PROS AND CONS OF STANDARDIZED AND LOCAL INSTRUMENTS

Pros of Standardized Instruments
1.  Low initial investment in concept, design, and printing.
2.  Generally less open to changes of subjectivity and bias (greater perceived legitimacy).
3.  Nationally normed for comparisons across institutions.
4.  Established validity and reliability – Technically sound.
5.  Processing, scoring, and reporting services are available.

Cons of Standardized Instruments
1.  No campus control over content, format, and style of questions.  Thus, the test may not reflect the goals and content of your program or curriculum – may measure only a small portion of what is taught.
2.  Over time, the test may unduly influence what is taught by faculty.
3.  Comparison scores may be based upon inappropriate or unrepresentative norm groups.
4.  Less sense of ownership by faculty and staff, and therefore, less likely to be used for improvement.
5.  May be expensive to purchase and score.
6.  May not provide data for follow-up analysis, and will give little information to indicate why some scores are low.

Pros of Local Instruments
1.  Reflects the goals and content of the curriculum – it tests  what is actually taught.
2.  Amenable to a variety of formats (problem solving, essay, performance, etc.)
3.  Greater sense of local ownership by faculty, staff, and students.
4.  Local data enhances additional analysis of results and programmatic uses.

Cons of Local Instruments
1.  May have less external credibility and internal legitimacy.
2.  More difficult to establish validity and reliability.
3.  Lack of normative data for comparisons
4.  Can be costly to design and produce (time consuming and difficult).
5.  Scoring and reporting must be locally designed.
 

| Table of Content | Examples | Home |