Final answer:
False: "In job description and performance evaluation terminology, "average" and "standard" do not have the same meaning; performance standards communicate expected work quality, and job descriptions and evaluations are not necessarily state labor law requirements".
Step-by-step explanation:
In the context of job descriptions and performance evaluations, the terms "average" and "standard" do not necessarily have the same meaning.
"Average" typically refers to the mean, which is the sum of all values divided by the number of values. For example, in IQ testing, the mean IQ score is 100, with standard deviations describing the dispersion of IQ scores from this average.
A standard deviation of zero in a data set implies that all data values are identical, as there is no variation among them. In performance terms, it might suggest that all employees are performing exactly at the same level.
However, when discussing job descriptions, "standard" often relates to a level of quality or a standardization method of testing that indicates consistency in administration and interpretation of results, which is different from just being average.
Therefore, when interpreting job performance, "average" performance would be within one standard deviation from the mean in a normally distributed set of data, such as IQ scores between 85 and 115.
In contrast, "standard" performance may refer to achieving set benchmarks that define acceptable or expected performance in a role, which may or may not coincide with the average performance of all employees.
Your complete question is: In Job description and performance evaluation terminology, "average" and "standard" have the same meaning.
False. Performance standards are used to tell employees how well they must do their work. True. Job descriptions and performance evaluations are both requirements set forth in state labor law?