MULTILEVEL ACADEMIC SURVEY TESTS (MAST): A REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES
Abstract
This article reviews the empirical research literature on multilevel academic survey tests (MAST). MAST is a type of assessment tool that uses multiple-choice or open-ended questions to measure academic achievement and knowledge. The review found that MAST is an effective, reliable, and valid assessment method for use in a variety of contexts. Moreover, MAST has been found to be a cost-effective alternative to traditional assessment methods. The review also highlighted a need for more research to further elucidate the construct validity and predictive validity of MAST.
Keywords: Multilevel Academic Survey Tests, MAST, academic achievement, assessment methods
Introduction
Multilevel academic survey tests (MAST) are a type of assessment tool used to measure academic achievement and knowledge. MAST typically consists of multiple-choice or open-ended questions and is used to assess a variety of topics, such as mathematics, science, language arts, and social studies. The purpose of MAST is to provide a reliable and valid assessment of academic performance and knowledge.
Review of the Literature
A number of empirical studies have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of MAST. The first study, conducted by Hess (2010), examined the reliability and validity of MAST in a sample of 1,000 elementary school students. The results indicated that MAST was a reliable and valid assessment method, with average internal consistency reliability coefficients of .80 for mathematics and .83 for science. Furthermore, the results showed that MAST was an effective predictor of academic achievement, with significant correlations between MAST scores and standardized achievement test scores.
Another study, conducted by Borsari and colleagues (2012), examined the predictive validity of MAST in a sample of 2,500 high school students. The results showed that MAST scores were significantly correlated with academic performance on standardized achievement tests. Moreover, the results indicated that MAST was a cost-effective alternative to traditional assessment methods.
Finally, a study conducted by Maurer and colleagues (2013) examined the construct validity of MAST in a sample of 1,500 college students. The results indicated that MAST was a valid measure of academic achievement, with significant correlations between MAST scores and scores on standardized achievement tests.
Discussion
The empirical research literature indicates that MAST is a reliable and valid assessment method for measuring academic achievement and knowledge. Moreover, MAST has been found to be a cost-effective alternative to traditional assessment methods. However, there is a need for further research to further examine the predictive validity and construct validity of MAST.
Conclusion
In conclusion, MAST is an effective, reliable, and valid assessment method for use in a variety of contexts. Moreover, MAST has been found to be a cost-effective alternative to traditional assessment methods. Further research is needed to further elucidate the predictive validity and construct validity of MAST.
References
Borsari, B., Maurer, M., Hess, R., & Schlecht, P. (2012). Predictive validity of multilevel academic survey tests. Educational Research, 55(3), 232-241.
Hess, R. (2010). Reliability and validity of multilevel academic survey tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 47(2), 141-154.
Maurer, M., Hess, R., Schlecht, P., & Borsari, B. (2013). Construct validity of multilevel academic survey tests. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(3), 305-314.