Raven's Progressive Matrices (often referred to simply as Raven's Matrices) or RPM, is

a nonverbal group test typically used in educational settings. It is the most common and
popular test administered to groups ranging from 5-year-olds to the elderly.
[1]
It is made of
60 multiple choice questions, listed in order of difficulty.
[2]
This format is designed to
measure the test-taker's reasoning ability or, ("meaning-making") component
of Spearman's g, which is often referred to as general intelligence. The tests were originally
developed byJohn C. Raven in 1936.
[3]
In each test item, the subject is asked to identify the
missing element that completes a pattern. Many patterns are presented in the form of a 4x4,
3x3, or 2x2 matrix, giving the test its name.
The Matrices are available in three different forms for participants of different ability:
Standard Progressive Matrices: These were the original form of the matrices, first
published in 1938. The booklet comprises five sets (A to E) of 12 items each (e.g., A1
through A12), with items within a set becoming increasingly difficult, requiring ever
greater cognitive capacity to encode and analyze information. All items are presented in
black ink on a white background.
Coloured Progressive Matrices: Designed for children aged 5 through 11 years-of-
age, the elderly, and mentally and physically impaired individuals. This test contains
sets A and B from the standard matrices, with a further set of 12 items inserted between
the two, as set Ab. Most items are presented on a coloured background to make the test
visually stimulating for participants. However the very last few items in set B are
presented as black-on-white; in this way, if a subject exceeds the tester's expectations,
transition to sets C, D, and E of the standard matrices is eased.
Advanced Progressive Matrices: The advanced form of the matrices contains 48
items, presented as one set of 12 (set I), and another of 36 (set II). Items are again
presented in black ink on a white background, and become increasingly difficult as
progress is made through each set. These items are appropriate for adults and
adolescents of above-average intelligence.

n addition, "parallel" forms of the standard and coloured progressive matrices were
published in 1998. This was to address the problem of the Raven's Matrices being too well
known in the general population. Items in the parallel tests have been constructed so that
average solution rates to each question are identical for the classic and parallel versions. A
revised version of the SPM - the Standard Progressive Matrices Plus - was published at
the same time. This was based on the "parallel" version but, although the test was the same
length, it had more difficult items in order to restore the discrimination that the original SPM
had among more able adolescents and young adults when it was first published. This new
test, developed with the aid of better sampling arrangements and developments in the
procedures available to implement Item Response Theory, has turned out to have
exemplary test properties.
J. C. Raven first published his Progressive Matrices in the United Kingdom in 1938. His
three sons established Scotland-based test publisher J C Raven Ltd. in 1972. In
2004,Harcourt Assessment, Inc. a division of Harcourt Education acquired J C Raven Ltd.
Harcourt was later acquired by Pearson PLC
The Triple Nine Society, a high IQ society, accepts the Advanced Progressive Matrices form
for one of their admission tests. They require a score of at least 32 out of 36 on or before
December 31, 1999 on the RAPM.
[4]
The International Society for Philosophical
Enquiry (ISPE) similarly accepts the RAPM as a qualification for admission,
[5]
and so does
the International High IQ Society.
[6]

Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary tests were originally developed for use in
research into the genetic and environmental origins of cognitive ability. Raven thought that
the tests commonly in use at that time were cumbersome to administer and the results
difficult to interpret. Accordingly, he set about developing simple measures of the two main
components of Spearman's g. These two components are (1) the ability to think clearly and
make sense of complexity, which is known as eductive ability (from the Latin root "educere",
meaning "to draw out") and (2) the ability to store and reproduce information, known as
reproductive ability.
Ravens tests of both were developed with the aid of what later became known as Item
Response Theory.


An example of one kind of IQ test item, modeled after items in the Raven's Progressive Matrices test.
Uses of the tests[edit]
The tests were developed for research purposes. Because of their independence of
language and reading and writing skills, and the simplicity of their use and interpretation,
they quickly found widespread practical application. For example, all entrants to the British
armed forces from 1942 onwards took a twenty minute version of the SPM. The routine
administration of what became the Standard Progressive Matrices to all entrants
(conscripts) to many military services throughout the world (including the Soviet Union)
continued at least until the present century. It was by bringing together these data
that James R. Flynn was able to place the intergenerational increase in scores beyond
reasonable doubt.
[7]
Flynn's path-breaking publications on IQ gains around the world have
led to the phenomenon of the gains being known as the Flynn Effect. Among Robert L.
Thorndike
[8]
and other researchers who preceded Flynn in finding evidence of IQ score
gains was John Raven,
[9]
reporting on studies with the RPM.
A 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with Asperger syndrome, a high-
functioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher than other individuals on Raven's
tests.
[10]
Another 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with classic autism, a low-
functioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher in Raven's tests than in Wechsler tests.
In addition, the individuals with classic autism were providing correct answers to the
Raven's test in less time than individuals without autism, although erring as often.
[11][non-primary
source needed]


PANUKAT NG KATALINUHANG PILIPINO (PKP) 1991
Aurora R. Palacio, Ed. D.
Author


The multifaceted Filipino culture seeks for the use of intelligence tests that can most
appropriately assess one's capability to handle particular tasks or activities. The most widely
used measures of intelligence are foreign-based and therefore, may not truly reflect the mental
ability of a Filipino. The situation in the country is inevitable due to the scarcity of Filipino-made
instruments of intelligence. Thus, development of a tool that is truly Filipino in nature and
orientation becomes a challenge in the field of education. The Panukat ng Katalinuhang
Pilipino (PKP) attempts to measure four major factors of human intelligence. Factors 1 3
require language skills while Factor 4 does not call for language ability. It is believed that
intelligence may be manifested either verbally, non-verbally or both.
Reliability
The following methods were used in testing the PKP for reliability: coefficient alpha, inter-
subtests correlations, inter-item correlation, inter-form correlations, and split-half technique.
The reliability coefficients obtained from the four subtests range from .80 in Vocabulary and .98
in the Non-Verbal area. The values obtained are highly satisfactory to assess the reliability of
the instrument. Reliability of the instrument was also determined by the consistency of the
results obtained from the parallel forms. Inter-form coefficients of correlations were obtained.
The Split-half technique confirms the reliability of the instrument. The odd-even scores for form
A, B, and K were correlated. The correlation obtained between the odds and even scores for
Form A, B, and K was .81, .84 and .82, respectively.
Validity
Two criterion measures were used to validate the test: a standard test, which is Cultured Fair
Intelligence Test (CFIT), Scale 3, and academic grades. The coefficients of correlations
obtained were all positive and significant at .01 levels.
The positive correlations between grades and PKP scores indicate that the instrument is
predictive of academic performance.
Administration
The normal testing conditions should be met when administering this test: adequate lighting,
proper ventilation, comfortable seating arrangement and freedom from any form of distractions
during the testing session. The test may be administered individually or in groups. The standard
procedure for test administration should be strictly followed. The total working time for the test is
52 minutes.
Scoring
The test can be scored either manually or by using a computerized scorer. The raw scores are
later converted into T scores and percentile ranks. Conversion tables are provided for this
purpose. There are conversion tables to change raw scores to T-scores and then to percentile
rank equivalents for each subtest after conversion to T-score.
Norms
The norms available are for senior high school (Metro Manila, N = 412), college undergraduates
(Metro Manila, N = 320) and college graduates (Nationwide, N = 375).
Also available, English Version of Panukat ng Katalinuhang Pilipino.
Back to top


FILIPINO INTELLIGENCE TEST (FIT)
Aurora R. Palacio, Ed. D.
Vicentita M. Cevera, Ed. D.
Authors
The English version of the PKP, known as the Filipino Intelligence Test (FIT), is a translation of
Form A. A retired college professor who has a B.S.E., cl, (major in English) and a Master of Arts
(major in Filipino) degrees both from the University of Santo Tomas translated the PKP into
English. She has taught both in English and Filipino for 39 years. The co-author of the FIT, who
is a test author herself, also reviewed the English translation. Some items were not direct
translations of the Filipino version because the nuances of the Filipino vocabulary and culture
could not be directly translated into English. These items then were parallel items in English,
meaning, the purpose of the test is retained even if the items were not direct translations from
Filipino to English.
In addition to norms for college graduates, college undergraduates and high school graduates, it
has norms for fourth year high school students, public elementary school teachers and public
secondary school teachers.


PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN EDUCATION SCALE-HIGH SCHOOL (PIES-HS)
Marilou E. Samonte, M. A. Psych. Services
Author
Traditionally, parent involvement in education is identified as home-based and school-based
activities. Home-based activities include helping with homework, encouraging children to read
and promoting school attendance while school-based activities include attending PTA meetings,
parent-teacher conferences, concerts and other school events, helping to raise money for
various school-improvement projects and volunteering at school during the day.
There are many reasons why parents get involved in the education of their children. A variety of
studies confirm that parent involvement makes an enormous impact on students' attitudes,
attendance and academic achievement. Children whose parents help them at home do better in
school behaved and more diligent in their efforts to learn.
Definition of Parental Involvement in Education Scale
Joyce Epstein, Director of the Center on School, Family and Community Partnerships at John
Hopkins University, expands the traditional types of involvement by identifying six other types.
Her framework is among the most useful tools developed in the field and is used as a guide to
help educators develop comprehensive family-school partnership. The six types of involvement
include:
A. Parenting: helping families with child-rearing and parenting skills, understanding child
and adolescent development and setting home conditions that support children as
students at each age and grade level. Assist schools understanding families.
B. Communicating: communicate with families about school programs and student
progress through effective school-to-home and home-to-school communications.
C. Volunteering: Improve recruitment, training work and schedules to involve families as
volunteers and audiences at the school or in other locations to support students and
school programs.
D. Learning at Home: Involve families with their children in learning activities at home,
including homework and other curriculum linked activities and decisions.
E. Decision-making: including families as participants in school decisions, governance
and advocacy through PTA, school councils, committees and other parent organizations.
F. Collaborating with Community: Coordinate resources and services for families,
students and the school with businesses, agencies and other groups and provide
services to the community.
Administration of the Test
PIES are a three-page questionnaire divided into two parts. Part I deals with information
background about the respondents. Part II includes the 49 statements that measure the level of
parental involvement in education. Respondents were asked to choose one of the numbers of a
four-point Likert scale to indicate the parent's level of involvement. Two color-coded sets of
questionnaire were prepared- green for the adolescent high school children and blue for the
parents.
An individual or a group may use the scale. There is no time limit required in answering the test.


SELF-CONCEPT RATING SCALE (SCRS)
Myrna M. Pasao, Ed. D.
Author
Self-Concept, a term so widely used in education today, has been and still is the target of
researches here and abroad. Difficult to define, problematic to measure and incredibly complex,
this dimension of personality nevertheless has been and continues to be the subject of theory
development. According to Thompson (1971, p. 322) there have been disagreements
(definition, theoretical analysis, designing instruments, etc.) among those interested in self-
concept, yet attempts to measure this construct as educators and psychologist are very much
aware of the significance of knowing one's concept of self. Self-concept has been demonstrated
to be related to a person's personal adjustment therefore influential in much of behavior.
Empirical and experimental data also indicate a direct relationship between self-concept and
academic excellence.
A variety of instruments have been developed over the past years to measure self-concept and
related constructs. However, these are Americ