Standardized Test Review and Selection

Abstract
The relevance of having in place standards of fair testing practices cannot be overstated. This is more so the case when it comes to highlighting and clearly outlining the obligations of those who either construct tests or formulate testing program policies and those who us tests. It is important to note that the Code of Fair Testing Practices in Education comes in handy for tests developed professionally such as the ones that have been addressed herein. In this text, a specific test category will be selected and three tests selected from the said category for comprehensive analysis. Essentially, the said evaluation and analysis will be on the basis of standards for tests users – with special reference to the selection of appropriate tests. It is important to note that on this front, test users ought to base their test selection on not only their ability to meet their intended purpose, but also on their suitability for the purposive users.
Review and Selection of a Standardized Test
Introduction
My area of particular area of specialization is ……. The test category that would be relevant to my area of specialization as well as processional career goals is personality. The instruments or tests utilized in this case are listed as: Personality Inventory For Children – Second Edition (PIC-2); NEO Personality Inventory – 4 (NEO-4); Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory – Adolescent (MMPI-A); Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory – 2 (MMPI-2)16PF – Fifth Edition (16PF5); Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory – IV (MCMI-IV); and Millon Adolescent Personality Inventory (MAPI).
The three tests that I will be concerning myself with in this case are: Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory – IV (MCMI-IV); Minnesota Counseling Inventory; and NEO Personality Inventory – 4 (NEO-4). The standards for test users to be utilized in this case are four in number – out of a total of nine.
Element 1: Define the purpose for testing, the content and skills to be tested, and the intended test takers. Select and use the most appropriate test based on a thorough review of available information.
With Millon Multiaxial Inventory – IV (MCMI-IV), clinicians can be able to swiftly discern clients in need of evaluation that is more intensive (Millon, Grossman, and Millon, 2019). In this case, MCMI-IV “reports provide an in-depth analysis of personality and symptom dynamics, and include action-oriented suggestions for therapeutic management” (Millon, Grossman, and Millon, 2019). The test takers in this case ought to be 18 years and above. On the other hand, the Minnesota Counseling Inventory is designed to be utilized by counselors and teachers to highlight the personality characteristics of students and to pinpoint those who could require therapeutic intervention. The intended test takers in this case are high school students (Frederiksen, n.d.).
Lastly, when it comes to the NEO Personality Inventory – 4, Bahns (n.d.) notes that this particular personality inventory was formulated by tweaking NEO-PI-R. NEO-4, in essence “provides information on four personality domains: Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness” (Costa, Robert, and McCrae, 2019). As the authors further point out, this particular test is ideal for utilization in personal counseling situations, amongst other settings.
Element 2: Review and select tests based on the appropriateness of test content, skills tested, and content coverage for the intended purpose of testing.
Millon Multiaxial Inventory – IV (MCMI-IV) has a total of 194 items. It should be noted that this effectively means that in comparison to other items, it happens to be shorter. Millon, Grossman, and Millon (2015) point out that the language utilized in the construction of this test is simple enough for most test takers to complete the same within a few minutes – 30 minutes on average. The strong connection that this personality test has to personality theory also means that its scales are rather refined - although not necessarily firmly rooted in the evolutionary theory of personality (Weiner and Greene, 2017).
When it comes to Minnesota Counseling Inventory, Rothney (n.d.) points out that the test consists of a total of 355 statements. Completing the test is easy for test takers as all they have to do is mark as appropriate with either a T for true or F for false (not true). At 14 items, the threshold for arriving at a validity score appears to be rather low. It is also important to note that Rothney (n.d.) is concerned that that the validity of score combinations on the test are not backed up with by any evidence. Regarding NEO Personality Inventory – 4, the various domains of the test avail key information regarding various aspects of the personality of an individual. According to Costa, Robert, and McCrae (2019), the interpretation of the four domains can take place at the global factor level.
Element 3: Review materials provided by test developers and select tests for which clear, accurate, and complete information is provided.
In seeking to enable and empower clinicians in their evaluation as well as diagnostic and treatment efforts, Millon Multiaxial Inventory – IV (MCMI-IV) has in place several assessment materials. These are inclusive of a manual, audio recordings, and test booklets. In essence, the said materials accomplish their role as far as administration; scoring and interpretation; and reporting capabilities are concerned.
Next, the developers of Minnesota Counseling Inventory provide the counseling inventory manual, answer sheet and key, as well as test booklet. It should, however, be noted that the control of answered that are given for their social desirability is not easily attained in this case. In seeking to remedy this concern, the developers of the test elected to include a “include the validity scale, which is interpreted as revealing an attempt on the part of the examinee to ‘look good’ (Frederiksen, n.d.). When it comes to NEO Personality Inventory – 4, it should be noted that the materials made available by test developers help in the provision of a rather respected, well-established, and comprehensive adolescent as well as adult personality assessment. The relevant materials are inclusive of, but they are not limited to: “a reusable item booklet, a hand-scorable carbonless answer sheet, a profile form, a booklet containing the six personal style graphs, and a summary form for the client …” (Costa, Robert, and McCrae, 2019).
Element 4: Select tests through a process that includes persons with appropriate knowledge, skills, and training
Regarding Millon Multiaxial Inventory – IV (MCMI-IV), users are expected to have a graduate-level psychology qualification and to have attended training in a formalized setting on “administration, scoring, and interpretation of personality scales” (Millon, Grossman, and Millon, 2015). It should also be noted that as the Manual further points out, users ought to have gained supervised experience in the utilization of the instruments in question. It is also recommended that users have proper and sound understanding of Millon’s theory so as to be able to derive maximum benefit from the test. However, it should be noted that a determination of those qualified to use the MCMI-IV cannot be done via the utilization of professional titles alone due to certification requirements variability across various jurisdictions.
Regarding Minnesota Counseling Inventory, test users ought to be in possession of formal psychological testing training and an undergraduate or equivalent in psychology (Meltzoff and Kornreich, 2007). Lastly, NEO Personality Inventory – 4 requires that test users have either a license, undergraduate qualification, or other equivalent certification to “practice in a health care profession or occupation, including (but not limited to) the following: medicine, neurology, nursing, occupational therapy and other allied health care professions, physician's assistants, psychiatry, social work” (Costa, Robert, and McCrae, 2019). In addition, the relevant experience as well as training on how to administer, score, as well as interpret instruments that help in the assessment of clinical behavior is instrumental.
Compare and Contrast
It is clear that on the basis of the four elements highlighted above, the three tests differ on various fronts. This is more so the case when it comes to test user qualification and the materials the test developers of each test elect to avail. Each test, however, has unique distinguishing features that set it aside from the other tests. However, it appears that all three tests have significantly evolved over time in an attempt to better execute the roles for which they were developed.
Based on my evaluation of all three tests, the focus of my project will in this case be the NEO Personality Inventory – 4. This is more so the case given the comprehensive nature of the tests domains. Essentially, the four domains cover a wide range of a person’s personality aspects (Widiger, 2017). Thus, it would be possible to identify the traits that are most relevant and also present key information relating to the various strengths and weaknesses of the patient. The fact that NEO Personality Inventory – 4 could be applied to not only various psychopathology kinds and also a wide age range also makes it more appealing.












References
Bahns, T.M. (n.d.).
Costa, Robert, and McCrae (2019). NEO-4™. Retrieved from https://www.parinc.com/Products/Pkey/273
Frederiksen, N. (n.d.).
Meltzoff, J. & Kornreich, M. (2007). Research in Psychotherapy. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers
Millon, T., Grossman, S. & Millon, C. (2019). Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-IV (MCMI-IV). Retrieved from https://www.pearsonassessments.com/store/usassessments/en/Store/Professional-Assessments/Personality-%26-Biopsychosocial/Millon-Clinical-Multiaxial-Inventory-IV/p/100001362.html
Millon, T., Grossman, S. & Millon, C. (2015). MCMI-IV: millon® clinical multiaxial inventory–iv. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.
Rothney, J.W. (n.d.).
Weiner, I.B. & Greene, R.G. (2017). Handbook of Personality Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Widiger, T.A. (Ed.) (2017). The Oxford Handbook of the Five Factor Model. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.