The Establishment of a National Research Institute for the Construction and Standardization of Tests

Abstract

Over the last twenty years as a psychologist and educator I have used hundreds of tests of every type — attainment, intelligence, personality, neurological, physical (sense organs and motor functioning), vocational, and a variety of screening devices. Yet I do not know of one which is very reliable, of high validity, and well standardized on stratified representative samples. Most often the causes of the shortcomings lie in a lack of funds and an ignorance of test construction. Few tests have been subjected to a very thorough item analysis. Frequently items are selected from earlier tests and are slightly modified or are invented by the author along traditional lines using analogies, similarities, absurdities, etc., in various guises. But most of the popular tests are useful, and some are indispensable. Whatever their inadequacies, no one would suggest throwing them aside, even though some may, at times, yield misleading results. For example, I have personally rescued several spatially bright boys placed in classes for educable mentally retarded children because psychologists had relied exclusively on a highly verbal intelligence test to measure their abilities. One boy had a Spatial IQ of approximately 135. No wonder his special education teacher said he was good with his hands. So was Isaac Newton who also did poorly in school. Defenders of current tests usually say an intelligence, language, or attainment test is intended to yield only one or two major results or quotients and that subtests are unreliable. This is not only true, but most unfortunate, particularly when a subtest measures and involves a wide variety of functions and capabilities even though it may carry a highly specific label. Moreover, most subtests or single function tests sample the specific human in question very narrowly yet proceed to label the test with a generic name like comprehension, auditory sequencing memory, spatial relations, or (to quote one of my own) visuo-spatial memory. Many professionals are over-impressed with these titles; they are led to believe the test truly