Norm- vs. Criterion-Referenced Tests

The culture in American education says to test our students. We test them to see how much they have learned; we test them to see where they rank among their peers; and coming to us here in New Jersey, we will use this testing to determine the employment and salary of our educators.
There are two main types of tests. There are norm-referenced tests and criterion-referenced tests. The purpose of this paper is to explain the two tests and to look into their benefits and drawbacks.
Norm-referenced tests (NRT) are designed to compare students. They determine individual performance in comparison with others. With norm-referenced tests a randomly selected group of students is given the test prior to the test’s public release. The scores from that group of students are used to make-up the tests norm. Every group of students who take the test after that initial norm group, will have their scores compared to the norm group. The process of norming a test can be quite costly and time consuming. Because of this, these types of tests are usually normed about every 7 years.
According to Linda Bond (1996), the major reason for using a norm-referenced test is to classify students as either high achieving or low achieving. These students can then be place in either remedial or gifted programs. Other benefits of NRT’s are that they are used by institutions of higher education to predict college readiness and potential for success in college (the SAT or ACT); also the test is standardized which means that it can be reliably compared.
Critics of norm-referenced tests say that they focus on low level, basic skills. Some also say that these types of tests give little information as to what a student knows or can do. Additionally, Bond (1996) points out that the validity of a NRT depends on whether the content of the test matches the knowledge and skills that is expected in that specific school.
Criterion-referenced tests (CRT) are designed to measure how well a student performs against an objective or standard. This type of test is looking for mastery in a particular area. The content on this type of test is chosen based on the curriculum. Other benefits are that it may help to eliminate competition amongst students and encourage cooperation. It also may be used to evaluate the process of instruction. This is where teacher evaluation may come into play.
There are several drawbacks when it comes to creating a CRT. Critics say that test makers can create benchmarks with varying difficulty without considering whether the items are actually compliant with grade level standards or age appropriate. It is also difficult to evaluate good and bad test items without extensive piloting of test questions. Also, the specificity of the test may be a drawback. You may need to create multiple tests in order to get the full picture of the curriculum.
There is a reason and a place for both types of tests. In terms of curriculum evaluation the analyst would use a criterion-referenced test. This will best show whether or not instruction has taken place, and that the standards and objectives in the curriculum have been addressed.
Source: Bond, Linda A. (1996). Norm- and criterion-referenced testing. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 5(2).