Tests in psychology: pros and cons. Pros and cons of testing by specialists. Projective test techniques. General characteristics

Method test control knowledge came to us from abroad (from countries in which Bologna process), where student assessment is equal for everyone. This knowledge control system was developed by Western professors in order to make learning more rigorous. Every student must understand that his success depends only on his own desire“to conquer the pinnacle of knowledge,” and for this he needs to direct all his efforts to study the complex of subjects and disciplines necessary to obtain a qualification. Otherwise, without a sufficient supply of knowledge it is impossible to achieve a high level of professionalism, therefore, such students will “weed out” to the working class of the population. Thus, every applicant, even upon admission, understood why he was entering the university.

Of course, in our country everything is a little different, but getting good education, also remains one of the most important tasks of every young man. Time has shown that the use of such a knowledge control test system is quite successful tool when teaching and testing students' qualifications. But, one way or another, like any control system it has its pros and cons, and the control method described above is no exception.

The advantages of testing include the objectivity of the assessment, and, consequently, the equality of all students when passing test tickets, since they all receive the same tasks (at the same time and in the same place) and have a certain amount of time to complete the same task. The positive aspects of testing include several other aspects, one of which is the ability to cover all topics of a particular discipline, at the same time, when during an oral exam the teacher cannot devote such a huge amount of time to one student to test his knowledge. Typically, during an oral exam, the teacher has the opportunity to ask the student a question on a maximum of three topics. The next advantage of testing is a more adequate scale for assessing knowledge. For example, if a test ticket consists of fifteen questions, then maximum quantity the points that a student can receive with correct answers is 15. If he makes mistakes, it will be clear how many mistakes he made and immediately determine how broad the student’s level of knowledge in this discipline is. Using the classical method, a student can get the maximum mark - 5 points, and the mark put in the record book may not always correspond to the actual level of knowledge.

The disadvantages of such a control system include the laboriousness of compiling such tests by the teacher. Since the number of topics in a particular discipline can vary from a few to several dozen, you can understand that this is a rather labor-intensive process and requires increased care (if the teacher makes a mistake when compiling keys to tests, students may be assessed biased). Another disadvantage of testing is the fact that for a certain question the ticket contains a list of possible answers, from which you need to choose one or two correct ones. Sometimes students manage to “at random” indicate the correct answer options. Thus, some students may receive an undeserved mark... On the other hand, if a student guesses the answer options, then he will probably not be able to guess all the remaining answers to the questions listed on the ticket.

Personnel assessment has been and remains one of the most important elements of the personnel management system: it is impossible to do without assessment either during personnel selection, certification, creation of a personnel reserve, or personnel rotation. Often the effectiveness of the entire HR system depends on the effectiveness of personnel assessment. The effectiveness of personnel assessment directly depends on the adequacy of the methods and approaches used. Is testing, so fashionable in the early 90s, always an adequate method?

At one time, when HR management in our country was taking its first steps, the majority of HR managers were recruited from psychologists who directly transferred their usual skills with them to a new area of ​​activity. scientific activity working methods - tests. This is quite understandable - in those days they didn’t know or know how to do anything else, information about Western technologies for working with personnel leaked out “a teaspoon at an hour”, their own methods had not yet been developed.

To maintain their authority and not lose their jobs, some psychologists, when hiring, gave candidates 300–600 questions each to fill out a battery of clinical tests. Of course, such a selection made an indelible impression. Both for candidates and employers. And on the “HR managers” themselves. In addition, the output is “objective” data. Apparently this is where the myth about the omnipotence of tests originates.

Unfortunately, this is just a myth. Application of tests in scientific purposes has a number of limitations, and the use of testing in business is doubly limited.

Traditionally, the advantages of testing include the standardization of methods, the presence of a normative result, and its reproducibility. It is believed that the data obtained during testing are objective. Also, many managers are impressed by the scientific nature of the assessment procedure in the case of testing.

However, almost all of these advantages have “ reverse side medals." Let's start with standardization. Not all methods used by HR managers are truly standardized (tested on a large, reference sample, which confirmed that for people with the same expressed trait being tested, the test results will be the same); amateur and popular science tests are very often used in HR work. Moreover, standardization in itself is not a guarantee of quality: as a rule, tests are standardized on students, and no one can guarantee that the norm of, say, anxiety among students, accountants and, for example, customs brokers will be the same.

The objectivity of data obtained through testing may also be questioned. Most of the tests used in personnel assessment are questionnaires; not all of them are equipped with a lie scale. The bulk of these questionnaires were designed for research purposes, testing took place voluntarily, or on the initiative of the subject, so the lie scale was not provided, or was poorly protected: the subjects had no need to lie. Therefore, for a person with higher education(which means it's enough high level intelligence) “bypassing” such a test is not a problem, especially if the success of passing the test determines whether he will be accepted for a promising job.

In addition, cumbersome questionnaires require a lot of time to complete, process and interpret. Naturally, a person who spends a lot of time and effort filling out tests begins to feel irritated towards the company and the people who subjected him to such a “test”. As a result, the company’s image deteriorates and employee loyalty decreases.

By and large, psychological testing in personnel work makes sense in two cases: when assessing the professional suitability of specialists in a number of fields that place special demands on the cognitive functions (attention, memory, thinking, emotional sphere, etc.) of a professional (accountant, dispatcher, pilot, etc.) and with a large flow (mass recruitment or certification of the same type of specialists), when speed of assessment and great value gains the ability to compare results.

At the same time, many characteristics that are in great demand in the labor market (corporatism, loyalty, constructiveness, customer orientation, etc.) cannot be reliably identified using tests. And it is impossible to determine whether a candidate will fit into the organizational culture of the company using any methods other than observation and conversation. In addition, it is not always possible to establish a direct connection between the presence of certain psychological qualities in a candidate and his professional success, and the absence of a number of professionally important qualities can be compensated for by experience and individual style of activity. In general, a fixation on identifying a predefined set of characteristics limits the range of information that can be obtained during a survey.

In general, the use of questionnaire tests requires the HR manager to have less competence in the field of psychology than projective techniques, observation and interviews, since the results of testing as a method minimally depend on the skill of the researcher. However, the lack of proper competence can lead to the fact that what is measured is not what was planned due to an inadequate choice of method. Often the test that the researcher is good at or is used to using is used, rather than the one that suits the situation. Many have probably encountered the fact that the MMPI clinical test, created to identify severe mental pathologies from the field of major psychiatry, was used to select and evaluate managers, sales representatives, insurance agents, and bank employees. Even if we ignore ethical issues, the adequacy of using this method outside the clinic raises, to put it mildly, great doubts. And the use of the Rorschach test (an even more complex projective clinical test, which takes several years to master) in marketing focus groups (imagine, this happens) is simply shocking. As practice shows, much more adequate and informative results when assessing professionalism can be achieved with the help of specially designed, structured interviews, the case method and an assessment center.

In terms of the variety of information provided, testing as a method is significantly inferior to such methods as conversation and observation. For all its apparent simplicity, ingenuousness, bias and “unscientific” nature, a half-hour conversation can give an experienced psychologist or manager more information about a person than a half-hour test.

However, there are three main categories of tests that can be used successfully by HR departments. These are projective, professional and cognitive tests. Projective tests provide a lot of varied information about a person, do not require much time to complete, and are very difficult to “deceive”, since these methods rather appeal to the unconscious, having little contact with our conscious attitudes and beliefs. That is why projective techniques, among other things, best method to identify serious mental pathologies organic character, which may not be revealed in observation and conversation. Cognitive tests allow you to assess the characteristics of cognitive functions: distribution of attention, resistance to stress, reaction speed, etc. Professional tests, as a rule, are not strictly psychological. They allow you to assess the level of professional knowledge of a specialist.

In conclusion, I would like to remind you that testing data, as well as refusal to undergo testing, according to current legislation, cannot be the reason for denying a job to an applicant or employee.

Based on materials from “New Markets”

Every software developer sooner or later faces the task of assessing the quality of the product being released. Often, managers of small projects consider it an unaffordable luxury to resort to the services of professional testers. After all, at first glance, who, if not the developer or user himself, can in the best possible way find flaws in the program? Essentially, in this case, the entire study comes down to beta testing (“Beta testing is the intensive use of an almost finished version of a product (usually software or hardware) in order to identify the maximum number of errors in its operation for their subsequent elimination before the final release of the product to the market, to the mass consumer").

The practice of using clients - consumers of a product as testers in lately became quite popular. We will try to evaluate the seemingly obvious pros and cons of beta testing and testing by specialists. Do all of them turn out to be “pros” or “cons” upon closer examination?

Pros and cons of beta testing

Pros :

1. Feedback.
The undeniable advantage of beta testing is getting real feedback from product users. For this, various tools are used: collecting feedback, surveys, and periodically involving real business users in the testing process.

Indeed, in some cases, only users can test the software to identify the most convenient, most interesting, or, conversely, the most unacceptable modules and functions. Having received such feedback, developers can quickly refine the product taking into account the expressed wishes: change the system logic, edit test scripts.

Software defects are also detected when using rare environments. Thus, when choosing a beta testing strategy, it should be taken into account that the best results will be achieved if large quantity users from different environments. An excellent example of such work is the strategy of the famous company Google. Using powerful equipment, the company systematizes and classifies reviews from tens of thousands of users, bringing its software products to perfection.

2. Saving money.

The advantage of beta testing, at first glance, is its low cost. Indeed, ideally we get test coverage without additional investments. The beta testing method is most often used in the gaming industry. The experience of many development companies confirms the economic feasibility of this method. A reduction in the company's overall costs can also be achieved by using beta tests as a tool for promoting the system. Free replication of beta versions ensures increased interest among end users in the final version of the product.

But does everything always work out so well? As practice shows, the lack of a competent beta testing strategy can lead to disastrous results. Let's look at this using real examples.

Not long ago, a certain company that produces computer games made a beta version freely available. The purpose of the action was to receive bug reports from users. Things didn’t work out right away: very few reviews were received. The developers had to offer bonuses in the form of necessary in-game artifacts for each bug report left. Only after this step was it finally received necessary information.

As a result of this “win-win” strategy, the company spent much more time than it had planned. Moreover, she incurred additional costs to “maintain” the entire development team while waiting for results.

Another recent example: one Japanese developer released into beta testing widely famous game for mobile devices. Imagine the surprise of users when it turned out that they were not always able to even just launch the game on their devices. Not only that, but beta testers prematurely spread information about the game online, which disrupted the campaign plans. In fact, the "savings" led to the commercial failure of the game's launch. At the same time, the company, as in the previous case, spent extra time and money.

The described situations show that beta testing, planned without the involvement of experienced specialists, does not always lead to cost savings.

Cons:

1. Low qualifications of testers.

It is important to remember that the main participants in beta testing are volunteers from among ordinary users of the future product. These people do not always have even the minimum technical skills to give a quality assessment of the software. Of course, you don’t even have to think about clear localization and a clear description of the bug during beta testing - this will still need to be done by full-time testers.

2. Incomplete test coverage.

A certain analogy of beta testing can be seen in the legendary film “Operation Y...”. According to the plot, the “gang” is faced with the task of staging a robbery of a warehouse in which “everything has already been stolen before you.” The “test bench” is a garage, converted to obtain the characteristics of a real warehouse (“Product”). The gang selects master keys and conducts “test scenarios” to infiltrate and simulate a robbery. In general, the operation should be successful, BUT... The “coward”, trained “on cats”, at a crucial moment stumbles upon an alternative scenario: “Where is grandma?” - “I’m for her”. As a result, Operation Y turns out to be a failure. Practice shows that when testing by non-professionals, part of the functionality always remains uncovered.

Pros and cons of testing by specialists

Now we will try to formulate the main pros and cons of working with professional testers.

Pros:

There are many advantages of working with an experienced team, we will focus on just a few of them.

1. An integrated approach to testing.

Obviously, the main advantage that interests everyone is the high quality of testing, achieved through maximum coverage of all stages of work. Defects missed in applications such as desktop or mobile software lead to huge financial losses for both the developer and his clients. Possibility of drawing up plans and coordination test coverage with business analysts gives confidence in minimizing material risks. Testers participate in the process of determining the composition of the release, checking the reliability of the procedure for both full version rollback and partial changes and data conversion.

2. Reporting test results.

Based on the results of the specialists’ work, the customer receives not only a list of completed scenarios, but also a set of reports that contain conclusions about the quality of the released product and bottlenecks Software, as well as suggestions for improvements. Based on such reports, the manufacturer has the opportunity to quickly make further decisions on the product. All necessary fixes and changes are outlined so that developers can immediately begin implementing them.

3. High quality testing based on the experience of specialists.

Let's return to the example of “Operation “Y”. Qualified specialists would never have missed alternative scenarios, and the outcome of the event could have been completely different. Experience is a great thing! At the same time, the testing team bears full responsibility for its work, which cannot be said about the beta testing participants.

Cons :

The disadvantages of hiring specialists most often include “the concept of two “Ds”: “expensive and time consuming”. Not every company can afford to expand its staff and hire testing employees on a permanent basis, especially when it comes to startups. Therefore, outsourcing is currently very popular. It makes it possible to attract a team of specialists to a specific project.

Another trend is the transition from traditional development and testing methods (Waterfall) to flexible ones (Agile). Janet Gregory and Lisa Crispin have published an excellent paper detailing the place of developers and testers in Agile projects. However, we should not forget that any tester must have minimal technical skills and be able to navigate the subject area well.

On the other hand, the examples presented in this article show that hopes for saving time and money from using “truncated” beta testing often turn out to be unrealistic. This means that “long and expensive” is just a common cliche, which is not always confirmed in practice.

Conclusion

So, without quality testing, you definitely run the risk of delivering a product with bugs to your client. But quality testing also involves obtaining information about whether the product being released meets end-user expectations. You need to decide for yourself which testing method to use on your project, or use a strategy that combines both approaches. We hope that this article will help you make an informed choice.

Testing students in school is by no means a newfangled invention, as many now want to imagine. Tests and independent work periodically performed by schoolchildren, frontal polls and personal assignments were also aimed at identifying the level of assimilation of the acquired knowledge. With the advent of computers in schools, the work of creating and checking tests for the most various topics on a wide variety of subjects has become much simpler. But the tests themselves appeared in schools much earlier.

What are the pros and cons of testing as a method of control?

Many teachers used so-called test cards in their work. Each card represented a unique individual task, they were distributed to the class for literally 10-15 minutes. After this, the cards were collected and the lesson continued. Such test tasks allowed the teacher to determine the completeness of students’ assimilation of the materials of the previous lesson. Moreover, checking such card tests required very little time - only a few seconds per card. At the same time, to check one independent work the teacher spent at least five minutes, and then only on the condition that he had previously dealt with similar tasks.

Attitudes towards tests in school are far from clear. Many people believe that tests do not reflect real level knowledge acquired by students. This is partly true, since in no case can one completely rely on test results to the exclusion of all other methods of testing knowledge. While taking tests, students may make some minor mistake that will affect the result, or simply rush and get nervous, or you never know what else. But the effectiveness of tests as a means of quickly assessing classroom performance cannot be denied. The only question is that it is unacceptable to accept all test results unconditionally; it is necessary to check the test results and conduct a differentiated analysis for each student individually.

When checking independent work, for example, in mathematics, the teacher can see the progress of the student’s calculations and identify the annoying typo that led to the error. Maybe someone distracted the student at this moment, and he did not have time to check on his own. An experienced and objective teacher will never consider this a mistake, especially if both the formulas and the solution were absolutely correct. Testing requires only the correct answer. When taking tests that require you to do something to get an answer, students are encouraged to turn in their drafts along with their test cards. Then both the teacher and the student will have reason to review the test results and give the correct grade. Application simple tests, in which it is necessary, for example, to substitute into the formula desired value, answer the question unambiguously “yes” or “no” or name the unit of measurement, most accurately reflect the assimilation of the material and do not require clarification. And the use of such tests in schools should be carried out as often as possible.

The quality of such tests today, unfortunately, leaves much to be desired. The point here is not only that there is not enough source material or means of independently developing tests, and also in the fact that over time the very attitude towards tests became negative and the developments of previous years were lost. But testing at school is not just a tribute to fashion and cannot be perceived formally, as some kind of imposed duty. Testing provides a good opportunity for students to clearly see their gaps in learning and try to correct them. After all, when entering higher education educational institution, and especially during their studies, the student will have to face the opinion of teachers who will evaluate their knowledge objectively, regardless of their previous school achievements. It is very important to show from the very beginning that the knowledge acquired at school, and most importantly the desire to obtain it, was not in vain for the student.

What to consider when developing tests

There are several important factors to consider when developing tests. First, tests should be compiled only on the basis of the material covered, additional material should not be taken into account here. Secondly, the time allotted for completing a certain test task should be calculated taking into account the speed of completing such tasks not on the average for the class, but on the basis of the slowest student; if necessary, such children should be given additional time without compromising the learning of new material. Third, the construction of tests should go from simple to complex, so that the student does not stumble on the first tasks and does not waste precious time. Fourth, all test tasks must be feasible, that is, they must be pre-checked for typos. If at least one of these requirements is not met, it is impossible to talk about a full and objective assessment of knowledge.

What is testing

Methods of psychological research are those scientific techniques and means with the help of which it is possible to record and describe psychological differences both between people and between groups of people united by certain characteristics.

The goal of modern psychological diagnostics is to obtain reliable information for further construction scientific theories and development of practical recommendations.

The following main methods of psychological research are distinguished: observation, survey, testing and experiment. The test method is one of the main ones in modern psychodiagnostics.

In terms of popularity in educational and professional psychodiagnostics, it has firmly held first place in world psychodiagnostic practice for almost a century.

Test(translated from English as “test” or “test”) is a short, standardized test that can be standardized and processed mathematically. With the help of tests, they strive to identify certain abilities, skills, abilities (or lack thereof), and to most accurately characterize certain personality qualities. In many cases in psychological research not one, but several methods are used, each of which complements the others, revealing new aspects of mental activity.

History of testing

Even in ancient times, there were more or less standard procedures for identifying individual differences between people. Thus, in China, more than four thousand years ago, senior officials were required to pass a strict examination in the presence of the emperor on knowledge of rituals and ceremonies, archery, horse riding, the ability to write, count, and play music. In ancient Babylon and Egypt, an applicant for the position of scribe had to prove possession of the appropriate skills, understand finances, laws, agriculture. The Bible describes unique ways of selecting warriors for especially difficult and dangerous tasks, depending on their actions at a rest stop. In ancient Greece and Rome, very detailed classifications of characters and patterns of their determination based on behavioral characteristics were developed.

Although all this and much more historically preceded testing, the emergence of scientific tests should only be dated to the end of the nineteenth century. The term itself was introduced by Francis Galton (1822 -1911), who was engaged in research on visual and hearing acuity, muscle strength, etc. However, this term gained the greatest popularity after the publication in 1890 of the article “Mental Tests and Measurements,” written by an American psychologist James Cattell (1860-1944)

Cattell developed several dozen tests aimed at assessing elementary sensorimotor processes (sensitivity, reaction time, number of sounds reproduced after a single listening, etc.).

The widespread use of tests began in 1905, when the Bean-Simon test was proposed to diagnose the development of children's intelligence.

Testing directions

The method of objective psychological assessment is based on a test (or sample), which can be:

1) a stimulus of a certain modality, if this is a psychophysical study;

2) tasks of different levels of complexity, if this is educational psychology;

3) tasks related to the study of attention, memory, intelligence, etc. in general and developmental psychology.

In order for these tests (samples) to provide objective and measurable data, they are first checked for large number subjects. For example, in educational psychology– on children of the same age or people of the same level of education, etc. In this case, from all the proposed problems, those are selected that are successfully solved by a significant number of all subjects (for example, two thirds).

This procedure is called normalization, or determining the “norm.” The decisions of those subjects whose knowledge, skills and abilities are measured are subsequently compared with it.

The results of these measurements are evaluated in conditional points (or in rank estimates), combined into an order scale and indicating where a given subject could occupy in relation to the corresponding group of subjects (that is, to the “norm”).

Task psychological tests, thus, to measure differences between individuals or between the responses of one individual under different conditions.

Types of tests

Tests vary in form:

Test questionnaire is a system of pre-thought-out, carefully selected and tested questions from the point of view of their reliability and validity, by the answers to which one can judge psychological qualities subjects.

Test task involves assessing a person’s psychology and behavior based on his actions. In tests of this type, the subject is given a series of special tasks, based on the results of which they judge the presence or absence and degree of development of the quality being studied.

The following types of tests are distinguished:

1. Personality tests designed to identify personal characteristics and character traits. The set of identified qualities depends on the theoretical concept underlying the test. These tests can reveal the level of expression of each characteristic (for example, the Cattell test), or, based on the totality of data, classify a person as one or another type (for example, the Myers-Briggs test). There are both complex tests that describe the personality as a whole, and tests for any specific quality (for example, tests to determine Eysenck’s temperament, etc.). Some tests are designed to identify pathologies of character and personal development (for example, MMPI).

2. Intelligence tests designed to determine the level of intelligence and education. Intelligence tests involve several tasks (arithmetic, logical, graphic, etc.), which are arranged in order of increasing difficulty (for example, the Wenger test). As a rule, to perform intelligence test given a limited amount of time.

3.Aptitude tests . Abilities are the individual psychological characteristics of a person that contribute to his success in any activity. Abilities are manifested in activity, formed in activity, and exist in relation to a specific activity. There are general and specific abilities. General Abilities, the basic forms of mental reflection inherent in all people: the ability to feel, perceive, remember, think; as well as, to a greater or lesser extent, the abilities inherent in all people for universal human activities: play, learning, work, communication. Particular abilities are not inherent in all people: an ear for music, an accurate eye, peculiarities of motor skills, memory, etc.

4. Projective tests . In modern psychodiagnostics they are distinguished separately. Projective tests are based on a projection mechanism that reveals one’s own unconscious thoughts, qualities, and shortcomings (for example, ART, TAT tests). These types of tests also include drawing, color (for example, the Luscher test), constitutive and interpretive techniques. Using a projective test, a psychologist can introduce the subject into an imaginary, plot-undefined situation, subject to arbitrary interpretation. Such a situation could be, for example, the search for a certain meaning in a picture that depicts unknown people, it is not clear what they are doing. We need to answer the questions of who these people are, what they are thinking, and what will happen next. Based on the meaningful interpretation of the answers, the own psychology responding.

Application of tests

How methodological tool tests are widely used in modern research. However, before deciding which of the hundreds of available tests can be used for research, the psychologist asks:

1) what is the purpose of the test?

2) for which group of people is it best suited?

3) how does it differ from other methods of studying human personality?

4) how responsibly was it designed?

5) how accurate is it?

6) how adequate and valid are its results?

Every measuring instrument is required to be as accurate as possible so that the results obtained can be relied upon as being close to the “true” value of the attribute being measured. Accuracy can therefore be understood as a measure of the confidence with which a test measures it.

Pros and cons of testing

The popularity of the test method is explained by the following main reasons: advantages .

1) Standardization of conditions and results. Test methods are relatively independent of the qualifications of the user (performer), but this does not mean that in order to prepare a comprehensive conclusion on a battery of tests it is not necessary to involve a qualified specialist with a full-fledged higher psychological education.

2) Efficiency and efficiency. A typical test consists of a series of short tasks, each of which usually takes no more than half a minute to complete, and the entire test takes no more than an hour (in school practice this is one lesson); A group of subjects is tested simultaneously, thus saving significant time (man-hours) on data collection.

3) Quantitative differentiated nature of assessment. The granularity of the scale and the standardization of the test allow us to consider it as a “measuring instrument” that gives a quantitative assessment of the properties being measured (knowledge, skills in a given area). Good test makes it possible to distinguish not only three categories of students - excellent students, “average students” and “low-achievers”, but also to well differentiate test subjects at the poles of the scale - to distinguish those who are simply capable from those who are very capable and talented, and among those lagging behind, to distinguish those who are not hopeless from those who are “hopeless” (or completely unprepared) . In addition, the quantitative nature of the test results makes it possible to apply a well-developed psychometric apparatus to the tests, allowing one to assess how well the work is performed. this test on a given sample of subjects under given conditions.

4) Optimal difficulty. A professionally done test consists of tasks of optimal difficulty. In this case, the average test taker scores approximately 50 percent of the maximum possible number of points. This is achieved through preliminary tests - a psychometric experiment, or aerobatics. If during aerobatics it becomes known that approximately half of the examined contingent can cope with the task, then such a task is considered successful and is left in the test.

5) Reliability. This is perhaps the most important advantage of the tests. The “lottery” nature of modern exams with the drawing of “lucky” or “unlucky” tickets has long been the talk of the town. The lottery for the examinee here results in low reliability for the examiner - answer to one fragment curriculum, as a rule, is not indicative of the level of assimilation of all material. In contrast, any well-constructed test covers the main sections of the curriculum (the area of ​​knowledge being tested or the manifestations of some skill or ability). As a result, the opportunity for the “tails” to become excellent students, and for the excellent student to suddenly “fail,” is sharply reduced.

6) Justice. Fairness is the most important advantage of the test method. It should be understood as protection from examiner bias. A good test puts all test takers on an equal footing. The subjectivity of the examiners, as we know, is most strongly manifested not in the interpretation of the level of solution of the problem (it is not so easy to call black white, or a solved problem unsolved), but in the tendentious selection of tasks: easier for their own, harder for others.

7) Possibility of computerization. As a result of computerization, all testing parameters are increased (for example, with adaptive computer testing testing time is sharply reduced). Computer organization of testing, which involves the creation of powerful information “banks” test tasks", allows you to technically prevent abuse by unscrupulous examiners. The choice of tasks offered to a competitive test subject can be made from such a bank by the computer program directly during testing, and presenting a given test subject with a certain task in this case is as much a surprise for the examiner as for the subject.

8) Psychological adequacy. This is the most important psychological consequence of optimal complexity. Presence in the test (compared to traditional exam options) of a large number of short tasks of average difficulty allows many subjects to believe in themselves, to activate the psychologically optimal attitude “to overcome.” The property of optimal complexity is important for the test in that it provides not only the measuring (discriminating) power of the test, but also the optimal psychological mood of the subjects. A test situation of optimal complexity is an optimal stimulus - people experience a normal level of stress (tension) necessary in order to show the highest result. Lack of stress (if light dough), and even more so an excess (in the case of a difficult one) distorts the measurement results. This, as a rule, is completely misunderstood by the organizers of our competitive exams, who, in the case of high competition, try to give applicants more difficult problems (“to fill in”), which creates excessive stress, which does not give the opportunity to prove themselves to people who are well prepared, but have reduced resistance to stress.

The test method has some very serious shortcomings , which do not allow reducing all diagnostics of abilities and knowledge solely to testing, such as:

1) The danger of “blind” (automatic) errors. For example, the subject did not understand the instructions and began to answer completely differently from what the standard instructions require, the subject for some reason used distorting tactics, a shift occurred in the application of the key stencil to the answer form (with manual, non-computer scoring), etc. .

2) The danger of profanity. It is no secret that the apparent ease of conducting tests seduces people who are not suitable for any skilled work. Equipped with tests of incomprehensible quality, but with loud advertising names, testing ignoramuses aggressively offer their services to anyone and everyone. All problems are supposed to be solved with the help of 2-3 tests - for all occasions. Towards quantitative test score a new label is attached - a conclusion that creates the appearance of compliance with the diagnostic task. An example of such profanation is the widespread use of the MMPI clinical test for personnel selection in our country. Unscrupulous profanity and basic ignorance go hand in hand in the field of testing;

3) Loss of individual approach, stress. The test is the most general ranking under which all people are fitted. The possibility of missing out on the bright individuality of a non-standard person is, unfortunately, quite likely. The test subjects themselves feel this, and it makes them nervous, especially in the situation of certification testing. People with reduced resistance to stress begin to worry and make mistakes in basic matters. Noticing such a reaction to a test in a timely manner is the task of a qualified and conscientious performer;

4) Lack of opportunity to reveal individuality. From the point of view of identifying creative potential Most tests are limited precisely by the fact that they do not appeal to creative, constructive activity. They are made in the form of a standard set of tasks with a given answer;

6) Lack of trust. The formalized nature of the testing procedure deprives the test subject of the feeling that the psychologist is interested in him personally, in helping with his problems and difficulties. Dialogical methods (conversation, games) in this regard have undoubted advantages: by directly communicating with the subject, a qualified psychologist can establish trusting contact, show personal involvement, and create an atmosphere that relieves tension and protection.

Conclusion

Thus, tests cannot be made the only comprehensive method of any diagnostics (both educational and professional, and personal) - they require the parallel use of free written work (in personal diagnostics, essays take the place of projective tests with a free response), as well as an oral interview (interview). The place of tests is to complement the traditional methods mentioned above. In this capacity, tests are irreplaceable, since they do not have many of the disadvantages inherent in traditional methods.

Related information.