What Is a Racially and Culturally Nondiscriminatory Test?

A Sociological and Pluralistic Perspective
  • Jane R. Mercer
Part of the Perspectives on Individual Differences book series (PIDF)


Public Law 94-142 (Section 612[5] [C] of the Education of the Handicapped Act) mandated, for the first time, racially and culturally nondiscriminatory assessment procedures in the identification of “handicapped” children to be served by federally funded programs. Each state is to establish

procedures to assure that testing and evaluation materials and procedures utilized for the purposes of evaluation and placement of handicapped children will be selected and administered so as not to be racially or culturally discriminatory. Such materials or procedures shall be provided and administered in the child’s native language or mode of communication, unless it clearly is not feasible to do so, and no single procedure shall be the sole criterion for determining an appropriate educational program for a child.


Test Score Teacher Rating Black Student White Student Item Difficulty 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Angoff, W. H., & Ford, S. F. Item-race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1973, 10, 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berk, R. A., Bridges, W. P., & Shih, A. Use of IQ scores for tracking mentally retarded. American Sociological Review, 1981, 46, 58–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boring, E. G. Intelligence as the tests test it. New Republic, 1923, 35, 35–37.Google Scholar
  4. Carver, R. Two dimensions of tests: Psychometric and edumetric. American Psychologist, 1974, 29(7), 512–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clarizio, H. F. In defense of the IQ test. School Psychology Digest, 1979, 8, 79–88.Google Scholar
  6. Cleary, T. A., & Hilton, T. L. An investigation of item bias. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1968, 28, 61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cleary, T. A., Humphreys, L. G., Kendrick, S. A., & Wesman, A. Educational uses of tests with disadvantaged students. American Psychologist, 1975, 30, 15–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Covington, J. E., & Klein, S. P. Validity Study of the Multistate Bar Examination Conducted by an Independent Panel and Sponsored by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, Columbia, Missouri, 1980–1981, personal communication.Google Scholar
  9. Crano, W. D., Kenny, D. A., & Campbell, D. T. Does intelligence cause achievement? A cross-lagged panel analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1972, 63, 258–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doll, E. A. Historical survey of research and management of mental retardation in the U.S. In E. P. Trapp (Ed.), Readings on the exceptional child. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1962.Google Scholar
  11. Federal Register, Tuesday, August 23, 1977: Part II, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: Office of Education, Education of Handicapped Children: Implementation of Part B of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Vol. 42, No. 163, 42474–42518.Google Scholar
  12. Figueroa, R. Progress Reports: The validation of the System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment (SOMPA). Department of Education, Grant 13.4430, 1979-1981 (unpublished).Google Scholar
  13. Flaugher, R. L. The many definitions of test bias. American Psychologist, 1978, 33, 671–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldman, R. D., & Hartig, L. K. The WISC may not be a valid predictor of school performance for primary-grade minority children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1976, 80(6), 583–587.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gomez-Palacio, Margarita, Rangel-Hinojosa, Elena, Padilla, & Eligio. Estandarización de la SOMPA en Mexico D.F.: Informe sobre teoria y resultados. Dirección General de Educación Especial SEP-OEA Mexico, 1982.Google Scholar
  16. Gomez-Palacio, Margarita, Padilla, Eligio, Roll, & Samuel. WISC-R Mexcano: Manuel de aplicación adaptado. Dirección de Educación Especial, SEP-OEA Mexico, 1982.Google Scholar
  17. Gordon, R. A. Examining labeling theory: The case of mental retardation. In W. R. Gove (Ed.), The labeling of deviance: Evaluating a perspective. New York: Halsted Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  18. Grossman, H. J. (Ed.). Manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation. Washington, D.C.: American Association on Mental Deficiency, 1973 (Special publication series No. 2.).Google Scholar
  19. Hayakawa, S. I. Language in action. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1947.Google Scholar
  20. Hebb, D. O. The organization of behavior: A neuropsychological theory. New York: Wiley, 1949.Google Scholar
  21. Heber, R. F. A manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation (2nd ed.). American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1962 (Monograph Supplement 64).Google Scholar
  22. Hilliard, A. G. Standardized testing and non standard populations. The Generator: Division G, American Educational Research Association, 1981, 11(2).Google Scholar
  23. Jensen, A. R. How biased are culture-loaded tests? Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1974, 90, 185–244.Google Scholar
  24. Jensen, A. R. Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press, 1980.Google Scholar
  25. Kaufman, A. S. Intelligent testing with the WISC-R. New York: Wiley, 1979. (a)Google Scholar
  26. Kaufman, A. S. ISC-R research: Implication for interpretation. The School Psychology Digest, 1979, 8, 5–27. (b)Google Scholar
  27. Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. Kaufman assessment battery for children (K-ABC). American Guidance Service, 1983.Google Scholar
  28. Larry P. et al. v. Wilson Riles, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of California et al., C 71 2270 RFP (United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Before the Honorable Robert F. Peckham, Chief Judge).Google Scholar
  29. MacMillan, D. I., & Meyers, C. E. The nondiscriminatory testing provision of PL 94–142. Viewpoints. 1977, 53(2), 39–56.Google Scholar
  30. Mercer, J. R. Labeling the mentally retarded. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  31. Mercer, J. R. Psychological assessment and the rights of children. In N. Hobbs (Ed.), The classification of children (Vol. 1). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. Mercer, J. R. Test “validity,” “bias,” and “fairness”: An analysis from the perspective of the sociology of knowledge. Interchange, 1978-1979, 9(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mercer, J. R. In defense of racially and culturally non-discriminatory assessment. School Psychology Digest, 1979, 8, 89–115. (a)Google Scholar
  34. Mercer, J. R. System of multicultural pluralistic assessment (SOMPA): Technical manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1979. (b)Google Scholar
  35. Mercer, J. R., & Lewis, J. F. System of multicultural pluralistic assessment (SOMPA): Parent interview manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1977.Google Scholar
  36. Mercer, J. R., & Lewis, J. F. System of multicultural pluralistic assessment (SOMPA): Student assessment manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1978.Google Scholar
  37. Messick, S. Test validity and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, November 1980, 35.Google Scholar
  38. Miele, F. Cultural bias in the WISC. Intelligence, 1979, 3, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Public Law 94–142. Amendment to the Education of the Handicapped Act, 94th Congress. S.6. November 29, 1975. 20 USC 1401.Google Scholar
  40. Reschly, D. J. WISC-R factor structures among Anglos, blacks, Chicanos, and native American Papagos. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 417–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Reschly, D. J., & Reschly, J. E. Validity of WISC-R factor scores in predicting teacher ratings of achievement and attention among four groups. Journal of School Psychology, 1980.Google Scholar
  42. Sandoval, J. The WISC-R and internal evidence of test bias with minority groups. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1979, 47(5), 919–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Senate Report (No. 94–168). Education for All Handicapped Children Act, June 2, 1975.Google Scholar
  44. Vernon, P. E. Intelligence and cultural environment. London: Methuen, 1969.Google Scholar
  45. Wechsler, D. Manual for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised. New York: Psychological Corporation, 1974.Google Scholar
  46. Wesman, A. G. Intelligent testing. American Psychologist, 1968, 23(4), 267–274.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jane R. Mercer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations