ABS300 Week 4 Journal, Evaluating Professional and Popular Press Self-discovery Assessments

ABS 300 Week 4 Journal Evaluating Professional and Popular Press Self-Discovery Assessments ABS 300: Psychological Assessment Instructor Date I took the online career test. After taking the Online Career Test the results revealed that I am organized and excel at creating, and nurturing relationships and that companies should value my cooperative nature. I also bring a personal touch to everything I do and jobs that value this quality in me will benefit from my work. Career self-assessments test (TypeFocus) The test was straightforward while the description of an ESTJ mostly fit my personality, due to ESTJ’s being logical as they apply their logic to people, places and things, they become objective organizers and terrific managers. They also pay attention to details, discipline themselves to make sure their goals are met, if you want a job done the right way, give it to an ESTJ, because they enjoy working with others, they are good leaders and they communicate their plans very clearly. The comparison between both tests is that the report presents an in-depth breakdown of certain areas that matched to my strong interest and insight into my likes and dislikes. I did not have to think too much as the questions were easy and comfortable to answer, the questions were straight forward and I was able to learn a lot more about myself in terms of these assessment tests. The format and level of the tests themselves are highly variable and there is no general consensus or invariable standard for test formats. They were able to make it possible for me to know my status at work and in my career choice, also predict how I am to a tee. “In many testing programs, there is no single form or version of the test because of security problems or test administration being done at different times and/or different locations, more than one test form of a test is required” (Gubes & Kelecioglu, 2015). It takes approximately 30 to 60 minutes for both tests. Using traditional Item Response Format is based marginal maximum likelihood estimation with an EM algorithm leads to computations that are extremely demanding, especially when the number of factors are large. Face validity is a form of validity to apply to research as you are unable to skim the surface in order to form an opinion, you have to take the test and the assessment from both tests measures what it is meant to measure. Homogeneous by definition “are comprised of participants who share similar characteristics or attitudes while Heterogeneous whether formed by chance or on purpose, enjoy diversity in their membership” (Merriam Webster Dictionary). For purpose of this assessment is to have the ability in which to work cohesively, remain intact, identify and meet priorities and goals, and maintain discipline. According to the text, “The ultimate validity criterion for any laboratory- or clinic- based assessment is unobtrusive observation of the target behavior in the community” (Cohen, Swerdilk, & Sturman, 2013). A measure cannot be valid without being reliable, therefore in my opinion, the apparent criterion related validity of the popular press assessment I noticed with the test how truthful the research really is and that it hit the bulls eye regarding my future, placing me in the right career in my field of study. When I re-test the on-line Career Test, there was some error but my score was higher than the first. In my opinion, the tools used in TypeFocus did what it set out to do and the combination of the instruments gives unparalleled power to providing me with great insights and accurate results which I am able to trust. I am able to say the same for Online Career Test, both reports serve as an aid for me to learn and discover things in an effective way. References Cohen, R. J., Swerdilk, M. E., & Sturman, E. D. (2013). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement, 8/e. New York, McGraw Hill. Drasgow, F., Liu, L., & Wang, W. (2016). Classification accuracy of mixed format tests: A Bi-factor item response theory approach. Retrieved May 16, 2017 from: Gubes, N., & Kelecioglu, H. (2015). The impact of test dimensionality, common-item set format, and scale linking methods on mixed-format test equating. Retrieved May 18, 2017 from: Merriam Webster Dictionary (1828). Retrieved May 18,2017 from: