A comparison of two criterion-referenced standard setting procedures for sports skills testing.

Abstract

The application of criterion-referenced (CR) standard setting procedures in physical education has been limited to the examinee-centered model known as criterion groups. Alternative examinee-centered approaches are available but have not been applied in sport skills testing. The purpose of this study was to compare two examinee-centered models for setting performance standards for a sport skills test battery. CR performance standards were determined for the tennis skills test battery published in Tennis skills test manual (Hensley, 1989) using the borderline group (BG) (Livingston & Zieky, 1982) and criterion groups (CG) (Berk, 1976) models. The comparison of these two methods demonstrated that the CG method consistently produced performance standards that were lower than the BG method. In one instance the BG method produced a standard that was clearly unreasonable. Estimates of CR reliability for the CG standards (.76 less than or equal to P less than or equal to .93; .52 less than or equal to Kq less than or equal to .86) were higher than BG estimates (.55 less than or equal to P less than or equal to .84; .11 less than or equal to Kq less than or equal to .68). Although each method has strengths, neither is without problems. Results from this study suggest these two methods might be combined to minimize the problems associated with each. This combined method should produce standards with improved accuracy, validity, and reliability.