Update July 2013

The revised EFPA Test Review Model

•  EFPA 2013 TEST REVIEW MODEL Version 4.2.6 (See attached PDF)

The Revised EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological and Educational Tests was approved by the EFPA General Assembly in July 2013. The official English language version can be downloaded here.

The EFPA Review model provides for procedures that employ two reviewers for each test review, with a third person to oversee the review (the ‘Consulting Editor’) – see Introduction for details.

Local arrangements may result in some of these functions being combined.

EFPA recommends that the evaluations in these reviews are directed towards qualified practising test users, though they should also be of interest to academics and specialists in psychometrics and psychological testing.

For details of the Review Procedure and any local modifications to the review content and criteria, consult your local Psychological Association.

Translations of the original EFPA Test Review form and notes, version 3-42-EU - version September 2008

Test User standard documents

The document “A European Standard for Test Use” provides a general introduction to the EFPA Test User standards and how they can be used to support user qualification in Member Associations

The European Test User Standards were the outcome of a two-year project undertaken jointly by EFPA and EAWOP during the period 2003 to 2005. While the initial focus was on test use in employment settings, the developers of the standards were tasked with developing a generic model and those who worked on the original standards came from all areas of psychology.

Since the initial development, work has continued to include specifications of standards for test use in the areas of Health & Social Care, and Education as well as in the area of Work. In addition the model has been refined to distinguish three levels of competence.

The standards can be used in a number of ways but are designed to facilitate the development of competence-based qualifications in test use. They are intended to provide a general European level ‘benchmark’ against which national qualification systems can be compared, audited or accredited

The actual standard is described in the Document titled “EFPA BoA Qualification Specification all levels 10-03-2012”. This gives details of the standards for three different levels of test use and in terms of three different contexts of use: health, work and education

Accreditation of test user certification

• EFPA-TUAC Obtaining EFPA Accreditation for National Test User Certification
• Rules Governing Certification procedure V1-0

EFPA has approved procedures for the accreditation of national test user qualifications. Currently these are confined to Levels 1 and 2 of this framework in the context of test use in employment-related settings. The other two documents provide the rules governing the accreditation procedure and the procedure involved in obtaining accreditation. Member Associations interested in this should request further information from the Board of Assessment through the EFPA Head Office.

Assessment Standards

In 2011 the Standing Committee on Tests and Testing became the Board of Assessment. Since then the Board has produced an updated version of its test user standards intended to cover the broader range of assessment.

The Board agreed a definition of assessment as a “systematic method or procedure for ascertaining the psychological characteristics of an individual or group of individuals, or the performance of an individual or group of individuals”. The Board emphasises that it intends a broad view of ‘psychological characteristics’. Indeed, the term is used to differentiate between physical and psychological characteristics rather than imply any restriction to trait-like attributes. The definition is based on that developed for the ISO 10667 standard on assessment and this makes clear that it covers all types of psychological attribute, assessed at individual as well as aggregate levels (team, organization, network, family, social group etc.). We also envisage this covering the measurement of ‘criteria’ in so far as these are relevant to the “performance of an individual or group of individuals”. The Board realises that future use of the definitions needs to include statements that ‘unpack’ what is meant by ‘psychological characteristics’ and ‘performance’.