English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper compares two “Testing Application” chapters of the 2014 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (hereinafter, Standards), jointly published by the American Educational Research Association (AERA), the American Psychological Association (APA), and the National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). The two chapters are Chapters 10 and 12 of the Standards: “Psychological Testing and Assessment (PTA)” and “Educational Testing and Assessment (ETA)”. It specifically aims to raise some overarching issues related to these chapters. An in-depth comparative analysis was conducted based on specific similarities of and differences between these two chapters. Both PTA and ETA cover the background of and standards regarding test administration, score interpretation, and the use of scores. However, PTA focuses more on test selection and test security, whereas ETA covers more on the test design and development. The overarching issues, questions, and concerns related to both chapters are discussed along with the results of the analysis. The paper concludes with a description of the differences between the two chapters from the current 2014 Standards and those of the previous 1999 version along with some plausible explanations for such discrepancies. The summary and analysis may be useful to test users and graduate students from the psychology and education fields whose interests revolve around testing and assessment practices.

Comparisons of and Concerns about Two Testing Application Chapters in the 2014 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing