effectively separate children in appropriate age groups to further explore common factors within the developmental process. Assessment tests have since adopted similar separation scales in order to best explore the abilities of each age group. David Wechsler, another major psychologist, developed initial findings posited by Spearman in order to present an idea of intelligence as the individual's ability to not only understand one's environment, but also be able to effectively react to it. He has been responsible for successful intelligence scales such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children and a similar scale for adults. Other major definitions include Raymond Bernard Cattell's theory of the 16 Personality Factor Model. This theory is also heavily based on Spearman's work and provides an analysis of intelligence through the common factor of language (Ferhiinger 2004). His assessment model measured 16 different source traits in comparison with one another to bring a better understanding of how different intelligences work together and independently. Along with the findings of the other researchers presented, Sternberg also provides a theory of multiple intelligences separated into various categories. Such research has been used to create the divisions within modern assessment testing, and what types of methodologies used within testing.

One of the most commonly used achievement tests within the United States is the California Achievement Tests (CAT/5). This test is meant to explore a student's ability within the fields of Reading, Spelling, Language, Mathematics, Study Skills, Science, and Social Studies (Nitko YEAR). The materials presented in this test are derived directly from state standard curriculum and is then presented in a multiple choice format. This then allows school officials to better understand the scores and percentages of the test, because they have first hand knowledge of the content itself (Nitko YEAR). Testing all levels of grade school children from first to twelfth grade, the CAT/5 gives a large breadth off information which describes a wide variety of children. Unlike many other achievement tests, the CAT/5 "developers used a thinking process framework to help balance the types of thought processes students would be required to use when responding to all items in the multiple-choice batteries," (Nitko YEAR). In fact, all material within the CAT/5 is developed to accommodate six thinking processes: gathering information, organizing that information, analysis, idea generation, synthesizing, and evaluation. This caters to the ____ intelligence definition.

Scores, called Objective Performance Indices, are used to relay teacher's information on what elements of the curriculum need to be more thoroughly explored. The CAT/5 aims to explore curriculum, and so its validity depends on its connection to local schools and what they teach their children. However, because the test contains more material on average than other tests, there is a higher rate of standard errors of measurement (Nitko YEAR).

The Bristol Achievement Tests is aimed at helping understand the cognitive and learning skills of children of various ages. Since its inception, the Bristol Achievement test was revised in 1982, which was reported to include a smaller number of questions and fewer instructions for students to follow (Brown YEAR). The Bristol Achievement Tests consist of three separate subtests aimed at measuring student's skills in Mathematics, English, and Study Skills, which are then further separated into five sub-sections each. Within these sections, graphics and pictures are used in order to help stimulate student achievement and understanding of the content at hand. The questions seen on the test prove to be inventive and good quality (Brown YEAR). Although the goal of the test is not to reflect an entire curriculum, it aims at "focus[ing] deliberately on skills and conceptual strategies of knowing rather than upon the content of the knowledge," (Brown YEAR). Thus, the Bristol Tests aim to gauge a student's capabilities of knowledge and methodologies of storing and retaining that knowledge, rather than particular elements of a curriculum study. Tests depend on the grade of the student taking it, and were designed with psychological, pedagogical, and curriculum concepts at hand (Brown YEAR). Two forms of the test, Form a and B, are given at different durations of the school year to help track the changing abilities of the student from the beginning of the school year to the end. The two versions of these tests then prove to have significantly different scores within the same group of sample students (Brown YEAR). A large difference from most other achievement tests is the concept that the teacher is the main responsible role in raw scoring and subsequently transferring this raw data into measurable material. This provides a more intimate method of scoring, yet opens up questions of score reliability. These scores are then finalized into percentile rankings, much like the other achievement tests mentioned. However, issues with validity have jeopardized the true benefits of the Bristol Test (Brown YEAR). No detailed studies attesting to the validity of the test in terms of average scores of each student.

The Multiple Intelligences Development Assessment Scales (MIDAS) is aimed at exploring a multitude of various intelligences within the minds of students. Unlike other achievement tests, it allows the exploration of different types of intelligences, as based of Howard Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences (Hiltonsmith YEAR). Linguistic, Logical-Mathematical, Spatial, Kinesthetic, Musical, Interpersonal, and Intrapersonal intelligences are all measured through the batteries within this testing scale. Four forms of the test are given to different age groups. Rather than a multiple choice format, which is more common in other tests, MIDAS is given in the form of a self report, questionnaires, and interviews for all levels, adults, teens, and children. Much unlike the other assessment tests, MIDAS allows for group or individual testing (Hiltonsmith YEAR). This stems from its initial development as an interview assessment for adolescents undergoing cognitive therapy. The internal reliability of the MIDAS test was analyzed within the scope of several studies, and has been proven to have internal validity and reliability which can help push the MIDAS tests as an integral tool to open up dialogue for major decision making within children and young adults.