Information for the Candidate.

This is Part 2 of a five-part training program.
It requires about 30 minutes to complete.
Click the link at the bottom of this lesson to advance to Part 3.

Part 2: Testing Basics

Psychometrics is a branch of Psychology that focuses upon measuring things that, in general, are not directly observable. Academic achievement, intelligence levels and personality charactreristics are examples of specific topics that have been of enduring interest to the field. Psychometrics is also concerned with the construction and development of instruments to measure such features. These instruments are commonly called tests.

This training program focuses upon a specific test, called the Educational Needs Screening Inventory (ENSI), and its use. The ENSI is a 76-item, multiple choice rating scale that was designed: a) to screen for possible educational needs in kindergarten through ninth grade students who range from five to 15 years of age, and b) to offer suggestions to address any of the potential concerns noted.

Core Principles of Psychological Testing

Test Security
Many psychological tests are only available to professionals with advanced training in “testing”. The reasons for this are very important. First and foremost, psychological tests are often extremely complex; and can be very dangerous if inappropriately used or misinterpreted. Second, if information about a test is made available to the public, the value of the results obtained on that test could be seriously compromised or invalidated. Third, developing an important test is a very slow and expensive venture — as is acquiring the advanced education and skills required to access, administer and interpret such tests.

Restricted access protects the financial interests of a) the developer (who often invests massive sums of money into developing and updating these tests) and b) qualified users (who pay significant sums for each test in their library). It also preserves the integrity of the test for the client, who expects and deserves a competent test administrator and unquestioned test quality.

Passing this online ENSI training program will earn you status as a “Qualified ENSI User“, and permit you to access and use the ENSI, with your only limitation being related to the type of account you decide to hold.

Importantly, as a qualified ENSI user you will be expected to:

protect the ENSI from unauthorized access, distribution and/or use,
only use it for its intended purposes,
administer it competently, and
report the obtained results appropriately.

Informed Consent

Regarding the ENSI, informed consent means that the parent or legal guardian of the student of interest will be:

made aware of your desire to conduct an ENSI screening of their child’s educational needs,
informed of the nature and scope of the screening,
instructed that they (the parent) will be informed of the obtained results,
informed they have the authority to consent to the screening or decline it, and
instructed that they can withdraw their consent for completing the ENSI at any time prior to its administration.

Because the ENSI was designed for use with children who are well below the age of majority, and their physical presence and participation in the screening are not required, there is no need to inform the student of a plan to complete the ENSI “on” them. Nor is there a need to inform them of its scope and purpose; or to secure their agreement to participate. However, in some cases, it may be very appropriate to inform the student of your desire to administer the ENSI; and how it might be of benefit to the student (in terms of possibly helping to identify their educational needs); and to you (in terms of enhancing your ability to work more effectively and successfully with them).

In some situations, a signed consent may not be necessary – such as when a parent formally agrees, in advance, to having their child participate in an admission screening program, or having the child included in on-going testing program that includes the ENSI. However, even in these situations, if you would like to inform the student of their ENSI results, it is always wise to secure a signed parental consent to do so.

Helpful Hint: Unless you are certain of information to the contrary, always assume that informed consent is required. The potential costs of proceeding without informed consent far outweigh the inconvenience of securing it.

Psychometric Properties

Psychological and achievement tests can be evaluated based upon their psychometric properties. Central among these are the test’s reliability, validity, and norms.

Reliability
A reliable test is one that provides the same, or very similar results across time, individuals and situations. For example, if a student is measured to be 4 feet 4 inches (i.e., 132 cm) tall on Monday, they are very likely to be the same height on Friday of that week; whether their parent, teacher or coach measures their height at home, in the classroom, or on the basketball court. A person’s height is a reliable measurement because it is likely to be the same over a reasonable period of time. Of course, one or two years later, their height might be very different. However, over a period of hours or days, they are not likely to be significantly taller or shorter.

An unreliable test is not of much use if you are seeking to measure a relatively stable trait or skill. For example, let’s say you are planning a vacation and know that your suitcase must not exceed 50 lbs. (i.e., 22.7 Kg) or you will be required to pay a penalty. You decide to weigh it before travelling to the airport. The first time you weigh it, it registers 48 lbs. on your bathroom scale (that coincidentally says: “not legal for trade”). So you decide to weigh it again, just to be sure. This time it registers 52 lbs. Based on these results, do you know if you should you take out some items; or if it would be OK to add a few more?

Measurement Error
Measurement error contributes to a test’s reliability. The scale mentioned immediately above is showing measurement error. Perhaps this relates to the fact that the metal used in the scale’s springs is not of the highest quality, so it stretches inconsistently, and therefore displays inconsistent weights — even when the same item is weighed several times in a row.

The manufacturer of such a scale might indicate the scale’s likely degree of error by noting, somewhere on the scale, that the weight displayed is only accurate to within (say) 3 lbs. of the weight displayed. Clearly, more accurate scales are available, but typically, increasing the accuracy of a measuring device increases it cost.

Point to ponder: Is the scale at the airport likely to exhibit more or less measurement error than your bathroom scale? Why is that?

Assessing Reliability
A test’s reliability can be assessed in a number of different ways. Some of the technical terms used regarding types of reliability are: test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, split-half reliability, etc. To date, the ENSI has not been subjected to any formal studies regarding its reliability. However, its test-retest reliability can easily be demonstrated by having the same informant ‘redo’ the ENSI for a particular student (test-retest reliability); or by having a number of individuals who are well acquainted with the student and his/her developmental history complete the ENSI at the same point in time (inter-rater reliability). You can easily demonstrate the ENSI’s test-retest reliability by completing the ENSI yourself [Self Administration method], two or three times in a row, with reference to the same student. Our “beta” (i.e., early, developmental, unpublished) work with the ENSI shows a very high degree of similarity in the ratings provided for the same student by his/her parents.

Validity
A valid test is one that measures what it was intended to measure. For example, a test of Written English requires the person taking the test to supply their answers in writing, using the English language. If the person taking the test were allowed to provide their answers verbally, or using some language other than English, it would not qualify as a valid test of Written English. An invalid test of Written English has little to no value for an agency that requires its applicants to be competent in writing, using the English language.

There are many ways to assess a test’s validity. The validity of the various scales of the ENSI was established by:

a) comparing the results students obtained on the ENSI to the results they earned on very well established and widely used measures of intelligence, behaviour problems, and learning styles (i.e. concurrent validity), and
b) by the inclusion of components, such as the Attention Problem Scale, and Barkley’s norms, that have an established history of acceptance and use in clinical practice (clinical validity).

The specific comparisons undertaken to validate the ENSI are summarized below. The published results are marked with an asterisk.

ENSI Scale Validating Measures
*Level of general intellectual functioning	Wechshler Full Scale IQ score,Total Score on Rogers and Silverman Giftedness Scale
*Visual-motor and auditory-verbal learning problems	Wechshler Verbal and Performance IQ score discrepancies
Attention problem	DSM III Attention Deficit Disorder scale using norms provided by Barkley
*Behaviour problems	Bristol Social Adjustment Guides

In summary, the comparisons that were undertaken in a formal research study (Nodrick & Li, 1985), offer strong support for the ENSI’s concurrent validity by showing that the results students obtain on the ENSI do, in fact, parallel the results they obtain on well established comparison measures.

Reliability vs Validity
Let’s say a manager of a produce department wants to test the calibration of a scale that her staff uses to weigh produce sold to the store’s customers. She selects a standard, 100 gram test weight from her calibration kit, and places it upon the scale. She allows the scale to settle, records the weight shown, and then removes the weight from the scale. She does this five times in a row. The weights recorded are: 75 grams, 105 grams, 88 grams, 112 grams, and 120 grams. Clearly, the scale is not reliable because it does not produce a consistent measurement under similar conditions.

If, however, it read 88 grams on each of the five “trials”, it would be a reliable scale–but not a valid one. To be reliable AND valid it would have to read 100 grams (plus or minus the scale’s known measurement error) on each of the five trials.

Validity Scales
Some tests include what are called ‘validity scales’. Validity scales typically contain a number of items and/or measures that are designed to provide an indication if the obtained results are credible. For example, if the person completing a multiple-choice test always selects response option c); or frequently follows a specific pattern, such as selecting option a), b), c) and then d) – – right across the test; or selects their answers at random, and thereby errs on even the most simple of the tests’s questions; it is likely that their obtained test score does not reflect the skill or trait that the test was designed to measure. In other words, their results are invalid.

The ENSI uses a number of measures to gauge if the results obtained can reasonably be considered to be valid; and it reports this information in three ways. First, the “Results” section of the written report begins by stating if the obtained results should be considered valid, invalid or only used with extreme caution. It also advises how to address the validity concerns noted. For example, it may suggest having another adult, who is better acquainted with the student-of-interest, complete the ENSI.

Second, a labelled, colour-coded bar in the upper left hand section of the graphical summary of the Results section of the printed ENSI report also displays the level of validity of the obtained results. Finally, the border colour of the graph itself (green = valid, red = invalid, orange = caution) also indicates the report’s level of validity. The main ENSI results must always be considered with reference to its reported validity results.

In summary, reliability and validity are important, technical properties of a test that inform us about the quality of that test. They are evaluated using rather sophisticated statistical techniques that are well beyond the scope of this program. However, for present purposes, what you need to keep in mind is that a reliable test yields consistent results across time and situations; and a valid test measures what it was designed to measure. Simple, huh?

The ENSI can easily be shown to be a reliable test* and, based upon published comparisons with well established, widely used and respected tests (Nodrick & Li, 1985), it has been shown to be a valid screening measure of educational needs.

*A formal reliability study of the ENSI is currently under way.

Norms
Norms refer to the array of results that are obtained from a particular test when that test is administered many, many times to a large number of suitable subjects. Once a test’s norms are documented, the results obtained by a particular subject (subsequently) taking that test can then be judged to be “normal” or abnormal, depending upon where their results fall in comparison to those obtained by the normative group. All newborns, for example, are measured for their weight to provide an indication of their health at birth. Those who are far below or above the “average” newborn weight (i.e., they are above or below the “norm”) may require a particular intervention to preserve or promote their health.

The Normative Sample
Norm-referenced tests are ONLY useful if they are administered to subjects who fall within the group that the test was “normed upon”. The norms for the ENSI are for children who range from 5 to 15 years of age, who are in attendance in school, and who attend kindergarten through the ninth grade. It is inappropriate to administer the ENSI for students who do not meet these qualifications. Any results obtained on children who fall outside of these criteria are unlikely to be meaningful or useful. Following from the birth weight example above, it would make no sense whatsoever to compare the weight of a newborn to the weight charts for children who are of school age in order to decide if an intervention is warranted.

The Normal Distribution
The normal distribution is a pattern that many things in nature follow. Consider height, for an example. Most Canadian men are about 5 feet 9 inches (i.e., 175 cm) tall while most Canadian women are about 5 feet 4 inches (i.e., 162 cm) tall. Some are very much taller, and some are very much shorter. However, the more a person’s height departs from the “average”; the fewer individuals you will find who are of that height. Let’s say you measure the height of 100 Canadian men and, for each, you write their height (to the nearest inch) on a 25 cent coin; and then arrange the coins from shortest height to tallest, in a row. Whenever you measure a man who is the same height as one you have already measured, you simply place their 25 cent coin immediately above the last one you placed showing the same height.

When you are finished measuring and recording the heights of all 100 men, and placing a 25 cent piece to represent each, you are very likely to have what is called a normal distribution. It is also called the “bell curve” to reflect the fact that the vast majority of coins (i.e., measurements) would cluster around the “average” height and would gradually taper off, in the shape of a bell, as the measured heights departed more and more from the “average” height. Obviously, if you repeated this exercise for women, you would get a similar “distribution” of scores, but the central or average female score would be lower than the average male score — because women are, on average, shorter than men.

Once such a distribution is “recorded”, you will be able to figure out how tall the next man or woman you measure is likely to be, simply by consulting the “distribution” of scores. If, for example, you wanted a very good estimate of how likely the next person you measure would be 5 feet 11 inches tall, all you would need to do is to count the number of 25 cent pieces in the 5 foot 11 inch column and read it as a per cent (because there is a total of one hundred 25-cent coins in the distribution.) Likewise, by simply counting the coins, you could estimate the percent of men (or women) above or below a certain height — or even the proportion that would fall between two heights (e.g., between 4 feet 8 inches and 5 feet 9 inches).

A point to ponder: A politician says, “Fifty percent of our high school students are earning below average grades!” How do you reply?

Probability
Few things in life are certain. For example, even if we are told that we are in for a nice, sunny, warm day, we frequently find that the forecast is “off”; and the day turns out to be cloudy or chilly, or even rainy and cold.

Probability is a statement about how likely something is to be. The meteorologist predicts how they expect the weather to be, based upon a number of factors such as the time of year, general climatic patterns, etc. However, there is no guarantee they will be correct. Maybe they will be correct seven or eight times out of ten, but they are certainly not going to be correct 100% of the time. That’s why they say things like: “the probability of precipitation is 70%”.

The results of psychological and educational tests are all subject to probability (i.e., some degree of error). The good ones are actually able to quantify how likely they are to be incorrect. As an example of the probability of error in a very well respected test, I was told of a young man who completed the entrance examination for Law school. He achieved one of the highest scores ever obtained on the test; even though he wasn’t known as being a particularly bright fellow, and he hadn’t spent much time studying for the test. Apparently, during the exam, when he was given a warning that the test time would be up in five minutes, he simply began filling in answers at random. As it turns out, the answers he selected were virtually all correct ones. He probably couldn’t do that again — even if he were given a “parallel” form of the same admission test. Nevertheless, he stood a chance of doing very well on the test he took simply by guessing — even though it was a very small chance — and that’s exactly what happened. He was awarded an admission scholarship but, as you probably guessed, he disappointed his professors badly during the course of his studies.

The moral from this story for the ENSI user is to always present your obtained results in a tentative manner. Sometimes the results can be very far “off the mark”. To think or act like a test is 100% accurate is like playing a game called “Russian Roulette”*. Sooner or later you will be wrong.

*Russian Roulette defined: The act of loading a bullet into one chamber of a revolver, spinning the cylinder, and then pulling the trigger while pointing the gun at one’s own head.

Types of Tests

A psychological test is an instrument designed to measure features of an individual that typically are not directly observable, such as their level of intelligence, their vocational interests, academic achievement, antisocial beliefs, etc. Testing is an act that is undertaken to produce a measure of an individual’s standing on a skill or trait of interest.

Psychological tests are often a series of tasks that are presented in a “standardized” (i.e., consistent) manner, that the examinee is required to “solve”. Most tests focus only upon a single feature or characteristic of the examinee, such as their reading achievement, creativity, manual dexterity, mechanical aptitude, etc. The examinee’s performance on a test, that is summarized by their obtained test score, is assumed to reflect their standing on the trait or characteristic of concern. Tests of this nature usually are interested in securing the examinee’s best performance. However, some tests, that are commonly called questionnaires, usually seek to identify an individual’s typical performance.

‘Objective’ tests generally have a limited number of response alternatives. For example, the examinee may only be able to choose between: “Strongly Agree”, “Agree”, “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree”. Specific, predefined response options such as this limit the degree to which the examiner’s beliefs and values can influence the score he/she is able to award the examinee on that test. In contrast, ‘projective’ tests, such as the famous “Ink Blot Test”, welcome all answers the examinee provides; and assume that the examinee reveals his/her essential nature by ‘projecting’ (much like a movie projector does) his/her own values and wishes upon the vaguely defined ‘target’ item (e.g., an ink blot). As a result, and even when scoring standards are supplied for the examiner, the results an examinee obtains on projective tests are much more subject to the biases and beliefs the examiner holds.

The ENSI is a forced-choice (i.e., objective) questionnaire, with the following response alternatives: “True”, “False” and “I Don’t Know”. It seeks to define the student’s typical performance across 11 “scales” (i.e., areas) that are important for their success in school, rather than assessing their optimal performance in each of the areas the ENSI addresses.

Understanding Test Scores

Test results are usually interpreted in a norm-referenced or criterion-referenced manner.

Theoretically, a norm-referenced test interpretation compares an individual’s obtained test results to the results that would have been obtained if the entire population of similar individuals had taken the test beforehand; and those results had been carefully recorded (as in the coin and height example above) for comparison purposes. In practice, however, an examinee’s results are, in fact, compared to a much smaller, but “representative sample” of the “population” of such individuals. This sample is called the “normative sample”. Considerable effort typically goes into ensuring a test’s normative sample closely parallels the population of interest. For example, the normative sample for a test of ‘distractibility in first-grade students living in Calgary, Alberta’, would likely include a 50-50% split of males and females, who were five to seven years of age, who were equally likely to live in each quadrant of the city, and so on.

The ENSI was normed on a sample of five to 15 year olds who were in school, and attending in kindergarten, or in grades from one through nine.

The ENSI uses norm referenced scoring in that the student-of-interest’s results on each of the ENSI scales are compared to the results obtained by other similar students in the “norm” group. It is inappropriate to administer the ENSI for a child who falls outside of the test’s norm group parameters, because there is no way to know if their obtained results would be meaningful in any way.

A criterion-referenced test focuses upon an individual’s performance on a particular measure or “criterion”, rather than where their score stands in comparison to a norm group. Consider a 10 word Spelling test, for example. For each word (i.e., criterion) the student spells correctly, he/she is awarded ten points. If 8 of the 10 words are spelled correctly, the student is awarded a score of 80%.

Criterion-referenced score interpretations are generally more applicable to achievement tests than tests that focus upon psychological traits. However, test scores are sometimes interpreted using both criterion-referenced and norm-referenced methods. For example, the above student’s score of 80% on the Spelling test may fall at the 84th percentile (i.e., above the score earned by 84% of his class mates).

Statisticians have a number of different methods to represent the student’s standing relative to a norm group; and to indicate just how significant their obtained score is. These methods are well beyond the scope of this program. However, it is important for you to know that the various categories of results (i.e, “above average”, “average”, and “below average”) and ranges of results (e.g., “Likely”, “Unlikely”, and “Possible”) that are reported by the ENSI have been determined using statistical measures of this nature.

To make the above discussion regarding norm- and criterion-referenced tests more meaningful, consider this: Your ENSI Qualifying Training Test score is criterion-referenced since it is based upon the number of items you answer correctly–not how well you perform in comparison to others taking the training.

A point to ponder: Why would we opt for a criterion-referenced Training Test over a norm-referenced Training Test?

To review, psychological tests are usually designed to measure a skill or trait that, typically, is not directly observable. Normally, a person’s score on a test is assumed to represent “how much” of the trait of interest (i.e., the thing that the test is measuring, such as intelligence) the test-taker possesses. Most tests are constructed using rather advanced statistical concepts and techniques, and, as a result, tend to be much more complex, and difficult to interpret than people expect. When important decisions are based upon the results a person obtains on a test, special consideration must be given to: a) the quality of the test (i.e., its psychometric properties and security), b) the appropriateness of its use with a particular ‘examinee’, and c) the competence of the professional who administers, scores and interprets it.

Understanding Reported Results

Testing vs Assessment vs Screening
Testing is a circumscribed activity that focuses upon a single area of concern, such as reading achievement. However, the term “testing” is often (inaccurately) interchanged with assessment. For example, a parent or a teacher might say: “Clearly, we have no idea what’s “up” with Johnny. He’s struggling horribly at school and in the community. We need to get him tested.”

In contrast to having a student “tested”, an assessment is a much more broadly based activity that seeks to: a) gather and integrate information from all pertinent sources relating to the area(s) of concern, b) arrive at a diagnosis (i.e., a specific statement of the focal concern(s), and c) detail a plan for addressing and/or relieving the concern(s) identified.

In education, the term assessment generally refers to a process involving a wide assortment of methods that educators use to evaluate the academic readiness, learning progress, and skill acquisition of their students. One or more tests are very common components of an academic assessment.

Returning to the “Johnny” example above, obviously, there are many factors that could be contributing to, or even the root cause of the difficulties Johnny is presenting. Maybe he is sleeping poorly, not getting sufficient nourishment, or is physically ill. Perhaps he is reacting to failing grades, or he is being bullied and his behaviour is essentially a “call for help”. His family could be under stress, or unable to provide him with the level of guidance and support he needs to do well. Maybe he is grieving the loss of his pet, a close friend or even a relative. The possibilities are extensive. How do clinicians ever decide which areas they need to include in their assessment?

Maslow’s “need hierarchy” provides one very useful framework for defining the scope of an assessment. Essentially, Maslow proposed that, when conditions are right, people are naturally motivated to become the best they can be, or to “self-actualize”. Self-actualizing requires a foundation of met (i.e., satisfied or fulfilled) needs. These needs are often depicted as five distinct, but inter-related layers of a pyramid that: a) the individual is naturally motivated to meet, and b) that become more intense the longer they go unmet. The first layer of the pyramid represents physiological needs. It is followed by safety, social, and esteem needs. Self-actualization stands at the pinnacle of the pyramid.

One must satisfy the lower level, more basic needs before progressing on to meet higher level growth needs. Importantly, needs that are unfulfilled will serve to obstruct the individual’s movement towards “being the best they can be”. To illustrate, if a student’s needs for food, shelter and water (physiological level needs) go unmet, that child is most unlikely to meet higher level needs, such as positive peer relations (social needs) or achievement (esteem needs). The same is true for safety and social needs, and so on.

These five “layers” provide a template for the scope of an assessment. A wide range of tests and techniques are generally employed to gauge the degree to which each of these need areas are being met. Identifying (i.e., diagnosing) any obstructions in the way of the individual’s positive progress; and prescribing a treatment to reduce or remove any such obstructions, theoretically, should return that individual to a positive path of growth.

A psycho-educational assessment is a unique form of assessment in that its focus is the intersection of the examinee’s educational and psychological functioning. In other words, a psycho-educational assessment measures and evaluates the student’s current achievement against his/her ‘potential’ achievement, diagnoses those learning factors and living circumstances that may be constricting his/her learning, and details specific strategies and steps to remedy or minimize the learning problems the student is experiencing.

The ENSI follows the “template” of a psycho-educational assessment in that it includes items and scales to provide an indication of the student’s:

a) learning potential,
b) their current achievement, and
c) strives to detect a wide range of learning, behavior and adjustment factors that could impede their ability to learn.

However, the ENSI is NOT and assessment. It is a screening measure.

Screening
Screening programs are used for a variety of purposes. They may take a variety of forms, and use a wide array of “critical” or test measures. However, their central purpose is to quickly, and economically categorize individuals into two groups — one group that “passes” on the measure of concern; and one that does not. Consider the following examples:

Example 1: During the recent ebola outbreak, health officials stationed at international airports scanned the body temperature of all arrivals from countries where the virus was known to be active. Those with a normal body temperature proceeded on their way. Those with an elevated body temperature were immediately directed towards further medical attention.

Example 2: A private school requires all of it’s (successful) applicants to be a full two years ahead of their current grade placement on the “Wide Range Achievement Test” – a paper and pencil test that only takes a few minutes to administer and score. Students scoring below the required level are simply denied admission.

Example 3: Individuals wishing to attend a political rally are required to pass through a magnetometer to ensure they are not carrying a concealed weapon. Anyone who activates the device is subjected to a thorough search before being allowed entry.

As a screening measure, the ENSI seeks to distinguish between students who are likely to progress well academically from those students whose educational success may be at risk.

Clearly, an effective screening program is much more cost effective and time efficient than, for example, subjecting all international visitors to a comprehensive medical examination, or completing a full scale academic assessment on all applicants who apply for an academically advanced school program. Unfortunately, though, no screening test is 100% accurate. As a result, misclassified cases represent a major concern for screening.

Accurately identified cases can be either “true positives” (i.e., those correctly identified as being at risk) or “true negatives” (i.e., those correctly identified as not at risk). Misclassified cases are either “false positives” (e.g., those cases identified as being at risk but who later perform satisfactorily in the area of concern); or “false negatives” (i.e., those cases not identified by the screening as being at-risk, but who later perform poorly in the area of concern). Consider the following 2 x 2 matrix of possible screening outcomes:

	Possible Screening Outcomes
	Positive	Negative
True	One	2
False	3	4

Examinees who fall into Cells 1 and 2 are served well by by a carefully crafted screening. To elaborate, those who fall into Cell 1 will undergo further evaluation in response to their screening results; and then, based upon their “follow-up” results, will receive treatment as appropriate. In contrast, no further actions are taken in the case of examinees who fall into Cell 2, which is appropriate, given that they do not appear to be experiencing notable concerns.

Cell 3 examinees are served modestly less well, since their screening results will trigger further evaluation which is unnecessary. Cell 4 examinees are served the least well, because no further evaluation will be undertaken when it is, in fact, necessary.

Ideally, with a “good” screening measure, the vast majority of all individuals screened will fall into Cells 1 or 2. However, even with a “good” screening measure, concern will always remain for “misclassified” (i.e., Cell 3 and Cell 4) cases — with this being most pertinent regarding examinees who fall into Cell 4, because their (genuine) needs may go unaddressed, and the time and effort spent on their screening were wasted.

Unfortunately, very few screening measures – including the ENSI – report how efficiently they are able to correctly classify the cases screened. However, unlike most other screening measures, the ENSI does report its results using a more stringent criterion (“Likely”), and a less stringent (“Possible”) criterion. Depending upon the prevailing circumstances/needs/concerns, this feature can be used to reduce the frequency of false positives (by requiring a “Likely” result); or reduce the frequency of false negatives (by employing the less demanding “Possible” criterion).

What are the hallmarks of a good screening Instrument?
A good screening instrument is one that:

is valid and reliable
provides little or no discomfort, or potential of harm, for the person screened
does not require advanced testing credentials
has a low per use cost
requires little administration time
is widely available and is suitable for administration in a variety of formats, and under a variety of conditions
is easy to administer
is quickly and objectively scored
is easily interpreted
clearly specifies areas of potential concern,
indicates an appropriate course of action for each potential concern detected
has a low “false negative” rate (i.e., is likely to identify an individual showing genuine concerns), and
has a low “false positive” rate (i.e., is unlikely to indicate a concern is present when a real concern does not exist).

The ENSI compares favourably on the vast majority of these indicies.

Using the ENSI

Contraindications

We strongly recommend that you do not use the ENSI under the following circumstances:

on your own child
on the child of a friend or relative
in situations where parental consent has not been secured or is uncertain
on students who fall outside of the required age and grade levels, or who are not currently in attendance at school
as a diagnostic test.

Introducing the ENSI

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances. If you are working directly with the student of concern, in the capacity of a teacher, counselor, child care worker, physician, social worker, etc., it is very likely that your concern will be for a child who is struggling; and apparently doing much less well than the norm for their age, or for their apparent ability.

In situations such as this, consider presenting the ENSI as a “compass” that might be able to “point us” towards one or more areas that could be contributing to the difficulties the student is experiencing. Make it clear that any such areas identified would then need to be assessed in depth to determine if a real concern is present and to decide upon the best way to address and resolve it.

If you are working in an administrative role, and want to use the ENSI as a component of your admission procedure, you would inform the parent that the ENSI s a part of your admission process; and that it is designed to help you distinguish between those students who are well suited to your program and those who are much less likely to benefit from your offerings. For example, say your program is designed for students who have average or better learning ability, but are experiencing notable learning difficulties that are not due to attention or behavioural factors. The ENSI results would do a very good job of detecting students who are likely and unlikely to meet these criteria—who would then be verified by further diagnostic testing.

Determining the Appropriate Administration Method

The ENSI can be administered in five different ways. Each of these methods is detailed below to assist you in selecting the method that is best suited to the prevailing circumstances. All assume that you have:

a) informed the parent/guardian about the ENSI and the reason(s) for your wish to complete it with reference to their son/daughter, and
b) secured their informed consent to do so.

Normally, detailing the specific instructions the parent/guardian needs to complete the ENSI will occur as each of the administration options is outlined. In general, the clinician will begin by presenting the administration method that requires less of their (the clinician’s) time. The particular method that is most efficient with your time will depend upon your particular circumstances and supports. Typically, and despite the method of administration employed, completing the ENSI will require about 15 minutes of the informant’s (i.e., the parent/guardian’s) time.

The Online Administration Method
The online administration method is the most economical in terms of the professional’s time, and is the most widely used administration method. Use the online administration method if the parent/caregiver:

a) has an current email address, (you may need to ask them for it)
b) has access to an internet-enabled mobile device or computer, and
c) indicates that they would be comfortable doing the data entry necessary to complete the ENSI online.

Literally, all the professional needs to do is:

1) open their ENSI account,
2) click the “Request ENSI” link in their toolbar,
3) fill in the student’s name, the parent/caregiver’s name, and the parent/caregiver’s email address, and
4) click “Send”.

Everything else happens automatically. This includes a message sent to the parent/caregiver:

a) asking them to complete the ENSI,
b) providing them with the specific instructions they need to complete it,
c) informing them that the results will be available from the administering professional,
d) providing them with the administering profesional’s contact information, and, when they finish answering the last item of the ENSI and click the “Submit” button,
e) a notice informing them that their answers were successfully transmitted for scoring.

A final written report is automatically compiled and will be immediately available to the clinician (from the “Reports” link of their ENSI account) as soon as the parent submits their answers to the ENSI’s questions. [Note: The ENSI also keeps track of the number of times and dates when the “Request ENSI” email is sent to the parent/guardian.]

The Kiosk Administration Method
Use this method as an alternate to the online administration method if the parent/guardian:

a) does not have a email account, and/or access to an internet enabled device but
b) is comfortable with level of “data entry” necessary to complete the ENSI,
c) is physically present in your office or clinic, and
d) you are able to provide them access to an internet enabled device.

The method simply requires you to:

1) Open your ENSI account.
2) Send yourself (rather than the parent/guardian) the “Request ENSI” email. Send it to your regular email address (or to an email account, such as hotmail or gmail account that has been created for the purpose).
3) Open the email you sent to yourself and click the link in it to activate the ENSI’s data entry form.
4) Close the ENSI and your email account (to prevent the parent/caregiver from accessing them), but leave the data entry form open, and
5) Invite the parent/caregiver to enter their answers to the questions and then hit the “Submit” button when they are finished.

To access the report, you will need to (re)open your ENSI account and click the “Reports” link in your toolbar.

The Questionnare Administration Method
This method is most convenient for parents/caregivers who do not have and email account, and/or do not have access to an internet enabled device, and/or who are uncomfortable with entering data into a computing device. Essentially, it is the “old fashioned” method of administering a test where the client gets a hard copy print out of the test, and is asked to fill in their answers using a pen or pencil.

Using the Questionnaire administration method requires:

1) Printing out a hard copy of the ENSI Questionnaire by clicking the “Questionnaire” link on your toolbar.
2) Giving the printed questionnaire to the parent/guardian, and
3) asking them to complete it and return it to you when they have finished it. (Specific instructions for the parent/caregiver appear in print on the questionnaire).

When the questionnaire is returned:

a) Open the ENSI
b) Click the “Enter Data” link on your toolbar, and
c) transfer (or have an assistant transfer) the responses recorded on the questionnaire into the data entry form that appears.

As ever, the written report will be immediately available from the “Reports” link on your toolbar as soon as the informant’s information is submitted.

The Question and Answer Administration Method
The Question and Answer method can be used with a parent/guardian who is in your office/clinic, or it can be employed over the telephone. It is very well suited to parents/guardians who, for one reason or another, would not be able to manage with either of the “self-administering” methods, or who may require the support and/or reassurance of the person administering the test.

This is the most time consuming administration method. It is likely that you will have a trained assistant undertake this administration. The steps involved are:

1) Open the ENSI
2) Click the “Enter Data” link to open the data entry page.
3) Read the instructions and each question aloud to the informant, and enter each answer they provide into the form.
4) Click the “Submit” button when all the questions have been answered.
5) Click the “Reports” link to access the prepared report.

The Self-Administration Method
The Self-Administration method is likely to be the least reliable of all of the administration methods because the clinician, rather than the parent/guardian, provides the answers to the ENSI’s questions. As a result, answers regarding the student’s developmental history are much less likely to be known than are answers to questions pertaining to the student’s present behaviour.

This administration method is most appropriate when an adult familiar with the student’s current behaviour and developmental history is unavailable; or the clinician feels that the ENSI might be able to generate some ideas that would be worthy of considering in their work with the student-of-concern.

Due to these limitations, the Self-Administration method should only be used sparingly; and any results obtained should always be seen as requiring an extra measure of caution.

The steps required for a Self-Administration are:

1) Open the ENSI
2) Click the “Enter Data” link on your toolbar to open the data entry page.
3) Answer each of the questions on the data entry page to the best of your knowledge, and then click the “Submit” button.
4) Click the “Reports” link on your toolbar to view the prepared report.

Reporting Your Obtained ENSI Results

XXXXX

Finally, while the parent/guardian may be granted full access to the information contained in reports kept in the child’s file – and may even make handwritten notes regarding that information – in many jurisdictions, they are not given hard copies of those reports. It is vitally important that you are aware of, and respect your prevailing requirements and circumstances regarding the release of printed reports.

Defending Your Use of the ENSI

Should your qualifications for using the ENSI ever fall into question, reply by stating:

“Access to the ENSI is restricted to qualified users. I have taken and passed the required training; and have documentation to certify that I am a qualified user.”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\
???????????????????????????????????

Comment: Screening strives to:
a) accurately identify cases who are in need of further attention (True Positives) and
b) accurately identify cases who do not require further intervention (True Negatives),
while minimizing:
c) the number of cases reported as needing further attention when they do not (False Positives), and
d) minimizing the number of cases seen as not needing further attention when, in fact, they do (False Negatives).

???????????????????????????????????

“””
Problems

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Screening processes always should define a protocol or procedure for determining which clients need further assessment (i.e., screen positive) for a condition being screened and for ensuring that those clients receive a thorough assessment.
“””
>>>>>>>>>>>>

Assessment:

Psychological assessment is a more comprehensive evaluation of the individual than psychological testing. Psychological assessment is a process that involves checking the integration of information from multiple sources, such as tests of normal and abnormal personality, tests of ability or intelligence, tests of interests or attitudes, as well as information from personal interviews. Collateral information is also collected about personal, occupational, or medical history, such as from records or from interviews with parents, spouses, teachers, or previous therapists or physicians. A psychological test is one of the sources of data used within the process of assessment; usually more than one test is used. Many psychologists do some level of assessment when providing services to clients or patients, and may use for example, simple checklists to osis for treatment settings; to assess a particular area of functioning or disability often for school settings; to help select type of treatment or to assess treatment outcomes; to help courts decide issues such as child custody or competency to stand trial; or to help assess job applicants or employees and provide career development counseling or training.[5]

>>>>>>>>>>>
Assessment:
A comprehensive activity designed to establish a context for and the interrelatedness of test results

Problems of Assessment;
Problems With Assessment To show that I am not adopting a holier-than-thou attitude about assessment, I want to state for the record that assessment is not without its own problems. These problems include:
Fear of legal issues. Assessments are bound by the same set of legal issues as screening is however legal concerns seem to be much more salient when it comes to assessment. Many folks are so worried about possible legal ramifications of these tools that they steer away from them, favoring simpler, but less effective, tools instead.
Time consuming to set up. Although the Internet has greatly reduced the time it takes to set up an assessment system, there is still ground work involved in getting an assessment system up and running. I place this in the “no free lunch” category. As far as assessment goes it is very hard to get something for nothing. Accurate prediction requires a bit of sweat.
Experts required. The technical rigor associated with assessment means that one of us I/O geeks should be involved somewhere in the process. In most cases this is the only way to ensure that assessments are being used in an effective and legally defensible manner.
Perceptions that the cost of entry is too high. All of the issues related to the proper use of assessments mean that many folks balk at the costs of setting up an assessment system. What they don’t understand is the fact that, with a properly set up system, these costs are but a small fraction of the return on the investment made in the system.
Ironically, many of these problems stem from the rigor that must be applied to the assessment process. This is pretty much the opposite of the origin of problems related to screening.

Diagnosis: a formal decision

Determining the Appropriate Administration Method

a) informed the parent/guardian about the ENSI and the reason(s) for your wish to complete it with reference to their son/daughter, and
b) secured their informed consent to do so.

Normally, detailing the specific instructions the parent/guardian needs to complete the ENSI will occur as each of the administration options is outlined. In general, the clinician will begin by presenting the administration method that requires less of their (the clinician’s) time. The particular method that is most efficient with your time will depend upon your particular circumstances and supports. Typically, and despite the method of administration employed, completing the ENSI will require about 15 minutes of the informant’s (i.e., the parent/guardian’s) time.

The Online Administration Method:

The online administration method is the most economical in terms of the professional’s time, and is the most widely used administration method. Use the online administration method if the parent/caregiver:

Literally, all the professional needs to do is:

1) open their ENSI account,
2) click the “Request ENSI” link in their toolbar,
3) fill in the student’s name, the parent/caregiver’s name, and the parent/caregiver’s email address, and
4) click “Send”.

Everything else happens automatically. This includes a message sent to the parent/caregiver:

a) asking them to complete the ENSI,
b) providing them with the specific instructions they need to complete it,
c) informing them that the results will be available from the administering professional,
d) providing them with the administering profesional’s contact information, and, when they finish answering the last item of the ENSI and click the “Submit” button,
e) a notice informing them that their answers were successfully transmitted for scoring.

A final written report is automatically compiled and will be immediately available to the clinician (from the “Reports” link of their ENSI account) as soon as the parent submits their answers to the ENSI’s questions. [Note: The ENSI also keeps track of the number of times and dates when the “Request ENSI” email is sent to the parent/guardian.]

The Kiosk Administration Method:

Use this method as an alternate to the online administration method if the parent/guardian:

a) does not have a email account, and/or access to an internet enabled device but
b) is comfortable with level of “data entry” necessary to complete the ENSI,
c) is physically present in your office or clinic, and
d) you are able to provide them access to an internet enabled device.

The method simply requires you to:

1) Open your ENSI account.
2) Send yourself (rather than the parent/guardian) the “Request ENSI” email. Send it to your regular email address (or to an email account, such as hotmail or gmail account that has been created for the purpose).
3) Open the email you sent to yourself and click the link in it to activate the ENSI’s data entry form.
4) Close the ENSI and your email account (to prevent the parent/caregiver from accessing them), but leave the data entry form open, and
5) Invite the parent/caregiver to enter their answers to the questions and then hit the “Submit” button when they are finished.

To access the report, you will need to (re)open your ENSI account and click the “Reports” link in your toolbar.

The Questionnare Administration Method:

This method is most convenient for parents/caregivers who do not have and email account, and/or do not have access to an internet enabled device, and/or who are uncomfortable with entering data into a computing device. Essentially, it is the “old fashioned” method of administering a test where the client gets a hard copy print out of the test, and is asked to fill in their answers using a pen or pencil.

Using the Questionnaire administration method requires:

1) Printing out a hard copy of the ENSI Questionnaire by clicking the “Questionnaire” link on your toolbar.
2) Giving the printed questionnaire to the parent/guardian, and
3) asking them to complete it and return it to you when they have finished it. (Specific instructions for the parent/caregiver appear in print on the questionnaire).

When the questionnaire is returned:

a) Open the ENSI
b) Click the “Enter Data” link on your toolbar, and
c) transfer (or have an assistant transfer) the responses recorded on the questionnaire into the data entry form that appears.

As ever, the written report will be immediately available from the “Reports” link on your toolbar as soon as the informant’s information is submitted.

The Question and Answer Administration Method:

The Question and Answer method can be used with a parent/guardian who is in your office/clinic, or it can be employed over the telephone. It is very well suited to parents/guardians who, for one reason or another, would not be able to manage with either of the “self-administering” methods, or who may require the support and/or reassurance of the person administering the test.

This is the most time consuming administration method. It is likely that you will have a trained assistant undertake this administration. The steps involved are:

1) Open the ENSI
2) Click the “Enter Data” link to open the data entry page.
3) Read the instructions and each question aloud to the informant, and enter each answer they provide into the form.
4) Click the “Submit” button when all the questions have been answered.
5) Click the “Reports” link to access the prepared report.

The Self-Administration Method:

The Self-Administration method is likely to be the least reliable of all of the administration methods because the clinician, rather than the parent/guardian, provides the answers to the ENSI’s questions. As a result, answers regarding the student’s developmental history are much less likely to be known than are answers to questions pertaining to the student’s present behaviour.

This administration method is most appropriate when an adult familiar with the student’s current behaviour and developmental history is unavailable; or the clinician feels that the ENSI might be able to generate some ideas that would be worthy of considering in their work with the student-of-concern.

Due to thse limitations, the Self-Administration method should only be used sparingly; and any results obtained should always be seen as requiring an extra measure of caution.

The steps required for a Self-Administration are:

1) Open the ENSI
2) Click the “Enter Data” link on your toolbar to open the data entry page.
3) Answer each of the questions on the data entry page to the best of your knowledge, and then click the “Submit” button.
4) Click the “Reports” link on your toolbar to view the prepared report.

Introducing the ENSI
Securing Consent

Reporting ENSI Results

The results of the ENSI are reported in a wide variety of settings ranging from a small, on-on-one meetings with the student’s parent/caregiver, to a large formal case conference that may also involve a wide range of professionals, caregivers and others.

In all occasions, before the ENSI results are disclosed, the Ensi’s purpose and requirements should be reviewed.

professional who administered it, should note again:
a) that the ENSI is a screening test — not a diagnostic test
b) that it’s purpose is
– Interpreting the ENSI
– stress purpose, requirements and disclaimer
– releasing the report – caution

Outcome
-where to from here

Defending your Qualifications/Use of ENSI
Do it right from the start (Introducing)
Can’t use w/o passing Training Test or supervision
No claims made – possibilities to explore

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

XXXXX

Sreening:
Screening often is the initial contact between a client and the treatment system
Screening processes always should define a protocol or procedure for determining which clients need further assessment (i.e., screen positive) for a condition being screened and for ensuring that those clients receive a thorough assessment.
Problems
Not based directly on job analysis. Screening questions often do not have direct, tight linkages to clearly specified aspects of job performance such as those provided by job analysis.
Not validated. Screening systems are almost never validated, so there is no way to gather robust (i.e., durable) metrics about the effectiveness of a specific screening question.
Lack of quality control. Systems that are set up to allow recruiters to create screening questions offer almost no quality control over contents of screening questions or the development of algorithms used to eliminate persons from the applicant pool.
Lack of concern over legal issues. Most screening system vendors downplay the whole idea that screening questions may actually run afoul of EEOC rules and regulations. This is far from true if you consider the fact that most of these systems allow personnel who are not well versed in the legal aspects of selection systems to develop measures used to kick applicants out of the selection process.
?? Hallmarks of a good screening Instrument??
Testing:
Testing is a circumscribed activity that focuses upon a single area of concern, e.g., reading achievement. The term is often interchanged with assessment, but testing is likely to be a component of assessment. Primary goal: a specific statement of a skill, or a level of functioning.

Assessment:

>>>>>>>>>>>
Assessment:
A comprehensive activity designed to establish a context for and the interrelatedness of test results

Fear of legal issues. Assessments are bound by the same set of legal issues as screening is however legal concerns seem to be much more salient when it comes to assessment. Many folks are so worried about possible legal ramifications of these tools that they steer away from them, favoring simpler, but less effective, tools instead.
Time consuming to set up. Although the Internet has greatly reduced the time it takes to set up an assessment system, there is still ground work involved in getting an assessment system up and running. I place this in the “no free lunch” category. As far as assessment goes it is very hard to get something for nothing. Accurate prediction requires a bit of sweat.
Experts required. The technical rigor associated with assessment means that one of us I/O geeks should be involved somewhere in the process. In most cases this is the only way to ensure that assessments are being used in an effective and legally defensible manner.
Perceptions that the cost of entry is too high. All of the issues related to the proper use of assessments mean that many folks balk at the costs of setting up an assessment system. What they don’t understand is the fact that, with a properly set up system, these costs are but a small fraction of the return on the investment made in the system.
Ironically, many of these problems stem from the rigor that must be applied to the assessment process. This is pretty much the opposite of the origin of problems related to screening.

Diagnosis: a formal decision

The Difference Between Screening and Assessment

The purpose of screening is to determine whether a woman needs assessment. The purpose of assessment is to gather the detailed information needed for a treatment plan that meets the individual needs of the woman. Many standardized instruments and interview protocols are available to help counselors perform appropriate screening and assessment for women.
Screening involves asking questions carefully designed to determine whether a more thorough evaluation for a particular problem or disorder is warranted. Many screening instruments require little or no special training to administer. Screening differs from assessment in the following ways:
Screening is a process for evaluating the possible presence of a particular problem. The outcome is normally a simple yes or no.
Assessment is a process for defining the nature of that problem, determining a diagnosis, and developing specific treatment recommendations for addressing the problem or diagnosis.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A screening is generally a short, informal test which is used either to determine whether further testing or warranted, or to determine whether an individual is likely to be helped by a specific program. Licensed Davis providers use screening to determine whether or not an individual is likely to benefit from a Davis program.
The term assessment may sometimes be used to mean an informal screening, or it could be used to mean more extensive testing. It also is commonly used when the testing is focused only on ascertaining academic skill levels, such as a reading assessment.
Diagnostic testing usually means that the person will be given several different kind of tests, in an effort to get a full picture of their learning needs. Depending on the background and qualifications of the professional doing the testing, it may include tests related to vision and hearing as well as tests related to intellectual functioning and achievement. Generally the professional will give a detailed written report summarizing the findings, and may also include recommendations as to the types of intervention or support that would be appropriate for the individual.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Interpreting Test ScoresYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Norm Referenced

Norms are statistical representations of a population. A norm-referenced score interpretation compares an individual’s results on the test with the statistical representation of the population. In practice, rather than a population, a representative sample or group is tested. This provides a group norm or set of norms. One representation of norms is the Bell curve(also called “normal curve”). Norms are available for standardized psychological tests, allowing for an understanding of how an individual’s scores compare with the group norms. Norm referenced scores are typically reported on the standard score (z) scale or a rescaling of it.
?? Find -Normal distribution and probability

ENSI’s Unique Features

As an online screening inventory, the ENSI has many unique features that make it an incredibly attractive resource for professionals working with students in need.

1. There is no software to purchase or install, and no contract to sign. The per use fee is the only cost involved and, with volume discounts, can be less than one dollar per use.
2. It is very intuitive and user-friendly. Most professionals only require a few minutes to acquaint them self with the ENSI and its major features.
3. It includes comprehensive video tutorials and step-by-step instructions to resolve any and all questions that might arise.
4. It offers a total of five different administration methods that can be selected to fit the particulars of the situation.
5. Administering the ENSI requires little to none of the busy clinician’s time. The online administration method, for example, can be executed in about 60 seconds. Other administration methods can easily be set up and executed by office or clinical support staff.
6. It follows the ‘template’ of a psycho-educational assessment. In other words, it addresses the core topics addressed in a formal psycho-educational assessment

No software to purchase or install
No contract to sign
Very intuitive and user friendly plus
Video and step-by-step tutorials
Multiple methods of administration
Few to no demands upon the clinician’s time
Follows a psycho-educational template
Written report instantly prepared
Provides a Summary and/or Expert Full Report
Automated requests, notices and internal communication
Supervisor/Manager friendly
Remarkably time and cost efficient
Free training for unqualified users.

Introducing the ENSI

Securing Consent – Online = assumed/stated agreement
– Other methods – take care
Determine appropriate Administration Method

Reporting the results
– stress Purpose, requirements and disclaimer
– releasing pdf report – caution

Introducing the ENSI:

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances. The following “scripts” are presented as guides that you may find helpful until you become familiar with the introducing the ENSI in a way that a) engages the parent/caregiver in addressing your concerns about their child, b) secures their consent for an ENSI screening, and c) encourages them to complete the ENSI.

If you are working directly with the student-of-interest it is very likely that your concern will have arisen because you have observed that child is struggling in some way. Perhaps they are achieving poorly, experiencing peer problems or misbehaving at school or in the community.

In situations such as this:

1) If you are not already acquainted with the parent/guardian, begin by introducing yourself and informing them of your role/involvement with their son/daughter.

2) Inform them of your concern that their child seems to be running into some difficulties (or that he/she is continuing to struggle) despite his/her apparent ability and the resources and supports that are available for them.

3) Ask the parent/guardian a) if they also feel the child is struggling; and b) for any ideas they have entertained regarding possible causes.

4) If they concur that the child is struggling, ask them if they would consider completing a short screening inventory that might provide some help towards getting a clearer idea of what areas are and are not working well for the student.

be in support of completing a quick screening to get some indication of what areas are and are not “working well” for the student.

offer that, with their support, we could do a quick screening to get a clearer sense of those areas that are working well for the student and perhaps get some indications

4) If they concur, ask them what they feel are the major areas of concern.

[If they disagree, state that you feel differently, but acknowledge that your differences of opinion might reflect the fact that you observe the child in a very different setting than the parent/guardian does. Then jump to point 6b)]

5) Ask them what, if any, ideas they have considered as possible underlying reasons for the child’s difficulties; and acknowledge each “potential cause” that they do offer as a noteworthy possibility.

6) State that it is difficult to know for sure what areas are “working well” and what areas might be contributing to his/her difficulties.

6b) State that you are seeing

Offer that it is difficult to know

Next, suggest that it might be helpful to do a quick “screen” for issues or concerns that might be “getting in their way of success”.

Then, state that with their support, you would like to

2) or b) that they are continuing to experience difficulty despite the efforts and resources that have been put in place for them,
2) suggest that it might be very helpful to zero in on the main spots that are contributing to his/her difficulties or b) that perhaps the main sources for his/her difficulties may have simply been missed.

consider presenting the ENSI to the parent/caregiver as a “compass” that might be able to “point us” towards one or more areas that could be contributing to the difficulties the student is experiencing, and/or even suggest a solution or two that we haven’t yet considered.

It is important that you make it clear that any such areas that the ENSI

would then need to be assessed in depth to determine if a real concern is present, and to decide upon the best way to address and resolve.

If you are working in an administrative role, and want to use the ENSI as a component of your admission procedure, you would inform the parent that the ENSI is a preliminary part of your admission process; and that it is designed to help you distinguish between those students who are well suited to your program and those who are much less likely to benefit from your offerings. For example, if you are representing a school or program for children with specific learning disabilities, but not exhibiting behaviour disorders, you might consider saying that your program is designed for students who have average or better learning ability, but are experiencing notable learning difficulties that are not due to attention or behavioural factors.
The ENSI results would do a very good job of detecting students who are likely and unlikely to meet these criteria—who would then be verified by further diagnostic testing.
Defending your Qualifications

Outcome
-where to from here

Psychological testing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]
refers to the administration of psychological tests.

Interpreting scores [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]

Key Concepts

Screening vs Testing vs Assessment

THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS SCREENING INVENTORY

Consent:

The ENSI requires informed consent.

Parental: Informed parental consent means that the parent or legal guardian of the student is:

made aware of your desire to conduct a screening of their child’s educational needs,
informed of the nature and scope of the screening, and that they will be informed of the obtained results,
given the opportunity to approve the screening (in writing) or decline it, and
informed that they can withdraw their consent for completing the ENSI at any time prior to its administration.

Student: Because the ENSI is designed for use with children who are well below the age of majority, and their participation in the screening is not required, there is no need to inform the student of a plan to complete the ENSI “on” them. Nor is there a need to inform them of its scope and purpose, or to secure their agreement to participate. However, in some cases, it may be very appropriate to inform the student of your desire to administer the ENSI and how it might be of benefit to the student (in terms of helping to identify their educational needs) and you (in terms of your ability to work more effectively and successfully with them).

Introducing the ENSI:

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances.

If you are working directly with the student of concern, in the capacity of a teacher, counsellor, child care worker, physician, social worker, etc., it is very likely that your concern will be for a child who is struggling; and apparently doing much less well than the norm for their age, or for their apparent ability.

In situations such as this, consider presenting the ENSI as a “compass” that might be able to “point us” towards one or more areas that could be contributing to the difficulties the student is experiencing, and or suggest a solution or two that we haven’t yet considered. Make it clear that any such areas identified would then need to be assessed in depth to determine if a real concern is present, and to decide upon the best way to address and resolve.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

virtue video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zp597oPqYU

Screening Inservice/ENSI Training

Psychometrics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychometrics

Psychometrics is a science that strives to measure educational and psychological levels of people and groups of people. Areas that are often studied include intelligence, skills, and personality traits. The science is mainly a part of the science of psychology.

and…

Psychometrics is the field of study concerned with the theory and technique of psychological measurement, which includes the measurement of knowledge, abilities, attitudes, and personality traits. The field is primarily concerned with the study of differences between individuals. It involves two major research tasks, namely: (i) the construction of instruments and procedures for measurement; and (ii) the development and refinement of theoretical approaches to measurement.

Psychological testing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]
refers to the administration of psychological tests.

A psychological test is “an objective and standardized measure of a sample of behavior” (p. 4).[1] The term sample of behavior refers to an individual’s performance on tasks that have usually been prescribed beforehand. The samples of behavior that make up a paper-and-pencil test, the most common type of test, are a series of items. Performance on these items produce a test score. A score on a well- constructed test is believed to reflect a psychological constructsuch as achievement in a school subject, cognitive ability, aptitude, emotional functioning, personality, etc. Differences in test scores are thought to reflect individual differences in the construct the test is supposed to measure. The technical term for the science behind psychological testing is psychometrics.

Principles of psychological testing

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]
Proper psychological testing is conducted after vigorous research and development in
contrast to quick web-based or magazine questionnaires that say “Find out your
Personality Color,” or “What’s your Inner Age?” Proper psychological testing consists of
the following:
· Standardization – All procedures and steps must be conducted with
consistency and under the same environment to achieve the same testing
performance from those being tested.
· Objectivity – Scoring is free of subjective judgments or biases based on the
fact that the same results are obtained on test from everyone.
· Test Norms – The average test score within a large group of people where
the performance of one individual can be compared to the results of others
by establishing a point of comparison or frame of reference.
· Reliability – Obtaining the same result after multiple testing.
· Validity – The type of test being administered must measure what it is
intended to measure.[11]

Interpreting Test Scores
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]

Psychological tests, like many measurements of human characteristics, can be interpreted in a norm-referenced or criterion-referenced manner.[citation needed]

A criterion-referenced interpretation of a test score compares an individual’s performance to some criterion other than performance of other individuals. For example, the generic
school test typically provides a score in reference to a subject domain; a student might score 80% on a geography test. Criterion-referenced score interpretations are generally more applicable to achievement tests rather than psychological tests.

Often, test scores can be interpreted in both ways; a score of 80% on a geography test
could place a student at the 84th percentile, or a standard score of 1.0 or even 2.0.

THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS SCREENING INVENTORY

Introducing the ENSI:

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances.

In situations such as this, consider presenting the ENSI as a “compass” that might be able to “point us” towards one or more areas that could be contributing to the difficulties the student is experiencing. Make it clear that any such areas identified would then need to be assessed in depth to determine if a real concern is present and to decide upon the best way to address and resolve it.

If you are working in an administrative role, and want to use the ENSI as a component of your admission procedure, you would inform the parent that the ENSI s a preliminary part of your admission process; and that it is designed to help you distinguish between those students who are well suited to your program and those who are much less likely to benefit from your offerings. For example, say your program is designed for students who have average or better learning ability, but are experiencing notable learning difficulties that are not due to attention or behavioural factors. The ENSI results would do a very good job of detecting students who are likely and unlikely to meet these criteria—who would then be verified by further diagnostic testing.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Consent:

The ENSI requires informed consent.

Parental Consent:
Informed parental consent means that the parent or legal guardian of the student is:

– made aware of your desire to conduct a screening of their child’s educational needs,
– informed of the nature and scope of the screening, and that they will be informed of the obtained results,
– given the opportunity to approve the screening (in writing) or decline it, and
– informed that they can withdraw their consent for completing the ENSI at any time prior to its administration.

Student Consent:
Because the ENSI is designed for use with children who are well below the age of majority, and their participation in the screening is not required, there is no need to inform the student of a plan to complete the ENSI “on” them. Nor is there a need to inform them of its scope and purpose, or to secure their agreement to participate. However, in some cases, it may be very appropriate to inform the student of your desire to administer the ENSI; and how it might be of benefit to the student (in terms of helping to identify their educational needs) and you (in terms of your ability to work more effectively and successfully with them).

Key Concepts

Reliability vs Validity

The key traditional concepts in classical test theory are reliability and validity. A reliable measure is
measuring something consistently, while a valid measure is measuring what it is supposed to measure. A
reliable measure may be consistent without necessarily being valid, .e.g., a measurement instrument like a
broken ruler may always under-measure a quantity by the same amount each time (consistently), but the
resulting quantity is still wrong, that is, invalid. For another example, a reliable rifle will have a tight
cluster of bullets in the target, while a valid one will center that cluster around the center of the target

Screening vs Tesing vs Assessment

Psychological assessment [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing] is similar
to psychological testing but usually involves a more comprehensive assessment of the individual. Psychological assessment is a process that involves checking the integration
of information from multiple sources, such as tests of normal and abnormal personality, tests of ability or intelligence, tests of interests or attitudes, as well as information from
personal interviews. Collateral information is also collected about personal, occupational, or medical history, such as from records or from interviews with parents, spouses, teachers, or previous therapists or physicians. A psychological test is one of the sourcesof data used within the process of assessment; usually more than one test is used. Many psychologists do some level of assessment when providing services to clients or patients, and may use for example, simple checklists to osis for treatment settings; to assess a particular area of functioning or disability often for school settings; to help select type of
treatment or to assess treatment outcomes; to help courts decide issues such as child custody or competency to stand trial; or to help assess job applicants or employees and provide career development counseling or training.

Introducing the ENSI:

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances.

If you are working in an administrative role, and want to use the ENSI as a component of your admission procedure, you would inform the parent that the ENSI s a preliminary part of your admission process; and that it is designed to help you distinguish between those students who are well suited to your program and those who are much less likely to benefit from your offerings. For example, say your program is designed for students who have average or better learning ability, but are experiencing notable learning difficulties that are not due to attention or behavioural factors. The ENSI results would do a very good job of detecting students who are likely and unlikely to meet these criteria—who would then be verified by further diagnostic testing.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Screening vs testing vs Assessment:

What are the goals of testing, assessment and screening?

Points in common:
All focus upon providing a statement of functioning oe need.
All may involve formal and informal instruments.
All require some understanding of the nature of the

What are the differences?

######################################### ##

###########################################################################################################
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A screening is generally a short, informal test which is used either to determine whether further testing or warranted, or to determine whether an individual is likely to be helped by a specific program. Licensed Davis providers use screening to determine whether or not an individual is likely to benefit from a Davis program.
The term assessment may sometimes be used to mean an informal screening, or it could be used to mean more extensive testing. It also is commonly used when the testing is focused only on ascertaining academic skill levels, such as a reading assessment.
Diagnostic testing usually means that the person will be given several different kind of tests, in an effort to get a full picture of their learning needs. Depending on the background and qualifications of the professional doing the testing, it may include tests related to vision and hearing as well as tests related to intellectual functioning and achievement. Generally the professional will give a detailed written report summarizing the findings, and may also include recommendations as to the types of intervention or support that would be appropriate for the individual.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

What are some situations where are screening assessments employed
Admissions (screening in or out)
Priorizing for assessment
Guiding an assessment
Checking for improvement

What are the hallmarks of a good screening device?
Validity: What are an acceptable types and levels of validity?
(e.g., correlates with established instruments,
Reliability: Test – retest, inter-rater,
Norms: normative population is consistent with the subjects screened

What is an acceptable level of reliability?

What are the necessary credentials for using a screening measure?

How should a screening asessment be introduced?

How should screening results be reported?

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{

What is the difference between assessment and evaluation?

•Assessment focuses on learning, teaching and outcomes. It provides information for improving learning and teaching. Assessment is an interactive process between students and faculty that informs faculty how well their students are learning what they are teaching.
The information is used by faculty to make changes in the learning environment, and is shared with students to assist them in improving their learning and study habits. This information is learner-centered, course based, frequentlyanonymous, and not graded.

•Evaluationfocuses on grades and may reflect classroom components other than course content and mastery level. These could include discussion, cooperation, attendance, and verbal ability.

• The table below summarizes key differences between assessment and evaluation

Dimension of Difference Assessment Evaluation

Content:timing, primary
purpose Formative:ongoing,
to improve learning Summative: final, to gauge quality
Orientation:
focus of measurement
Process-oriented:how
learning is going
Product oriented: what’s beenlearned
Findings:
uses thereof
Diagnostic:identify areas
for improvement
Judgmental: arrive at an overall grade/score

Content adapted from:

Angelo, T and Cross, K.P. 1993. Classroom assessment techniques a handbook for college teachers. Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. Pp 427.

Assessment of Student Learning in STEM disciplines. A Duke University ‘Teaching IDEAS workshop’ presented by Ed Neal, P
h.D. Director of Faculty Development, Center for Teaching and Learning,
University of North Carolina.

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A Test is a thing.

Most people are clear on what a test is—it is the “thing” or “product” that measures a particular behavior or set of objectives. The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999) define test as “an evaluative device or procedure in which a sample of an examinee’s behavior in a specified domain is obtained and subsequently evaluated and scored using a standardized process.” When you give a test, you are taking a “snapshot in time” and making an observation of an individual’s or group’s performance. Usually, a test gives only scores; however, when the test is considered diagnostic, it offers information related to the examinee’s strengths and weaknesses based on the test performance. For example, the PPVT-III is an example of a receptive vocabulary test, while the CASL and the GRADE are diagnostic tests that offer an analysis/profile of the examinee’s strengths and weaknesses in oral language and literacy, respectively.

The problem with the word test is that it has somewhat of a negative connotation in the public arena. No parents want their children to have to be “tested,” and many of us may remember negative or stressful experiences with tests in the past. Based on the definition above, taking a test is simply gathering information in a standard way, and we certainly want to gather the best and most accurate information available. The testing experience is an important consideration, however, especially in this high-stakes arena, which continues to escalate for educational accountability. Tests are key players in this arena.

An Assessment is a process.

An assessment is a more general process of gathering data to evaluate an examinee. You take the information from test data, interviews, and other measures, and pull it all together. An assessment process begins to shape the answer to the question “why did the person/people perform this way?” The Standards (1999) define assessment as “any systematic method of obtaining information from tests and other sources, used to draw inferences about characteristics of people, objects, or programs.” Assessment can also refer to the outcome of that process (e.g., “What is your assessment of Susie’s difficulty?”). You can’t point to, or hold, an assessment (just a report from an assessment process). For example, you might use the GFTA-2 and the KLPA-2 as tests in your assessment process. You might also interview the parent(s) and the teacher. Then you make some overall intelligibility judgments. You watch the student in class or at play. These are all important steps in the assessment process.

The practical problem is that out in the world, test and assessment are sometimes used as synonyms. During a focus group we conducted a few years ago, the moderator asked the question “What assessments do you use?” The attendees were puzzled at first and then responded with the overall assessment processes they use. Had the moderator asked “What tests do you use?” or even “What assessment instruments do you use?” the confusion may have been less. Precision lowers confusion!

A Diagnosis is a decision.

After all the testing is done and you’ve gathered all the information you need and uncovered all the available data, compared it, held it up to the light, put it under a microscope and considered it in context, it is time to make a clinical judgment. “In my professional opinion, based on all the data, the history, and my clinical experience, I believe that the issue is X.” You’ve made a diagnosis—a statement or conclusion about the testing and other information-gathering that you’ve done in the overall assessment process. For example, after you complete the assessment using the GFTA-2 and KLPA-2 tests and other assessment instruments and procedures, you may conclude that the child has a phonological process disorder. You support that diagnosis with test scores, medical history data, interviews, observation, and the like. But the diagnosis is your decision, for which you must use your clinical judgment—and no test or assessment can do that for you.

Why all the fuss over terminology? Are we just splitting semantic hairs? Maybe not. Again, while the word test may not have a great reputation, it is simply one piece of the larger assessment process. A test cannot make a diagnosis; humans do that. Likewise, an assessment is not a diagnosis either. A diagnosis is the result of the assessment process; it explains and defines the “why” of performance data. Both testing and diagnosis are really steps in the larger general assessment process: gathering background information, planning, testing, interviewing, observing, analyzing, interpreting, diagnosing, and recommending. The overarching umbrella to this process is clearly our clinical minds!
– See more at: http://www.speechandlanguage.com/clinical-cafe/tests-dont-diagnose-you-do- the-difference-between-testing-and-assessment#sthash.Dj13YP6H.dpuf

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Assessment is more than testing

Psychological testing (e.g., an intelligence test, personality test, or mental health test) occurs as part of the process of psychological assessment. Professional psychological assessment usually also includes:

interview
demographic information
medical information
personal history
observations by others

Thus, the results of a psychological test are rarely used on their own.

The following definitions should help to clarify the difference between assessment and testing in psychology.
Definition of Psychological Testing

“An objective and standardized measure of a sample of behaviour”

(Anastasi, 1990)

Definition of Psychological Assessment

“An extremely complex process of solving problems (answering questions) in which psychological tests are often used as one of the methods of collecting relevant data”

(Maloney & Ward, 1976)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What Is Screening?

Response:

Screening is a brief procedure “to identify concerns regarding a child’s developmental, sensory (visual and auditory), behavioral, motor, language, social, cognitive, perceptual, and emotional skills. To the greatest extent possible, these screening procedures must be sensitive to the child’s cultural background.” (Head Start Program Performance Standard [HSPPS] 1304.20(b)(1))

Purpose

“Developmental screening is a brief check to identify children who need further evaluation to determine whether they may have disabilities” (HSPPS 1308.6(b)(3)). Screening alone is not sufficient to diagnose a developmental, behavioral, or health concern. It is one piece of information that may indicate the need for further evaluation by a qualified professional. If the screening raises concerns, then the child should be referred to the local Part C agency that will perform further evaluation. If the child is eligible, the Part C agency will lead the development of an Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) and coordinate services.

Appropriate Screening Tools

THE HALLMARKS OF A GOOD SCREENING MEASURE

Screening procedures and tools should be:

Linguistically appropriate. When possible, the screening tool should be in the child’s and family’s primary language
Age and developmentally appropriate. Choose the appropriate screening tool for the age of the child.
Culturally appropriate. Some developmental skills may look different depending on the culture and background of the child. When possible, use a screening tool or procedure that takes into account the child’s cultural context. When a culturally and linguistically appropriate screening tool is not available, information from families is even more critical to ensure validity.
Valid, reliable, and standardized when available to ensure that the tool gives information about the how a child is developing relative to a larger group of their same-age peers.
Identified as screening tools. Screening tools might inform ongoing assessment, but a tool created for assessment would not be appropriate for screening.

Timing

The screening process ideally begins during enrollment and sometimes even prior to actual participation in the program as the staff builds relationships with families. Screening offers an opportunity to work with the family to learn more about the child and support the parent–child relationship. Programs “must perform or obtain linguistically and age appropriate screening procedures to identify concerns regarding a child’s developmental, sensory (visual and auditory), behavioral, motor, language, social, cognitive, perceptual, and emotional skills,” as stated in HSPPS 1304.20(b)(1), within 45 calendar days of entry into the program (or within 30 days for programs operating 90 days or less), but they can begin as soon as the child and family are determined eligible.

Results

When the screening is performed or obtained, there are three possible actions that may follow based on the results:

There are no concerns. Child participates in ongoing, individualized care.
There may be concerns. Child participates in ongoing, individualized care while families and program staff closely monitor development over the next few weeks and months to determine if further evaluation is needed.
There are concerns. Child participates in ongoing, individualized care, and program staff should support families in contacting their local early intervention service provider.

Go to top

Questions to Consider for Planning and Programming:

How do staff ensure that parents and families understand the purpose of screening and their role in the screening process?
How do staff gather parent information to incorporate into the screening?
How does the program choose a screening tool that is valid and reliable as well as developmentally, linguistically, and culturally appropriate for the population served?
What training, both in orientation and ongoing, do staff receive in using the both the tools and the program procedures for screening and referral?
How does the program ensure that every child is screened within 45 days of enrollment?
How does the program support families in sharing screening results with their child’s physician?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Standardization – All procedures and steps must be conducted with consistency and under the same environment to achieve the same testing performance from those being tested.
Objectivity – Scoring is free of subjective judgments or biases based on the fact that the same results are obtained on test from everyone.
Test Norms – The average test score within a large group of people where the performance of one individual can be compared to the results of others by establishing a point of comparison or frame of reference.

“Normal distribution” Bell curve (also called “normal curve”). Norms are available for standardized psychological tests, allowing for an understanding of how an individual’s scores compare with the group norms. Norm referenced scores are typically reported on the HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_score” \o “Standard score” standard score (z) scale or a rescaling of it.
A HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criterion-referenced_test” \o “Criterion-referenced test” criterion-referenced interpretation of a test score compares an individual’s performance to some criterion other than performance of other individuals. For example, the generic school HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_%28student_assessment%29” \o “Test (student assessment)” test typically provides a score in reference to a subject domain; a student might score 80% on a geography test. Criterion-referenced score interpretations are generally more applicable to HYPERLINK “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achievement_test” \o “Achievement test” achievement tests rather than psychological tests.
Often, test scores can be interpreted in both ways; a score of 80% on a geography test could place a student at the 84th percentile, or a standard score of 1.0 or even 2.0.

************************************************
ENSI Training

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thank you for your interest in qualifying to use the Educational Needs Screening Inventory (ENSI). Please complete the steps listed below to register for, and complete the training necessary.

1. Read: http://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_training.htm
This section a) outlines the ENSI training program, b) provides information regarding testing basics, and c) details how to use the ENSI appropriately.

2. Read: https://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_info.htm
This section provides specific information about the ENSI and its development.

3. Watch: https://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_tutorials.htm
These videos show you how to use all of the ENSI’s features.

{Vova FYI: I have prepared – but not yet uploaded – a page for academycentre.com that has links to all of the videos that are duplicated on YouTube-just in case the user is unable to view the videos in the format they are stored in on the ensi.helpmetrics site.}

4. Consult: https://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_help.htm
This section provides written, step-by-step instructions for using each of the ENSI’s functions.

5. Complete: [?? add a new page or just place the test, or a link to it, on the ensi_training page??]
The ENSI Training Test. It is a 100-item “open book”, multiple-choice exam. All of the correct answers will be found in steps 1, 2, 3 and 4 (above). A score of 90% is the minimum required to pass the test and become a qualified ENSI user.

6. After you submit your ENSI Training Test answers for scoring, you will receive an email stating the score you achieved and, if your score is 90% or higher, it will also tell you how to activate your ENSI account.

Save this information for future reference.

The ENSI Team
[email protected]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

##########################################################

INTRODUCTION

What is the Educational Needs Screening Inventory?

The Educational Needs Screening Inventory (ENSI) is a 76-item screening inventory. It was designed:
a) to assist physicians, psychologists, social workers, teachers, counsellors and other professionals working with students-in-need, achieve a broad spectrum view of that student’s possible programming, placement, and/or assessment needs, and
b) to offer suggestions to address any areas of potential concern detected.

What are specific situations where the ENSI can be appropriately used?

The ENSI can be appropriately used:

a) as a first-level admission screening instrument,

b) to identify and prioritize students requiring a formal assessment,

c) to guide the assessment focus by flagging potential problem areas,

d) to identify and prioritize students requiring a counselling referral,

e) to assist in identifying general issues for exploration in counselling,

f) to investigate if a student’s problems appear across multiple environments,

and finally,

g) to aid clinicians and teachers in their day-to-day work with students of concern.

However, the ENSI is NOT to be used as a diagnostic test.

Who are suitable target subjects?

The ENSI is appropriate for use with students in kindergarten through the ninth grade who range from five to 15 years of age. However, it should not be used with children who are:

a) younger than five years of age,
b) older than 15 years of age, or
c) with students who are not attending school.

Who Are Eligible Users?

Professionals using the ENSI must have some formal training in the use and interpretation of educational and/or psychological tests. Those lacking the necessary training must:
a) work under the direction of a supervisor who is qualified to use the ENSI, or
b) successfully complete our online ENSI training program.

Who are eligible informants?

The individual providing information on the ENSI should be well acquainted with the student, and be familiar with the student’s developmental history. Parents and caregivers are likely to be the best ENSI informants. Informants who do not meet these criteria are likely to produce invalid ENSI results.

How long does it take for a parent (or other informant) to complete the ENSI?
Completing the ENSI takes about 15 minutes of the informant’s time. There are two parts they must complete. In the first part, they are required to supply a few pieces of identifying information (like the student’s name, date of birth and grade). In the second part, they are required to answer a total of 76 questions about the student’s learning and behaviour. Each of these questions only requires a “True”, “False”, or an “I Don’t Know” answer.

Depending upon which of the five administrations methods employed, the ENSI can take less than 60 seconds of the clinician’s time to administer. An office assistant or a clerk may also administer the ENSI on the clinician’s behalf. This is particularly useful for administration methods that are more time consuming (e.g., the Queston and Answer method).

What happens when the informant clicks the ‘Submit’ button after answering the ENSI’s 76 questions?
1) a written report of the results is automatically compiled, and
2) an email is sent to the clinician notifying them that the student’s ENSI report is avaiable.

Two types of reports are available. The Summary report presents the ENSI’s essential findings in a table and also summarises the ENSI’s essential findings in a graph. The Full report includes all of the information presented in the Summary report, but it also includes a description of the ENSI’s findings, and details specific strategies for the professional working directly with the student of interest.

The clinician can print as many reports as they require; and may do so whenever they require them.

PSYCHOMETRICS

Psychometrics is the field of study concerned with the theory and technique of psychological measurement. Psychological and achievement tests can be evaluated based upon their psychometric properties. Central among these are: the test’s reliability, validity and norms.

Reliability

There are many ways to determine if a test is reliable. A reliable test is one that provides the same, or very similar results across time, individuals and situations. For example, if a student is measured to be 52 inches (i.e., 4 feet 4 inches or 132 cm) tall on Monday, they are very likely to be the same height on Friday of that week; whether their mother, teacher or coach measures their height at home, in the classroom in on the basketball court. A person’s height is a reliable measurement because it is likely to be the same over a reasonable period of time. Of course, one or two years later, their height might be very different. However, over a period of days or weeks, they are not likely to be significantly taller or shorter.

An unreliable test is not of much use if you are seeking to measure a relatively stable trait or skill. For example, let’s say you are planning a vacation and know that your suitcase must not exceed 50 lbs. or you will be required to pay a penalty. You decide to weigh it before travelling to the airport. The first time you weigh it, it registers 48 lbs. on your bathroom scale (that coincidentally says: “not legal for trade”). So you decide to weigh it again, just to be sure. This time it registers 52 lbs. Based on these results, do you know if you should you take out some items or if it would be OK to add a few more?

The ENSI has not been subjected to any formal studies regarding its reliability. However, its relaiability can easily be demonstrated by having the same informant ‘redo’ the ENSI for a particular student; or by having a number of individuals who are well acquainted with the student and his/her developmental history complete the ENSI at the same point in time. You can easily demonstrate the ENSi’s test-retest reliability by completing the ENSI yourself, two or three times in a row, with reference to the same student. Our “beta” work with the ENSI shows a very high degree of similarity in the ratings provided for the same student by his/her parents.

Validity

A valid test is one that measures what it was intended to measure. For example, a test of Written English requires the person taking the test to supply their answers in writing, using the English language. If the person taking the test were allowed to provide their answers verbally, or using some other language (e.g., French) it would not qualify as a valid test of Written English. An invalid test of Written English has little to no value for an agency that requires its applicants to be competent in writing, using the English language.

There are many ways to assess a test’s validity. The validity of the various scales of the ENSI were established by a) comparing the results students obtained on the ENSI, to the
results they earned on very well established and widely used
measures of intelligence, behaviour problems and learning styles,
and
b) by drawing on the inclusion of components, such as the Attention
Problem Scale items and Barkley’s norms, that have an established
history of use in clinical practice.

The specific comparisons undertaken are summarized below:

ENSI Scale Validating Measures

Level of general intellectual funtioning Wechshler Full Scale IQ score
Total Score on Rogers and Silverman Giftedness Scale

Visual-motor and Auditory-verbal learning Wechsler Intelligence Scale Verbal-
problems Performance IQ discepancies

Attention problem DSM III Attention Deficit Disorder scale
using Norms provided by Barkley

Behaviour problems Bristol Social Adjustment Guides

Taken together, the comparisons made show that the ENSI does a very good job of parallelling the results students obtained on a range of well established and widely used clinical tests.

??? Add here or later??
As a result, a clinician using the ENSI can quickly and easily secure a reasonably good indication of the results a student would obtain on a formal psycho-educational assessment — and do so for a negligible cost. Moreover, a written report of the ENSI’s results is immediately available.

Norms
Norms refer to the array of results that are obtained on a particular test when that test is administered many, many times to a large number of suitable subjects. Once a test’s norms are documented, the results obtained by a subject taking that test can then be judged to be “normal” (and very likely to be obtained), or abnormal in some way, depending upon where their results fall in comparison to those obtained by the normative group. All new borns, for example, are measured for their weight to provide an indication of their health at birth. Those who are far below or above the “average” newborn weight (i.e., they are above or below the “norm”) may require a particular intervention to promote their health.

The Normative Sample
Tests are ONLY useful if they are administered to subjects who fall within the group that the test was “normed upon”. The norms for the ENSI are for children who range from 5 to 15 years of age, who ARE in attendance in school, and who attend kindergarten through the nineth grade. It is inappropriate to administer the ENSI for students who do not meet these qualifications. Any results obtained on children who fall outside of these critereia are unlikely to be meaningful or useful. Following from the birth weight example above, it would make no sense whatsoever to compare the weight of a newborn to the weight charts for children who are of school age in order to decide if an intervention is warranted.

The Normal Distribution
The normal distribution is the pattern that many things in nature follow. Consider height, again, for an example. Most Canadian men are about 5 feet 9 inches tall while most Canadian women are about 5 feet 4 inches tall. Some are very much taller, and some are very much shorter. However, the more a person’s height departs from the “average”; the fewer individuals you will find who are of that height. Let’s say you measure the height of 100 Canadian men and, for each, you write their height (to the nearest inch) on a 25 cent coin; and then arrange the coins from shortest height to tallest, in a row. Whenever you measure a man who is the same height as one you have already measured, you simply place their 25 cent coin immediately above the last one you placed showing the same height.

When you were all done and through measuring and recording the heights of all 100 men, and placing a 25 cent piece to represent each, you are very likely to have what is called a normal distribution. It is also called the “bell curve” to reflect the fact that the vast majority of coins (i.e. measurements) would cluster around the “average” height and would gradually taper off, like a bell, as the measured heights departed more and more from the “average” height. Obviously, if you repeated this exercise for women, you would get a similar “distribution” of scores, but the central or average female score would be lower than the average male score — because women are, on average, shorter than men.

Once such a distribution is “recorded”, you will be able to figure out how tall the next man or woman you measure is likely to be, simply by consulting the “distribution” of scores. If, for example, you wanted a very good estimate of how likely the next person you measure would be 5 feet 11 inches tall, all you would need to do is to count the number of 25 cent pieces in the 5 foot 11 inch column and read it as a per cent (because there is one hundred 25 cent coins in the distribution.) Likewise, by simply counting the coins, you could estimate the percent of men (or women) above or below a certain height — or even the proportion who would fall between two heights (e.g., 4 foot 8 inches and 5 foot 9 inches).

Statisticians have many tools and techniques that allow them to make sense of all kinds of distributions and scores. Most of their analyses hinge upon the notion of probability — essentially what you have been using as you counted your way through these coin examples. [Here’s something to think about: A politician says, “Fifty percent of our high school students are earning below average grades!” How do you reply?]

Probability

Few things in life are certain. For example, even if we are told that we are in for a nice, sunny, warm day, we frequently find that the forecast is “off”; and the day turns out to be cloudy or chilly, or even rainy and cold.

Probability is a statement about how likely something is to be. The meteorologist predicts how they expect the weather to be, based upon a number of factors such as the time of year, general climatic patterns, etc. However, there is no guarantee they will be correct. Maybe they will be correct nine times out of ten, but they are certainly not going to be correct 100% of the time. That’s why they say things like: “the probability of precipitation is 60%”.

The results of psychological and educational tests are all subject to probability. The good ones are actually able to quantify how likely they are to be incorrect. As an example of the probability of error in a very well respected test, an acquaintance of mine completed the entrace examination for Law school. He achieved one of the highest scores ever obtained on the test; even though he wasn’t a particularly bright fellow, and he hadn’t spent much time studying for the test.

He told me that when he was given a warning that the test time would be up in five minutes, he simply began filling in answers at random. As it turns out, the answers he selected were virtually all correct ones. He probably couldn’t do that again — especially if there were another “parallel” form of the admission test. Nevertheless, he stood a chance of doing very well on the test he took–even though it was a very small chance — and that’s exactly what happened.

He was awarded an admission scholarship but, as you probably guessed, he disappointed his professors badly during the course of his studies. The moral of the story: For the ENSI user, always present your obtained results in a tentative manner. Sometimes the results can be very far “off the mark”. Probability and testing error is like that.
To think or act like a test is 100% accurate is like playing a game called *”Russian Roulette”. Sooner or later you will be wrong.
*Rus·sian rou·lette: Definition: the practice of loading a bullet into one chamber of a revolver, spinning the cylinder, and then pulling the trigger while pointing the gun at one’s own head.

What are the differences between screeening, testing, assessment and evaluation?

What are the hallmarks of a good screening measure?

ENSI Development

School Problem Screening Inventory
Nodrick & Li
Gifted
DSM III

Introducing the ENSI to a parent/caregiver

Cautions

Administering the ENSI

Secure the necessary permssions
Making a request
– engaging the parent/caregiver
– detail purpose
– stress the limitations
Methods of Administration/Applications
Accessing and printing your report

Reporting the ENSI

Cautions:
It is important to stress:
– that the ENSI is not a diagnostic test. It’s job is only to: a) point out areas where further focus and attention may be required, and b) to note those areas where potential concerns are not likely.
– Any potential concerens identified should be explored in greater detail using appropriate measures and/or by appropriately skilled professionals.
– The strategies the ENSI offers are only suggestions.

Defending Yourself and the ENSI

Qualifications
–

Suggestions and Interventions
– based upon the offerings of a wide array of instructional texts, countless hours of consultation with instructional and clinical staff, and hands on experiences by the author.

Using the ENSI

Types of ENSI Users/Accounts

Creating your account

Managing Your ENSI

The ENSI Qualifying Examination

100 multiple choice questions broken into 10 sections:

Examinees who achieve a score of __ % will granted a Trial account

#######################################################

What are the differences between screeening, testing, assessment and evaluation?

A test must only be administered to individuals whoup ao fall within the same gr
norms
probability

Differences between Screening, Testing, Assessment, (Evaluation)

Hallmarks of a good screening measure

ENSI Development

School Problem Screening Inventory
Nodrick & Li
Gifted
DSM III

Introducing the ENSI

Cautions

Administering the ENSI

Methods of Administration/Applications
How to Upgrade/Reactivate your account
(if SubUser must request more crdits)

???
The Online administration method of the ENSI [See the ENSI Tutorials] documents the Respondent’s consent since they are asked, via the automated email you send to them, to voluntarily complete the ENSI and submit their answers in the spirit of that request. However, caution is in order, because the Respondent (say the student’s aunt or coach) may not have parental authority over the student of interest.

Norm Referenced

Once such a distribution is “recorded”, you will be able to figure out how tall the next man or woman you measure is likely to be, simply by consulting the “distribution” of scores. If, for example, you wanted a very good estimate of how likely the next person you measure would be 5 feet 11 inches tall, all you would need to do is to count the number of 25 cent pieces in the 5 foot 11 inch column and read it as a per cent (because there is one hundred 25 cent coins in the distribution.) Likewise, by simply counting the coins, you could estimate the percent of men (or women) above or below a certain height — or even the proportion who would fall between two heights (e.g., 4 foot 8 inches and 5 foot 9 inches).

Probability

Probability is a statement about how likely something is to be. The meteorologist predicts how they expect the weather to be, based upon a number of factors such as the time of year, general climatic patterns, etc. However, there is no guarantee they will be correct. Maybe they will be correct nine times out of ten, but they are certainly not going to be correct 100% of the time. That’s why they say things like: “the probability of precipitation is 60%”.

Shares the Developmental focus – particular attention to the developmental stages and concerns that tend to appear
Educational – the benchmark is the level of intellectual functioning – learning rate and potential
and, like an onion around this
— looks at sensory/physical (visual, auditory, motor)status/encumbrances
(– learning rate and potential)
— Opportunities and support for learning
— achievement level
(– opportunities and support for learning)
— specific encumbrances to learning
— social/emotional/adjustment concerns/barriers

Psycho-educational assessments
??? Or here Yes!!!
integration of educational and psychological
In education, the term assessment generally refers to a process involving a wide assortment of methods that educators use to evaluate the academic readiness, learning progress, and skill acquisition of their students. One or more tests are very common component of an assessment. A psycho-educational assessment extends the focus of this process to the psychological and social functioning of the student as well.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
One must satisfy lower level basic needs before progressing on to meet higher level growth needs. Once these needs have been reasonably satisfied, one may be able to reach the highest level called self-actualization.
Every person is capable and has the desire to move up the hierarchy toward a level of self-actualization. Unfortunately, progress is often disrupted by failure to meet lower level needs. Life experiences including divorce and loss of job may cause an individual to fluctuate between levels of the hierarchy.
Motivation theory which suggests five interdependent levels of basic human needs (motivators) that must be satisfied in a strict sequence starting with the lowest level. Physiological needs for survival (to stay alive and reproduce) and security (to feel safe) are the most fundamental and most pressing needs. They are followed by social needs (for love and belonging) and self-esteem needs (to feel worthy, respected, and have status). The final and highest level needs are self-actualization needs (self-fulfillment and achievement). Its underlying theme is that human beings are ‘wanting’ beings: as they satisfy one need the next emerges on its own and demands satisfaction … and so on until the need for self-actualization that, by its very nature, cannot be fully satisfied and thus does not generate more needs. This theory states that once a need is satisfied, it stops being a motivator of human beings. In personnel management, it is used in design of incentive schemes. In marketing, it is used in design of promotional campaigns based on the perceived needs of a market segment a product satisfies. Named after its originator, the US psychologist Abraham Harold Maslow (1908-70) who proposed it in 1954.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/Maslow-s-hierarchy-of-needs.html#ixzz3c09SE3PE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[namaste-mark]

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

is a branch of Psychology that focuses upon measuring things that, in general, are not directly observable. Academic achievement, intelligence levels and personality charactreristics are examples of specific topics that have been of enduring interest to the field. Psychometrics is also concerned with the construction and development of instruments to measure such features. These instruments are commonly called tests.

Core Principles of Psychological Testing

Test Security

Many psychological tests are only available to professionals with advanced training in “testing”. The reasons for this are very important. First and foremost, psychological tests are often extremely complex; and can be very dangerous if inappropriately used or misinterpreted. Second, if information about a test is made available to the public, the value of the results obtained on that test could be seriously compromised or invalidated. Third, developing an important test is a very slow and expensive venture — as is acquiring the advanced education and skills required to access, administer and interpret such tests.

Passing this online ENSI training program will earn you status as a “Qualified ENSI User“, and permit you to access and use the ENSI with your only limitation being related to the type of account you decide to hold.

Importantly, as a qualified ENSI user you will be expected to:

protect the ENSI from unauthorized access, distribution and/or use,
only use it for its intended purposes,
administer it competently, and
report the obtained results appropriately.

Informed Consent

Regarding the ENSI, informed consent means that the parent or legal guardian of the student of interest will be:

made aware of your desire to conduct an ENSI screening of their child’s educational needs,
informed of the nature and scope of the screening,
instructed that they (the parent) will be informed of the obtained results,
informed they have the authority to consent to the screening or decline it, and
instructed that they can withdraw their consent for completing the ENSI at any time prior to its administration.

Psychometric Properties

Psychological and achievement tests can be evaluated based upon their psychometric properties. Central among these are the test’s reliability, validity, and norms.

Reliability

A reliable test is one that provides the same, or very similar results across time, individuals and situations. For example, if a student is measured to be 4 feet 4 inches (i.e., 132 cm) tall on Monday, they are very likely to be the same height on Friday of that week; whether their parent, teacher or coach measures their height at home, in the classroom, or on the basketball court. A person’s height is a reliable measurement because it is likely to be the same over a reasonable period of time. Of course, one or two years later, their height might be very different. However, over a period of hours or days, they are not likely to be significantly taller or shorter.

Measurement Error

Measurement error contributes to a test’s reliability. The scale mentioned immediately above is showing measurement error. Perhaps this relates to the fact that the metal used in the scale’s springs is not of the highest quality, so it stretches inconsistently, and therefore displays inconsistent weights — even when the same item is weighed several times in a row.

Point to ponder: Is the scale at the airport likely to exhibit more or less measurement error than your bathroom scale? Why is that?

Assessing Reliability

A test’s reliability can be assessed in a number of different ways. Some of the technical terms used regarding types of reliability are: test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, split-half reliability, etc. To date, the ENSI has not been subjected to any formal studies regarding its reliability. However, its test-retest reliability can easily be demonstrated by having the same informant ‘redo’ the ENSI for a particular student (test-retest reliability); or by having a number of individuals who are well acquainted with the student and his/her developmental history complete the ENSI at the same point in time (inter-rater reliability). You can easily demonstrate the ENSI’s test-retest reliability by completing the ENSI yourself [Self Administration method], two or three times in a row, with reference to the same student. Our “beta” (i.e., early, developmental, unpublished) work with the ENSI shows a very high degree of similarity in the ratings provided for the same student by his/her parents.

Validity

A valid test is one that measures what it was intended to measure. For example, a test of Written English requires the person taking the test to supply their answers in writing, using the English language. If the person taking the test were allowed to provide their answers verbally, or using some language other than English, it would not qualify as a valid test of Written English. An invalid test of Written English has little to no value for an agency that requires its applicants to be competent in writing, using the English language.

There are many ways to assess a test’s validity. The validity of the various scales of the ENSI was established by:

The specific comparisons undertaken to validate the ENSI are summarized below. The published results are marked with an asterisk.

ENSI Validating Measures

*Level of general intellectual functioning Wechshler Full Scale IQ score,Total Score on Rogers and Silverman Giftedness Scale
*Visual-motor and auditory-verbal learning problems Wechshler Verbal and Performance IQ score discrepancies
Attention problem DSM III Attention Deficit Disorder scale using Norms provided by Barkley
*Behaviour problems Bristol Social Adjustment Guides

In summary, the comparisons that were undertaken in a formal research study (Nodrick & Li, 1985), offer strong support for the ENSI’s concurrent validity by showing that the results students obtain on the ENSI do, in fact, parallel the results they obtain on well established comparison measures.

Reliability vs Validity
Let’s say a manager of a produce department wants to test the calibration of a scale that her staff uses to weigh produce sold to the store’s customers. She selects a standard, 100 gram test weight from her calibration kit, and places it upon the scale. She allows the scale to settle, records the weight shown, and then removes the weight from the scale. She does this five times in a row. The weights recorded are: 75 grams, 105 grams, 88 grams, 112 grams, and 120 grams. Clearly, the scale is not reliable because it does not produce a consistent measurement under similar conditions.

Validity Scales
Some tests include what are called ‘validity scales’. Validity scales typically contain a number of items and/or measures that are designed to provide an indication if the obtained results are credible. For example, if the person completing a multiple-choice test always selects response option c); or frequently follows a specific pattern, such as selecting option a), b), c) and then d) right across the test; or selects their answers at random, and thereby errs on even the most simple of the tests’s questions; it is likely that their obtained test score does not reflect the skill or trait that the test was designed to measure. In other words, their results are invalid.

The ENSI uses a number of measures to gauge if the results obtained can reasonably be considered to be valid; and it reports this information in three ways. First, the “Results” section of the written report begins by stating if the obtained results should be considered valid, invalid or only used with extreme caution. It also advises how to address the validity concerns noted. For example, it may suggest having another adult, who is better acquainted with the student-of-interest, complete the ENSI.

Second, a labelled, colour-coded bar in the upper left hand section of the graphical summary of the Results section of the printed ENSI report also displays the level of validity of the obtained results. Finally, the border colour of the graph itself (green = valid, red = invalid, orange = caution) also indicates the report’s level of validity. The ENSI results must always be considered with reference to the reported validity results.

The ENSI can easily be shown to be a reliable test* and, based upon published comparisons with well established, widely used and respected tests (Nodrick & Li, 1985), it has been shown to be a valid screening measure of educational needs.

*A formal reliability study of the ENSI is currently under way.

Norms
Norms refer to the array of results that are obtained from a particular test when that test is administered many, many times to a large number of suitable subjects. Once a test’s norms are documented, the results obtained by a particular subject (subsequently) taking that test can then be judged to be “normal” or abnormal, depending upon where their results fall in comparison to those obtained by the normative group. All newborns, for example, are measured for their weight to provide an indication of their health at birth. Those who are far below or above the “average” newborn weight (i.e., they are above or below the “norm”) may require a particular intervention to preserve or promote their health.

The Normative Sample
Norm-referenced tests are ONLY useful if they are administered to subjects who fall within the group that the test was “normed upon”. The norms for the ENSI are for children who range from 5 to 15 years of age, who are in attendance in school, and who attend kindergarten through the ninth grade. It is inappropriate to administer the ENSI for students who do not meet these qualifications. Any results obtained on children who fall outside of these criteria are unlikely to be meaningful or useful. Following from the birth weight example above, it would make no sense whatsoever to compare the weight of a newborn to the weight charts for children who are of school age in order to decide if an intervention is warranted.

The Normal Distribution
The normal distribution is a pattern that many things in nature follow. Consider height, for an example. Most Canadian men are about 5 feet 9 inches (i.e., 175 cm) tall while most Canadian women are about 5 feet 4 inches (i.e., 162 cm) tall. Some are very much taller, and some are very much shorter. However, the more a person’s height departs from the “average”; the fewer individuals you will find who are of that height. Let’s say you measure the height of 100 Canadian men and, for each, you write their height (to the nearest inch) on a 25 cent coin; and then arrange the coins from shortest height to tallest, in a row. Whenever you measure a man who is the same height as one you have already measured, you simply place their 25 cent coin immediately above the last one you placed showing the same height.

A point to ponder: A politician says, “Fifty percent of our high school students are earning below average grades!” How do you reply?

Probability
Few things in life are certain. For example, even if we are told that we are in for a nice, sunny, warm day, we frequently find that the forecast is “off”; and the day turns out to be cloudy or chilly, or even rainy and cold.

The moral from this story for the ENSI user is to always present your obtained results in a tentative manner. Sometimes the results can be very far “off the mark”. To think or act like a test is 100% accurate is like playing a game called “Russian Roulette”*. Sooner or later you will be wrong.

*Russian Roulette defined: The act of loading a bullet into one chamber of a revolver, spinning the cylinder, and then pulling the trigger while pointing the gun at one’s own head.

How Tests Are Used

The ENSI is a forced-choice (i.e., objective) questionnaire, with the following response alternatives: “True”, “False” and “I Don’t Know”. It seeks to define the student’s typical performance across 11 “scales” (i.e., areas) that are important for their success in school, rather than assessing their optimal performance in each of the areas the ENSI addresses.

Making Sense of Test Scores

Test results are usually interpreted in a norm-referenced or criterion-referenced manner.

The ENSI was normed on a sample of five to 15 year olds who were in school, and attending in kindergarten, or in grades from one through nine.

The ENSI uses norm referenced scoring in that the student-of-interest’s results on each of the ENSI scales are compared to the results obtained by other similar students in the “norm” group. It is inappropriate to administer the ENSI for a child who falls outside of the test’s norm group parameters, because there is no way to know if their obtained results would be meaningful in any way.

Statisticians have a number of different methods to represent the student’s standing relative to a norm group; and to indicate just how significant their obtained score is. These methods are well beyond the scope of this program. However, it is important for you to know that the various categories of results (i.e, “above average”, “average”, and “below average”) and ranges of results (e.g., “Likely”, “Unlikely”, and “Possible”) that are reported by the ENSI have been determined using statistical measures of this nature.

To make the above discussion regarding norm- and criterion-referenced tests more meaningful, consider this: Your ENSI Qualifying Training Test score is criterion-referenced since it is based upon the number of items you answer correctly–not how well you perform in comparison to others taking the training.

A point to ponder: Why would we opt for a criterion-referenced Training Test over a norm-referenced Training Test?

Interpreting Test Scores

Testing vs Assessment vs Screening
Testing is a circumscribed activity that focuses upon a single area of concern, such as reading achievement. However, the term “testing” is often (inaccurately) interchanged with assessment. For example, a parent or a teacher might say: “Clearly, we have no idea what’s “up” with Johnny. He’s struggling horribly at school and in the community. We need to get him tested.”

The ENSI follows the “template” of a psycho-educational assessment in that it includes items and scales to provide an indication of the student’s:

a) learning potential,
b) their current achievement, and
c) strives to detect a wide range of learning, behavior and adjustment factors that could impede their ability to learn.

However, the ENSI is NOT and assessment. It is a screening measure.

Screening
Screening programs are used for a variety of purposes. They may take a variety of forms, and use a wide array of “critical” or test measures. However, their central purpose is to quickly, and economically categorize individuals into two groups — one group that “passes” on the measure of concern; and one that does not. Consider the following examples:

Example 1: During the recent ebola outbreak, health officials stationed at international airports scanned the body temperature of all arrivals from countries where the virus was known to be active. Those with a normal body temperature proceeded on their way. Those with an elevated body temperature were immediately directed towards further medical attention.

Example 2: A private school requires all of it’s (successful) applicants to be a full two years ahead of their current grade placement on the “Wide Range Achievement Test” – a paper and pencil test that only takes a few minutes to administer and score. Students scoring below the required level are simply denied admission.

Example 3: Individuals wishing to attend a political rally are required to pass through a magnetometer to ensure they are not carrying a concealed weapon. Anyone who activates the device is subjected to a thorough search before being allowed entry.

Globally speaking, as a screening measure, the ENSI seeks to distinguish between students who are likely to progress well academically from those students whose educational success may be at risk. However, it also “screens” for possible concerns across a number of educationally significant areas, and indicates if the concerns noted are more or less likely to be present.

[due to the unmet needs across a number of educationally relevant factors.]

Possible Screening Outcomes

Positive

Negative

True

False

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

“False Positives” (i.e., examinees who fall into Cell 3) should also undergo further evaluation, but are likely to be found to be “doing well”, and not in need of any further action.

‘False Negatives’

>>> Unlike other screening measures, the ENSI employs a more stringent criterion -> Likely vs possible AND it states practical steps to follow when the ENSI results reveal that a student should undergo further evaluation.

Screening takes a variety of forms and may focus upon a wide range of concerns. A preschool screening test, for example, may be used to gauge whether a child is physically, emotionally, socially, and/or intellectually ready to begin preschool. Later, achievement screening may be used to gauge whether a student appears ready to begin a course, enter an academic program, or if they should be considered for specialized assistance or services.

Using the ENSI

Introducing the ENSI

In the main,

Contraindications

We strongly recommend that you do not use the ENSI under the following circumstances:

on your own child
on the child of a friend or relative
in situations where parental consent has not been secured or is uncertain
on students who fall outside of the required age and grade levels, or who are not currently in attendance at school
as a diagnostic test
Finally, while the parent/guardian may be granted full access to the information contained in reports kept in the child’s file – and may even make handwritten notes regarding that information – in many jurisdictions, they are not given hard copies of those reports. It is vitally important that you are aware of, and respect your prevailing requirements and circumstances .

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.

Sreening
The central purpose of screening is to categorize individuals into two groups: 1) those who require further evaluation and 2) those who do not. Screening takes a variety of forms and may focus upon a wide range of concerns. A preschool screening test, for example, may be used to gauge whether a child is physically, emotionally, socially, and/or intellectually ready to begin preschool. Later, achievement screening may be used to gauge whether a student appears ready to begin a course, enter an academic program, or if they should be considered for specialized assistance or services.

Unfortunately, no screening test is 100% accurate. As a result, a major goal for screening is to minimize the number of misclassified cases (StatSoft, Inc., 2007). Accurately identified cases can be either “true positives” (i.e., those correctly identified as being at risk) or “true negatives” (i.e., those correctly identified as not at risk). Misclassified cases are either “false positives” (e.g., those cases identified as being at risk but who later perform satisfactorily in the area of concern); or “false negatives” (i.e., those cases not identified by the screening as being at-risk but who later perform poorly in the area of concern). Consider the following 2 x 2 matrix of possible screening outcomes:

Possible Screening Outcomes

Positive

Negative

True

False

Examinees who fall into Cells 1 and 2 are likely to be served well by the screening. To elaborate, those who fall into Cell 1 should undergo further evaluation in response to their screening results; and then receive treatment as appropriate, based upon their “follow-up” results. Since examinees who fall into Cell 2 do not appear to be experiencing any difficulties of note, no further actions are warranted.

“False Positives” (i.e., examinees who fall into Cell 3) should also undergo further evaluation, but are likely to be found to be “doing well”, and not in need of any further action.

‘False Negatives’

Fortunately, individuals seen as “being at risk” on a screening measure typically undergo some form of follow-up. Theoretically, ‘True Positives’ (i.e., examinees who fall into cell 1), will undergo some additional testing or assessment that will bring forth an appropriate intervention.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Comment: 2×2 Matrix –> statement of the efficiency/utility of the screening measure. Unfortunately, screening measures are rarely validated. This is [mitigated] by the fact that further assessment is likely to follow a positive screening test result.
Screening results in the categorization of students into one of these four groups (see Figure 1). From this 2 × 2 table, we can calculate several statistics that provide an overall indication of a screening instrument’s utility.

Screening measures are rarely validated.
??????????????????????????????????????
A screening instrument is judged primarily by its ability to accurately categorize students into these two groups. However, no screen will be 100% accurate. Therefore, the goal is to minimize the number of misclassified cases (StatSoft, Inc., 2007). Accurately identified students can be either true positives (TPs; those correctly identified as at risk) or true negatives (TNs; those correctly identified as not at risk). Misclassified cases are either false positives (FPs; those students identified as at risk who later perform satisfactorily on reading outcomes) or false negatives (FNs; those students not identified by the screen as at-risk but who later perform poorly on reading outcomes). Screening results in the categorization of students into one of these four groups (see Figure 1). From this 2 × 2 table, we can calculate several statistics that provide an overall indication of a screening instrument’s utility.

The first statistic is the classification accuracy. Classification accuracy is simply the total number of correctly classified cases (TP + TN) divided by the total number of students screened (TP + TN + FP + FN). In the example in Figure 1, 65 of 85 students have been correctly classified, resulting in 76% classification accuracy. The next useful statistic is sensitivity. Sensitivity is the proportion of students at risk who are correctly identified as such by the screen. It is calculated by dividing the number of true positives by the total number of students at risk (TP + FN). In Figure 1, 15 of 25 students at risk have been identified, resulting in 60% sensitivity. Finally, a screening instrument’s specificity tells us the percentage of students not at risk who are correctly identified by the process. It is calculated by dividing the number of true negatives by the total number of students not at risk (TN + FP). In Figure 1, 50 of 60 students have been correctly identified as not at risk, or 83% specificity.

Figure 1: A 2 × 2 table of screening results
screeningforreadingproblemsfigure-1

In an RTI framework, the goal of screening for reading problems is to have very few false negatives by using instruments that yield true-positive rates approaching 100% (Compton, Fuchs, Fuchs, & Bryant, 2006; Jenkins, 2003; Jenkins & Johnson, 2008). In other words, we want a screening instrument to identify all or nearly all of the students who are at risk. This must be balanced, however, by maintaining a manageable number of false positives. Errors will always occur during a screening process, but there is little consensus on what acceptable levels of accuracy and error are. Most practitioners would agree that minimizing false negatives is paramount. Students who are at risk for poor reading outcomes who do not receive intervention early on may continue to develop reading problems that later become intractable. In reading, this has been termed the “Matthew effect” (Stanovich, 1986), and it is precisely this phenomenon that an RTI process can prevent through the focus on early identification and intervention.

However, overidentification of students at risk presents a significant challenge for schools. False positives accrue a cost that is difficult to discern. Though most practitioners would argue that little harm is done to the student who receives an intervention that was not absolutely necessary, a recent meta-analysis of research on reading interventions for students in grades K–3 indicates that moderate to large gains in reading achievement were achieved when teacher-to-student ratios were no more than 1:5, and most interventions used groupings of 1:1 or 1:3 (Scammacca, Vaughn, Roberts, Wanzek & Torgesen, 2007). Identifying too many false positives may negatively impact the efficacy of intervention efforts by forcing intervention program ratios to greatly exceed these numbers.

The efficiency and utility of a screening test can be assessed by the balance of these outcomes it produces. However, screening tests are rarely evaluated. …Mitigated by the fact that “positive” results are typically followed by further evaluation.
Studies have not yet been completed to evaluate the efficiency of the ENSI.

?????????????????????????????????????

“””
Problems
Not based directly on job analysis. Screening questions often do not have direct, tight linkages to clearly specified aspects of job performance such as those provided by job analysis.
Not validated. Screening systems are almost never validated, so there is no way to gather robust (i.e., durable) metrics about the effectiveness of a specific screening question.
Lack of quality control. Systems that are set up to allow recruiters to create screening questions offer almost no quality control over contents of screening questions or the development of algorithms used to eliminate persons from the applicant pool.
Lack of concern over legal issues. Most screening system vendors downplay the whole idea that screening questions may actually run afoul of EEOC rules and regulations. This is far from true if you consider the fact that most of these systems allow personnel who are not well versed in the legal aspects of selection systems to develop measures used to kick applicants out of the selection process.
What are the hallmarks of a good screening Instrument?
A good screenig instrument is one that:
is valid and reliable
provides little or no discomfort, or potential of harm, for the person screened
does not require advanced testing credentials
has a low per use cost
requires little adminitration time
is widely available and is suitable for administration in a variety of formats, and under a variety of conditions
is easy to administer
is quickly and objectively scored
is easily interpreted
clearly specifies areas of potential concern,
indicates an appropriate course of action for each potential concern detected
has a low “false negative” rate (i.e., is likely to identify an individual showing genuine concerns), and
has a low “false positive” rate (i.e., is unlikely to indicate a concern is present when a real concern does not exist).

Comment: The ENSI compares favourably on the vast majority of these indicies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Screening processes always should define a protocol or procedure for determining which clients need further assessment (i.e., screen positive) for a condition being screened and for ensuring that those clients receive a thorough assessment.
“””
>>>>>>>>>>>>

Assessment:

>>>>>>>>>>>
Assessment:
A comprehensive activity designed to establish a context for and the interrelatedness of test results

Diagnosis: a formal decision

Determining the Appropriate Administration Method

The ENSI can be administered in five different ways. Each of these methods is detailed below to assist you in selecting the method that is best suited to the prevailing circumstances. All assume that you have:

a) informed the parent/guardian about the ENSI and the reason(s) for your wish to complete it with reference to their son/daughter, and
b) secured their informed consent to do so.

Normally, detailing the specific instructions the parent/guardian needs to complete the ENSI will occur as each of the administration options is outlined. In general, the clinician will begin by presenting the administration method that requires less of their (the clinician’s) time. The particular method that is most efficient with your time will depend upon your particular circumstances and supports. Typically, and despite the method of administration employed, completing the ENSI will require about 15 minutes of the informant’s (i.e., the parent/guardian’s) time.

The Online Administration Method:

Literally, all the professional needs to do is:

Everything else happens automatically. This includes a message sent to the parent/caregiver:

The Kiosk Administration Method:

Use this method as an alternate to the online administration method if the parent/guardian:

The method simply requires you to:

To access the report, you will need to (re)open your ENSI account and click the “Reports” link in your toolbar.

The Questionnare Administration Method:

Using the Questionnaire administration method requires:

When the questionnaire is returned:

a) Open the ENSI
b) Click the “Enter Data” link on your toolbar, and
c) transfer (or have an assistant transfer) the responses recorded on the questionnaire into the data entry form that appears.

As ever, the written report will be immediately available from the “Reports” link on your toolbar as soon as the informant’s information is submitted.

The Question and Answer Administration Method:

This is the most time consuming administration method. It is likely that you will have a trained assistant undertake this administration. The steps involved are:

The Self-Administration Method:

This administration method is most appropriate when an adult familiar with the student’s current behaviour and developmental history is unavailable; or the clinician feels that the ENSI might be able to generate some ideas that would be worthy of considering in their work with the student-of-concern.

Due to thse limitations, the Self-Administration method should only be used sparingly; and any results obtained should always be seen as requiring an extra measure of caution.

The steps required for a Self-Administration are:

Introducing the ENSI
Securing Consent

Reporting ENSI Results

In all occasions, before the ENSI results are disclosed, the Ensi’s purpose and requirements should be reviewed.

Outcome
-where to from here

Defending your Qualifications/Use of ENSI
Do it right from the start (Introducing)
Can’t use w/o passing Training Test or supervision
No claims made – possibilities to explore

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

XXXXX

Assessment:

>>>>>>>>>>>
Assessment:
A comprehensive activity designed to establish a context for and the interrelatedness of test results

Diagnosis: a formal decision

The Difference Between Screening and Assessment

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Interpreting Test ScoresYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Norm Referenced

ENSI’s Unique Features

As an online screening inventory, the ENSI has many unique features that make it an incredibly attractive resource for professionals working with students in need.

1. There is no software to purchase or install, and no contract to sign. The per use fee is the only cost involved and, with volume discounts, can be less than one dollar per use.
2. It is very intuitive and user-friendly. Most professionals only require a few minutes to acquaint them self with the ENSI and its major features.
3. It includes comprehensive video tutorials and step-by-step instructions to resolve any and all questions that might arise.
4. It offers a total of five different administration methods that can be selected to fit the particulars of the situation.
5. Administering the ENSI requires little to none of the busy clinician’s time. The online administration method, for example, can be executed in about 60 seconds. Other administration methods can easily be set up and executed by office or clinical support staff.
6. It follows the ‘template’ of a psycho-educational assessment. In other words, it addresses the core topics addressed in a formal psycho-educational assessment

Introducing the ENSI

Securing Consent – Online = assumed/stated agreement
– Other methods – take care
Determine appropriate Administration Method

Reporting the results
– stress Purpose, requirements and disclaimer
– releasing pdf report – caution

Introducing the ENSI:

In situations such as this:

1) If you are not already acquainted with the parent/guardian, begin by introducing yourself and informing them of your role/involvement with their son/daughter.

3) Ask the parent/guardian a) if they also feel the child is struggling; and b) for any ideas they have entertained regarding possible causes.

be in support of completing a quick screening to get some indication of what areas are and are not “working well” for the student.

offer that, with their support, we could do a quick screening to get a clearer sense of those areas that are working well for the student and perhaps get some indications

4) If they concur, ask them what they feel are the major areas of concern.

6) State that it is difficult to know for sure what areas are “working well” and what areas might be contributing to his/her difficulties.

6b) State that you are seeing

Offer that it is difficult to know

Next, suggest that it might be helpful to do a quick “screen” for issues or concerns that might be “getting in their way of success”.

Then, state that with their support, you would like to

It is important that you make it clear that any such areas that the ENSI

would then need to be assessed in depth to determine if a real concern is present, and to decide upon the best way to address and resolve.

Outcome
-where to from here

Psychological testing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]
refers to the administration of psychological tests.

Interpreting scores [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]

Key Concepts

Screening vs Testing vs Assessment

THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS SCREENING INVENTORY

Consent:

The ENSI requires informed consent.

Parental: Informed parental consent means that the parent or legal guardian of the student is:

Introducing the ENSI:

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

virtue video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zp597oPqYU

Screening Inservice/ENSI Training

Psychometrics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychometrics

and…

Psychological testing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]
refers to the administration of psychological tests.

Principles of psychological testing

Interpreting Test Scores
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_testing]

Psychological tests, like many measurements of human characteristics, can be interpreted in a norm-referenced or criterion-referenced manner.[citation needed]

Often, test scores can be interpreted in both ways; a score of 80% on a geography test
could place a student at the 84th percentile, or a standard score of 1.0 or even 2.0.

THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS SCREENING INVENTORY

Introducing the ENSI:

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances.

In situations such as this, consider presenting the ENSI as a “compass” that might be able to “point us” towards one or more areas that could be contributing to the difficulties the student is experiencing. Make it clear that any such areas identified would then need to be assessed in depth to determine if a real concern is present and to decide upon the best way to address and resolve it.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Consent:

The ENSI requires informed consent.

Parental Consent:
Informed parental consent means that the parent or legal guardian of the student is:

Key Concepts

Reliability vs Validity

Screening vs Tesing vs Assessment

Introducing the ENSI:

The introduction you provide a parent/caregiver in support of administering the ENSI will vary considerably upon the prevailing circumstances.

In situations such as this, consider presenting the ENSI as a “compass” that might be able to “point us” towards one or more areas that could be contributing to the difficulties the student is experiencing. Make it clear that any such areas identified would then need to be assessed in depth to determine if a real concern is present and to decide upon the best way to address and resolve it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Screening vs testing vs Assessment:

What are the goals of testing, assessment and screening?

Points in common:
All focus upon providing a statement of functioning oe need.
All may involve formal and informal instruments.
All require some understanding of the nature of the

What are the differences?

####################################################

What are some situations where are screening assessments employed
Admissions (screening in or out)
Priorizing for assessment
Guiding an assessment
Checking for improvement

What is an acceptable level of reliability?

What are the necessary credentials for using a screening measure?

How should a screening asessment be introduced?

How should screening results be reported?

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{

What is the difference between assessment and evaluation?

•Evaluationfocuses on grades and may reflect classroom components other than course content and mastery level. These could include discussion, cooperation, attendance, and verbal ability.

• The table below summarizes key differences between assessment and evaluation

Dimension of Difference Assessment Evaluation

Content adapted from:

Angelo, T and Cross, K.P. 1993. Classroom assessment techniques a handbook for college teachers. Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. Pp 427.

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A Test is a thing.

An Assessment is a process.

A Diagnosis is a decision.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Assessment is more than testing

interview
demographic information
medical information
personal history
observations by others

Thus, the results of a psychological test are rarely used on their own.

The following definitions should help to clarify the difference between assessment and testing in psychology.
Definition of Psychological Testing

“An objective and standardized measure of a sample of behaviour”

(Anastasi, 1990)

Definition of Psychological Assessment

“An extremely complex process of solving problems (answering questions) in which psychological tests are often used as one of the methods of collecting relevant data”

(Maloney & Ward, 1976)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What Is Screening?

Response:

Purpose

Appropriate Screening Tools

THE HALLMARKS OF A GOOD SCREENING MEASURE

Screening procedures and tools should be:

Timing

Results

When the screening is performed or obtained, there are three possible actions that may follow based on the results:

Go to top

Questions to Consider for Planning and Programming:

************************************************
ENSI Training

1. Read: https://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_training.htm
This section a) outlines the ENSI training program, b) provides information regarding testing basics, and c) details how to use the ENSI appropriately.

2. Read: https://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_info.htm
This section provides specific information about the ENSI and its development.

3. Watch: https://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_tutorials.htm
These videos show you how to use all of the ENSI’s features.

4. Consult: https://ensi.helpmetrics.ca/Tutorials/ensi_help.htm
This section provides written, step-by-step instructions for using each of the ENSI’s functions.

Save this information for future reference.

The ENSI Team
[email protected]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

######################################### ########

INTRODUCTION

What is the Educational Needs Screening Inventory?

What are specific situations where the ENSI can be appropriately used?

The ENSI can be appropriately used:

a) as a first-level admission screening instrument,

b) to identify and prioritize students requiring a formal assessment,

c) to guide the assessment focus by flagging potential problem areas,

d) to identify and prioritize students requiring a counselling referral,

e) to assist in identifying general issues for exploration in counselling,

f) to investigate if a student’s problems appear across multiple environments,

and finally,

g) to aid clinicians and teachers in their day-to-day work with students of concern.

However, the ENSI is NOT to be used as a diagnostic test.

Who are suitable target subjects?

The ENSI is appropriate for use with students in kindergarten through the ninth grade who range from five to 15 years of age. However, it should not be used with children who are:

a) younger than five years of age,
b) older than 15 years of age, or
c) with students who are not attending school.

Who Are Eligible Users?

Who are eligible informants?

The clinician can print as many reports as they require; and may do so whenever they require them.

PSYCHOMETRICS

Reliability

An unreliable test is not of much use if you are seeking to measure a relatively stable trait or skill. For example, let’s say you are planning a vacation and know that your suitcase must not exceed 50 lbs. or you will be required to pay a penalty. You decide to weigh it before travelling to the airport. The first time you weigh it, it registers 48 lbs. on your bathroom scale (that coincidentally says: “not legal for trade”). So you decide to weigh it again, just to be sure. This time it registers 52 lbs. Based on these results, do you know if you should you take out some items or if it would be OK to add a few more?

Validity

The specific comparisons undertaken are summarized below:

ENSI Scale Validating Measures

Level of general intellectual funtioning Wechshler Full Scale IQ score
Total Score on Rogers and Silverman Giftedness Scale

Visual-motor and Auditory-verbal learning Wechsler Intelligence Scale Verbal-
problems Performance IQ discepancies

Attention problem DSM III Attention Deficit Disorder scale
using Norms provided by Barkley

Behaviour problems Bristol Social Adjustment Guides

Taken together, the comparisons made show that the ENSI does a very good job of parallelling the results students obtained on a range of well established and widely used clinical tests.

Once such a distribution is “recorded”, you will be able to figure out how tall the next man or woman you measure is likely to be, simply by consulting the “distribution” of scores. If, for example, you wanted a very good estimate of how likely the next person you measure would be 5 feet 11 inches tall, all you would need to do is to count the number of 25 cent pieces in the 5 foot 11 inch column and read it as a per cent (because there is one hundred 25 cent coins in the distribution.) Likewise, by simply counting the coins, you could estimate the percent of men (or women) above or below a certain height — or even the proportion who would fall between two heights (e.g., 4 foot 8 inches and 5 foot 9 inches).

Probability

Probability is a statement about how likely something is to be. The meteorologist predicts how they expect the weather to be, based upon a number of factors such as the time of year, general climatic patterns, etc. However, there is no guarantee they will be correct. Maybe they will be correct nine times out of ten, but they are certainly not going to be correct 100% of the time. That’s why they say things like: “the probability of precipitation is 60%”.

What are the differences between screeening, testing, assessment and evaluation?

What are the hallmarks of a good screening measure?

ENSI Development

School Problem Screening Inventory
Nodrick & Li
Gifted
DSM III

Introducing the ENSI to a parent/caregiver

Cautions

Administering the ENSI

Reporting the ENSI

Defending Yourself and the ENSI

Qualifications
–

Using the ENSI

Types of ENSI Users/Accounts

Creating your account

Managing Your ENSI

The ENSI Qualifying Examination

100 multiple choice questions broken into 10 sections:

Examinees who achieve a score of __ % will granted a Trial account

######################################### #####

What are the differences between screeening, testing, assessment and evaluation?

A test must only be administered to individuals whoup ao fall within the same gr
norms
probability

Differences between Screening, Testing, Assessment, (Evaluation)

Hallmarks of a good screening measure

ENSI Development

School Problem Screening Inventory
Nodrick & Li
Gifted
DSM III

Introducing the ENSI

Cautions

Administering the ENSI

Methods of Administration/Applications
How to Upgrade/Reactivate your account
(if SubUser must request more crdits)

Norm Referenced

Once such a distribution is “recorded”, you will be able to figure out how tall the next man or woman you measure is likely to be, simply by consulting the “distribution” of scores. If, for example, you wanted a very good estimate of how likely the next person you measure would be 5 feet 11 inches tall, all you would need to do is to count the number of 25 cent pieces in the 5 foot 11 inch column and read it as a per cent (because there is one hundred 25 cent coins in the distribution.) Likewise, by simply counting the coins, you could estimate the percent of men (or women) above or below a certain height — or even the proportion who would fall between two heights (e.g., 4 foot 8 inches and 5 foot 9 inches).

Probability

Probability is a statement about how likely something is to be. The meteorologist predicts how they expect the weather to be, based upon a number of factors such as the time of year, general climatic patterns, etc. However, there is no guarantee they will be correct. Maybe they will be correct nine times out of ten, but they are certainly not going to be correct 100% of the time. That’s why they say things like: “the probability of precipitation is 60%”.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/Maslow-s-hierarchy-of-needs.html#ixzz3c09SE3PE

However, it also “screens” for possible concerns across a number of educationally significant areas, and indicates if the concerns noted are more or less likely to be present.

[due to the unmet needs across a number of educationally relevant factors.]

A screening instrument is judged primarily by its ability to accurately categorize students into these two groups. However, no screen will be 100% accurate. Therefore, the goal is to minimize the number of misclassified cases (StatSoft, Inc., 2007). Accurately identified students can be either true positives (TPs; those correctly identified as at risk) or true negatives (TNs; those correctly identified as not at risk). Misclassified cases are either false positives (FPs; those students identified as at risk who later perform satisfactorily on reading outcomes) or false negatives (FNs; those students not identified by the screen as at-risk but who later perform poorly on reading outcomes). Screening results in the categorization of students into one of these four groups (see Figure 1). From this 2 × 2 table, we can calculate several statistics that provide an overall indication of a screening instrument’s utility.

Figure 1: A 2 × 2 table of screening results
screeningforreadingproblemsfigure-1

Not based directly on job analysis. Screening questions often do not have direct, tight linkages to clearly specified aspects of job performance such as those provided by job analysis.
Not validated. Screening systems are almost never validated, so there is no way to gather robust (i.e., durable) metrics about the effectiveness of a specific screening question.
Lack of quality control. Systems that are set up to allow recruiters to create screening questions offer almost no quality control over contents of screening questions or the development of algorithms used to eliminate persons from the applicant pool.