Scoring, Standardizing, Weighting and Combining Test Scores Sample Clauses

Scoring, Standardizing, Weighting and Combining Test Scores. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the scoring of all testing components. The testing instruments administered by the CITY have been validated by the CONSULTANT on the basis of criterion and content validation strategies. The written ability test shall be scored in a straightforward manner, with each of the 60 items being worth one point. The work style and biodata inventory scales shall be used to score the candidate’s work style and biodata inventory tests. CONSULTANT shall generate oral board scores for each candidate based on a statistical combination of assessor scores. If necessary, and based on discussions with the Project team, CONSULTANT will standardize scores by board and exercise version to ensure that any differences that occur as a result of board or exercise assignment are eliminated. Once the CONSULTANT has scored all tests, the CONSULTANT will standardize each test component and apply the prescribed weights to each component. These weights were derived on the basis of the job analysis and criterion-related validity results and finalized through joint discussion with the CITY’S Project team. The CONSULTANT shall then add the scores together to generate a total score for each candidate.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Scoring, Standardizing, Weighting and Combining Test Scores. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the scoring of all testing components. The testing instruments administered by the CITY shall have been previously validated by the CONSULTANT prior to administration on the basis of criterion and content validation strategies. The written ability test shall be scored in a straightforward manner, with each of the 75 items being worth one point. The work style and biodata inventory scales shall be used to score the candidate’s work style and biodata inventory tests. CONSULTANT shall generate oral board scores for each candidate based on a statistical combination of assessor scores. If necessary, and based on discussions with the Project team, CONSULTANT will standardize scores by board and exercise version to ensure that any differences that occur as a result of board or exercise assignment are eliminated. Once the CONSULTANT has scored all tests, the CONSULTANT will standardize each test component and apply the prescribed weights to each component. These weights shall be derived on the basis of the job analysis results and finalized through joint discussion with the Overland Park Project team. The CONSULTANT shall then add the scores together to generate a total score for each candidate. In addition to the above, the CONSULTANT shall merge the dataset from five (5) test administrations to refine the scoring solution and derive common scoring, banding and cut-off standards for use with future administrations. Establishing common standards will allow applicants from different administrations to be directly compared and to be merged onto a common list. The scoring solution will be re-examined and refined, if appropriate, based on the combined candidate database from the five (5) test administrations. Effort will be directed toward minimizing subgroup differences while maintaining validity as established by the criterion-related validity study conducted in 1999. Common scoring standards shall be recommended by using the merged dataset characteristics to derive: a) formulas for standardizing scores on each test element, b) a common set of bands, and c) a common cut-off score for use with applicant groups moving forward in the selection process.

Related to Scoring, Standardizing, Weighting and Combining Test Scores

  • Corrective Measures If the Participating Generator fails to meet or maintain the requirements set forth in this Agreement and/or the CAISO Tariff, the CAISO shall be permitted to take any of the measures, contained or referenced in the CAISO Tariff, which the CAISO deems to be necessary to correct the situation.

  • Mileage Measurement Where required, the mileage measurement for LIS rate elements is determined in the same manner as the mileage measurement for V&H methodology as outlined in NECA Tariff No. 4.

  • Power Factor Design Criteria Developer shall design the Large Generating Facility to maintain an effective power delivery at demonstrated maximum net capability at the Point of Interconnection at a power factor within the range established by the Connecting Transmission Owner on a comparable basis, until NYISO has established different requirements that apply to all generators in the New York Control Area on a comparable basis. The Developer shall design and maintain the plant auxiliary systems to operate safely throughout the entire real and reactive power design range. The Connecting Transmission Owner shall not unreasonably restrict or condition the reactive power production or absorption of the Large Generating Facility in accordance with Good Utility Practice.

  • Measuring EPP parameters Every 5 minutes, EPP probes will select one “IP address” of the EPP servers of the TLD being monitored and make an “EPP test”; every time they should alternate between the 3 different types of commands and between the commands inside each category. If an “EPP test” result is undefined/unanswered, the EPP service will be considered as unavailable from that probe until it is time to make a new test.

  • Stability Testing Patheon may be requested to conduct stability testing on the Products in accordance with the protocols set out in the Specifications for the separate fees and during the time periods set out in Schedule C to a Product Agreement. Patheon will not make any changes to these testing protocols without prior written approval from Client. If a confirmed stability test failure occurs, Patheon will notify Client within one Business Day, after which Patheon and Client will jointly determine the proceedings and methods to be undertaken to investigate the cause of the failure, including which party will bear the cost of the investigation. Patheon will not be liable for these costs unless it has failed to perform the Manufacturing Services in accordance with the Specifications, cGMPs, and Applicable Laws. Patheon will give Client ail stability test data and results at Client’s request.

  • Performance Measure Grantee will adhere to the performance measures requirements documented in

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion # 4 READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not i ncrease your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for years two and thr ee and potentially year four, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIP S, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentati on, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from th e “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, wit h any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they ma y apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@t xxx-xxx.xxx

  • Performance Measurement The Uniform Guidance requires completion of OMB-approved standard information collection forms (the PPR). The form focuses on outcomes, as related to the Federal Award Performance Goals that awarding Federal agencies are required to detail in the Awards.

  • Loop Testing/Trouble Reporting 2.1.6.1 Telepak Networks will be responsible for testing and isolating troubles on the Loops. Telepak Networks must test and isolate trouble to the BellSouth portion of a designed/non-designed unbundled Loop (e.g., UVL-SL2, UCL-D, UVL-SL1, UCL-ND, etc.) before reporting repair to the UNE Customer Wholesale Interconnection Network Services (CWINS) Center. Upon request from BellSouth at the time of the trouble report, Telepak Networks will be required to provide the results of the Telepak Networks test which indicate a problem on the BellSouth provided Loop. 2.1.6.2 Once Telepak Networks has isolated a trouble to the BellSouth provided Loop, and had issued a trouble report to BellSouth on the Loop, BellSouth will take the actions necessary to repair the Loop if a trouble actually exists. BellSouth will repair these Loops in the same time frames that BellSouth repairs similarly situated Loops to its End Users. 2.1.6.3 If Telepak Networks reports a trouble on a non-designed or designed Loop and no trouble actually exists, BellSouth will charge Telepak Networks for any dispatching and testing (both inside and outside the CO) required by BellSouth in order to confirm the Loop’s working status. 2.1.6.4 In the event BellSouth must dispatch to the end-user’s location more than once due to incorrect or incomplete information provided by Telepak Networks (e.g., incomplete address, incorrect contact name/number, etc.), BellSouth will xxxx Xxxxxxx Networks for each additional dispatch required to repair the circuit due to the incorrect/incomplete information provided. BellSouth will assess the applicable Trouble Determination rates from BellSouth’s FCC or state tariffs.

  • Constructability Review Prepare detailed interdisciplinary constructability review within Fourteen (14) days of receipt of the plans from the District that: 10.1.2.1.6.1 Ensures construction documents are well coordinated and reviewed for errors; 10.1.2.1.6.2 Identifies to the extent known, construction deficiencies and areas of concern; 10.1.2.1.6.3 Back-checks design drawings for inclusion of modifications; and 10.1.2.1.6.4 Provides the District with written confirmation that: 10.1.2.1.6.4.1 Requirements noted in the design documents prepared for the Project are consistent with and conform to the District's Project requirements and design standards. 10.1.2.1.6.4.2 Various components have been coordinated and are consistent with each other so as to minimize conflicts within or between components of the design documents.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!