Free Essay Sample: Interpreting Verbal Reasoning Test Scores

A Verbal Reasoning Test score has to be interpreted regarding how other tests have been used compared to other aptitude tests. Even though they are numerical or abstract, an A "pass" score has to exist because an individual has time to carry on the analysis, and the points that have been provided have to be in rhyme with the tests provided. Therefore, a comparison of the score and very many encounters have shown that every person needs to stick in the doings and the benchmark that is given in the process of ensuring that criteria have been met and observed. Some benchmarks are included concerning the scores that have been based on the scores that an individual has based on the others about verbal reasoning in a professional and organizational level (Roach, 2014). For instance, if a candidate applies for a part in commerce, he or she must be tested in the sane, regarding the raw data and test results that have been collected. Therefore, the persons that have the highest scores have the ultimate chances or opportunities. The test shows that an individual has to make some effort to get to the top since this is the standard that has to be used in the elimination of the perfect candidates. In this case, the perfect candidates are chosen on merit and proven to be essential in employment procedures that engage perfection and knowledge in a particular field in a business organization.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Various examples can be offered regarding any situation that leads to or focuses on the aptitude tests present in the modern world, including the selected, Verbal Reasoning Test. For instance, if an individual applies to commerce, the score of the same has to be gauged on the number of correct answers that are offered concerning the verbal reasoning test that is compared to a large number of scores from individuals who work in roles that are pertaining roles found in the industry or similar roles found in the same industry. Such a strategy ensures that employees have access to verbal reasoning skills compared to those of other staff in the field. Therefore, the results have to be calculated and formulated regarding the relativity of people engaged in a similar situation and the applicable roles.

However, the aptitude test has some challenges when comparing some groups of people with others and the answers that have been provided. Hence, this creates a situation where some errors have to exist since the same results can be different concerning the replies and the average scores in a given area of concern. Therefore, some errors have to be addressed, and their comparisons have to be made clear to come up with a validated conclusion regarding the same when dealing with this aptitude test or reasoning (Blondon et al., 2017).

Moreover, measurement has to be included to ensure that internal and external validity is observed to give authentic data that can be used to determine the appropriateness of the experimental and observational data about the issues of concern. Various sources of errors are distinct while utilizing this type of aptitude or reasoning ground and test. For example, different people or groups have various decisions that they have to make in life, and verbal amplitude tests have been known to have some errors. In that instance, different personalities have different stands about what they believe and what the environment has provided for them. Therefore, even mathematics as well as probability has shown some results and concluded on the same issue, different people have scored either high or low on the same, but the sources of errors remain concerning the measurements, as well as the probability of the same happening when a large population is engaged in the Verbal Reasoning Test.

Every person has his or her reasoning. It has to be noted that everyone has to have a say regarding his or her life, which sparked such an error regarding personality and reasoning. Every person has his or her reasoning. It has to be noted that everyone has to have a say regarding his or her life and that what sparked such an error regarding personality and reasoning. The contentious "No Child Left behind Act" (NCLB) is responsible for influencing the popular test-based school liability widely-accepted standards in the US. The current research relies on the results from data references crucial in identifying prevalent accountability practices that have been suggested to challenge how the NCLB has impacted learners outcome, funds for various school districts, and how teachers’ performance is evaluated.

The outcomes prove that NCLB produced progressive outcomes in younger learners 'arithmetic performance, especially those from low-income neighbourhoods. Nevertheless, there is no evidence suggesting that NCLB’s involvement in influencing student reading instruction. School-district expenses escalated exponentially where the contentious NCLB is applicable, and these increases were not matched by federal revenue. The results suggest that NCLB influenced increased satisfaction among educators that relied on the profitability of their graduate degrees. The results have proved that the controversial NCLB has shifted its focus from improving math and reading instruction’s, which has led to the involvement of additional accountability systems in the American education sectors.

The error is instigated when the examiners are focused on a goal that may be achieved by some members of the society or an organization. However, it should be known that various members in society have differences and personalities and that each member has to choose his or her way of making decisions and reactions. For instance, when a student scores 25 of 30 questions presented in a verbal test, the feeling is that of an excellent or recommendable result. Nonetheless, other persons in the same roles have an average of 26 correctly answered questions over the possible 30.

Therefore, the error can be presented because the ability of the person that has achieved 25 out of the possible marks is not included in the team. Such is a good result, and an individual believes in his or her performance (Roach, 2014). However, the opportunities for getting employed get shrunk because of other factors that are not relating to the same. In such a case, an individual can be employed because of the score that he or she has been achieved. Calculation of the percentages regarding the performance of this test is also controversial since some of the students or employees qualified for a certain course seem to be discriminated against regarding their scores. However, it should be noted that there are capable students, but verbal reasoning tests can be difficult in some ways, and a student of a capable worker can be put aside because of his or her scores.

Concerning the standardized tests, as presented by Roach, regarding the proliferated and shaped K-12 American education founded in the 1980s, the performance index can be determined (Roach, 2014). However, they are not as accurate concerning the aptitude tests that are commonly used. In this case, the Verbal Reasoning Test proves to be discriminatory in the context that all people have to be given equal chances.

Although the test is prone to measuring pupils’ ability and score to be enrolled in various universities, there is an error. Some of the potential students may lack the verbal skills, but the content and knowledge that is engraved in their minds speak a lot about their personalities and abilities in the field that have to be observed. Therefore, this test has to include all the possibilities that have to be observed in each field. On the contrary, the utilization of standardized tests in education and college admissions has reduced, which is a controversial issue. However, most higher education institutions have been adopting test-optional admissions since the 1980s. The issue is what is kept in place regarding the selection of able-minded candidates rather than selecting students on other merits (Barrett, 2011). Therefore, it shows that some of the students can be chosen or admitted while their abilities do not reach or meet the required standards.

Performance is the key in every field, especially in grooving the future generation or students undertaking a particular course. However, it has to be noted that people should be given a chance to walk through their achievements. The abilities that various people possess cannot only be measured through Verbal Reasoning Tests. Their various abilities can be expressed in multiple ways.

Therefore, their advances in a particular field can only be achieved via encouraging them to have some initiatives that can only be known and determined by exposure of their abilities and aptitudes. In a case, institutions have to explore candidates' capabilities, as well as their potential (Carriedo et al., 2016). A review regarding their advantages shows that learning experience is also another factor that has to be reckoned with because it can model a person's future goals. Hence, there is a need to use standardized and holistic characteristics rather than the Verbal Reasoning Tests that only concentrate on one aspect of a very extensive field that has to include many psychological stances and issues that can result in diverse results.

The errors that have been noted mainly regard the measurements (measurement errors) that address the question of the people that are left out. In contrast, they have the abilities to be included in an education institution (Barrett, 2011). However, it is clear that the personally generated errors can be rectified when all people are given equal chances. Concentrating on the Verbal Reasoning Tests can result in some instances of errors or mistakes that are made and can be viewed as discriminating against some viable candidates either in educational institutions or workplaces. Given that the sources of error have been provided, it is essential that the system has to adopt some measures that will ensure that all people are given equal opportunities to express themselves. Various educational and occupational positions need critical reviews in all positions and not only on the verbal aptitude (Heyes et al., 2016). Therefore, dealing with people who are applying for various positions needs to scan their abilities; hence, multiple scrutinies of abilities are required to find the balance between personality and his or her ability to perform or engage in a particular task.

The aptitude test that has been engaged in the paper is termed the Verbal Reasoning Test. It has been used to show how influential an individual expression can be in various fields, such as in education. However, as the test suggests, it is a necessary test that can be used in recruiting and admissions of students in an institution. However, the test has been found to have some flaws because some issues are not explained. Such issues have been found to limit the validity of the test and its hypothesis. Therefore, it is recommendable that all the stakeholders be included in the decision-making process to ensure that the main aspects are considered. This is not discriminatory of any avenue, including educational institutions, training institutions, and workplaces. Several aptitude tests should be carried out to ensure that the quality of a candidate's needs is gained and that chances are given to the deserving parties. In such a way, the quality will be improved, and the desired candidates' performances will transform the organization for the better. However, it should be noted that communication is mainly in verbal form. The utmost recommendation is that an individual should have such skills to enhance his or her eligibility in any field, not only in education.