The Differential Aptitude Test: A Review and Critique.

The Differential Aptitude Test (DAT) is a multiple aptitude battery designed to measure junior and senior high school students' and adults' ability to learn or succeed in certain areas. The test is suitable for group administration and is primarily for use in educational and vocational counseling, although it may be used in employee selection. The DAT contains two levels, with two equivalent alternate forms for each level. Eight subtests measure abilities. A score is provided for each subtest as well as for scholastic aptitude. Test administration procedures are easy to follow, and test materials are durable and reusable. The norming process for the edition was impressive, with about 170,000 students in the standardization samples. Evidence for reliability and validity is reviewed. The fact that the DAT has remained one of the most frequently used batteries is a tribute to its quality, credibility, and utilty The new items and new norming data of the most recent edition have improved the test while preserving psychometric quality. It would be worth pursuing concurrent validity data on the DAT in a few broadly defined occupational areas. (SLD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Flosasich and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document hiS been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating tt 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction duality Points of new or opinions slated inthis rfocu menl do not necessarily represent official OE RI position or policy "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." The Differential Aptitude Test: A Review and Critique Lin Wang Department of Educational Psychology College of Education Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843 Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association Austin, Texas January 29, 1993 2 3EST COPY AVAILABLE p