MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797014392 · doi:10.1177/0829573518765010

Developing Proficiency in Standardized Cognitive Assessment Scoring: How Much Is Enough?

2018· article· en· W2797014392 on OpenAlexaff
Damien C. Cormier, Ethan R. Van Norman, Clarissa Wei Shuen Cheong, Kathleen E. Kennedy, Okan Bulut, Martin Mrázik

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyStandardized testWechsler Intelligence Scale for ChildrenWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleClinical psychologyCognitionWechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of IntelligenceIntelligence quotientMedical educationApplied psychologyMathematics educationPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to systematically evaluate the scoring errors made by psychologists in training, in the hopes of providing strong, empirically based guidelines to training programs. Survival analysis was used to determine the number of attempts required for graduate students to achieve proficiency in scoring standardized record forms from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV). The results suggest that the majority of students will require at least six attempts prior to achieving proficiency in the standardized scoring procedure associated with the WISC-IV. The significant contribution of this study stems from its notably larger sample size ( N = 546 record forms) and increased ecological validity compared with previous studies. As a result, this study is likely to improve training in an area that has been established as a core competency for school, clinical, and counselling psychologists.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicStudent Assessment and FeedbackFrench-language works237,207