Why the Major Field Test in Business Does Not Report Subscores: Reliability and Construct Validity Evidence

Abstract

To assess the value of individual students' subscores on the Major Field Test in Business (MFT Business), I examined the test's internal structure with factor analysis and structural equation model methods, and analyzed the subscore reliabilities using the augmented scores method.Analyses of the internal structure suggested that the MFT Business measures a unidimensional construct, which does not support reporting individual students' subscores. Augmented score analyses revealed that the observed total score could approximate the true subscore more accurately than the observed subscores, which do not support reporting individuals' subscores either. The results from these two approaches provided consistent evidence in support of the current practice of not reporting individuals' subscores on the MFT Business. The relationship between the two approaches is discussed, followed by a recommendation of an alternate method for future research.

Repurposing a Business Learning Outcomes Assessment to College Students Outside of the United States: Validity and Reliability Evidence

“…A single-factor model with all 118 items loaded on the same latent variable of businessrelated knowledge and skill was fitted to the data, with acceptably good fit indices. The RMSEA value was .015, and the TLI and CFI values were .94 and .94, respectively (see Table 2), which are similar to those based on the U.S. sample as found in Ling (2012). Note.…”

“…As was mentioned earlier, a measurement model was fitted to the data of each of the seven content areas, similar to Ling (2012). The measurement model fit the data acceptably well for six content areas, with the other area having marginally acceptable values on the fit indices (see Table 2).…”

“…These items cover seven content areas of business knowledge and skills: (a) accounting, (b) economics, (c) management, (d) quantitative business analysis and information systems, (e) finance, (f) marketing, and (g) legal and social environment, labeled as S1 to S7, respectively. The number of items varies from 12 to 21 across the seven content areas (see Ling, 2012, for details).…”

How Often Do Subscores Have Added Value? Results from Operational and Simulated Data

“…Seven subscores (accounting, economics, management, quantitative business analysis and information systems, finance, marketing, and legal and social environment) are reported at aggregate levels (e.g., average subscore of a class or a program) and not for individual examinees. The data considered here were analyzed in Ling (2009).…”

The Major Field Test in Business: A Solution to the Problem of Assurance of Learning Assessment?

“…60 correct answers? For his ETS study, Ling (2009) had access to the raw scores for the 2002-2006 version of the MFTB. His analysis yields some answers to this conundrum.…”