3006PSY Psychological Assessment 2015 .

Mark:______/100 (35%)
Criteria and Mark Allocation (See also Overview of Assignment)
APA Formatting: _______ (5 marks)                   Not in word count
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
APA style (6th Ed), incl. appropriate title page and references
ConstructDefinition: _______(8 marks)                    Approx. 100 – 150 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Describe and define construct using a range of sources for the definition (e.g., scale development paper, theory, dictionary/everyday definition). The content areas that you use for your blueprint should be evident even though the blueprint might reflect broader abstraction of themes from that definition.
Scale Description:_______(12 marks)                    Approx. 200 – 300 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Description of actual scale (# items, response format, mode of administration, instructions, scoring); its purpose (if an adaptation, note this and reason for adaptation, comparison with original);end users; target population;provision of norms (if so, brief description of the normative sample); brief history of its use.
Scale Evaluation/Critique incl. blueprint mapping:_______(15 marks)    Approx. 200 – 400 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
From your reading of literature: evidence of reliability (SEM, internal consistency, test-retest);validity (consider evidence for each form of validity); if relevant, adequacy of standardization & norming procedures.
If you cannot find some of these aspects reported anywhere, note that, indicate why it is a problem, and what is needed (e.g., suggestions for what specific procedures/measures could be used to provide the missing evidence).
Your own critique: of content validity from mapping items under the blueprint that you construct; of face validity and other aspects of scale (response format, readability, clarity, etc.)
Nomological Net and Construct Validity Scale:___________5 marks        Approx. 50 – 75 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Provide a figure depicting a small nomological net for the construct, indicating valence of relationships, 1 citation for each link in net provided.
Description of scale to measure one chosen construct from net
(Approx 1800 words for all method and results)
Sample:  _______ (5 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Description and justification for sample, clearly outlined procedure for recruitment and data collection.
Item Analysis and Reliability (Results):  _______ (15 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Outline process and results of item analysis, incl. identification of poorly performing items; determine scale reliability.

Evidence of Construct Validity: ______ (10 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Indicate how construct validity was addressed by all means available to you and report evidence for validity
Descriptive Statistics and Normative Data (Results): _______ (10 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Outline of summary statistics, provision of norms and converted scores
Conclusion: _______ (10 marks)                        Approx. 200 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Provide overall conclusion regarding your overall evaluation of the scale based on critique from published literature in combination with your own analyses. Outline further work needed.
Appendix: _______ (5 marks)                   Not in word count
Absent    Very Poor    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Full Questionnaire attached: formatted clearly and professionally

3006PSY Psychological Assessment 2015 .

Mark:______/100 (35%)
Criteria and Mark Allocation (See also Overview of Assignment)
APA Formatting: _______ (5 marks)                   Not in word count
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
APA style (6th Ed), incl. appropriate title page and references
ConstructDefinition: _______(8 marks)                    Approx. 100 – 150 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Describe and define construct using a range of sources for the definition (e.g., scale development paper, theory, dictionary/everyday definition). The content areas that you use for your blueprint should be evident even though the blueprint might reflect broader abstraction of themes from that definition.
Scale Description:_______(12 marks)                    Approx. 200 – 300 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Description of actual scale (# items, response format, mode of administration, instructions, scoring); its purpose (if an adaptation, note this and reason for adaptation, comparison with original);end users; target population;provision of norms (if so, brief description of the normative sample); brief history of its use.
Scale Evaluation/Critique incl. blueprint mapping:_______(15 marks)    Approx. 200 – 400 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
From your reading of literature: evidence of reliability (SEM, internal consistency, test-retest);validity (consider evidence for each form of validity); if relevant, adequacy of standardization & norming procedures.
If you cannot find some of these aspects reported anywhere, note that, indicate why it is a problem, and what is needed (e.g., suggestions for what specific procedures/measures could be used to provide the missing evidence).
Your own critique: of content validity from mapping items under the blueprint that you construct; of face validity and other aspects of scale (response format, readability, clarity, etc.)
Nomological Net and Construct Validity Scale:___________5 marks        Approx. 50 – 75 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Provide a figure depicting a small nomological net for the construct, indicating valence of relationships, 1 citation for each link in net provided.
Description of scale to measure one chosen construct from net
(Approx 1800 words for all method and results)
Sample:  _______ (5 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Description and justification for sample, clearly outlined procedure for recruitment and data collection.
Item Analysis and Reliability (Results):  _______ (15 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Outline process and results of item analysis, incl. identification of poorly performing items; determine scale reliability.

Evidence of Construct Validity: ______ (10 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Indicate how construct validity was addressed by all means available to you and report evidence for validity
Descriptive Statistics and Normative Data (Results): _______ (10 marks)
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Outline of summary statistics, provision of norms and converted scores
Conclusion: _______ (10 marks)                        Approx. 200 words
Absent    Insufficient    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Provide overall conclusion regarding your overall evaluation of the scale based on critique from published literature in combination with your own analyses. Outline further work needed.
Appendix: _______ (5 marks)                   Not in word count
Absent    Very Poor    A bit sparse    Satisfactory    Good    Very Good    Excellent
Full Questionnaire attached: formatted clearly and professionally