Establishing performance standards for child development: learnings from the ECDI2030.

BACKGROUND: Standards of early childhood development (ECD) are needed to determine whether children living in different contexts are developmentally on track. The Early Childhood Development Index 2030 (ECDI2030) is a population-level measure intended to be used in household surveys to collect globally comparable data on one of the indicators chosen to monitor progress toward target 4.2 of the Sustainable Development Goals: The proportion of children aged 24-59 months who are developmentally on track in health, learning and psychosocial well-being. METHODS: To define performance cut-scores for the ECDI2030 we followed a criterion-referenced standard setting exercise using the modified Angoff method. The exercise gauged the expectations from 15 global experts in ECD and was informed by representative population data collected in Mexico and the State of Palestine. The final calibrated age-specific performance cut-scores were applied to these data to estimate the proportion of children developmentally on track, disaggregated by background characteristics, including the child's sex and attendance to early childhood education. RESULTS: Through a process of standard setting, we generated robust performance standards for the ECDI2030 by establishing five age-specific cut-scores to identify children as developmentally on track. CONCLUSIONS: This paper demonstrated how the standard setting methodology, typically applied to measures in the health and education fields, could be applied to a measure of child development. By creating robust criterion-referenced standards, we have been able to ensure that the cut-scores related to age for the ECDI2030 are based on performance standards set by global experts in the ECD field for defining on and off track development.

Developing content for American Board of Pediatric Dentistry certification examinations using practice analysis.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Pediatric Dentistry (ABPD) conducted a practice analysis to guide the development of its certification examination outlines for assessing the knowledge, skills, and abilities of pediatric dentists. This article describes the systematic approach used by the ABPD. METHODS: The ABPD conducted its practice analysis in 4 phases: (1) preparation, (2) focus group meetings, (3) survey, and (4) examination blueprint development. RESULTS: Phase 2 resulted in 150 job tasks relevant to entry-level pediatric dental practice, organized into 10 domains. In Phase 3, 8,730 pediatric dentists received an electronic survey, with 10% returning a completed survey. Respondents rated tasks in terms of frequency and risk, which were analyzed to determine the combined relevance of each task. Phase 4 organized a final list of tasks within each domain and the recommended weighting of domains by certifying examination. CONCLUSIONS: The ABPD practice analysis created a comprehensive outline of the job tasks an entry-level pediatric dentist is expected to perform. The ABPD plans to use the results to help develop the examination content for continuing certification and will use a similar process every 5 through 7 years to update the examination content blueprints to ensure their continued relevance to the practice of pediatric dentistry. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The ABPD used a process known as practice analysis to ensure that its examinations and continued competency assessments measure the knowledge, skills, and abilities required for safe and effective clinical practice.