Testing Procedures and Security

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Review of Literature
Interview Summary
Questions, Responses, and Interpretations
A Summary of Findings, Reflections, and Insights
References

Review of Literature

Testing is a crucial step in student teaching and learning. Tests are administered in academic settings to give data or performance indicators that inform decisions about pedagogic methods or programs. According to Roshan (2016), testing is grounded in three premises: First, test scores are required for the improvement of academic programs or courses. Second, testing informs changes to the curriculum and accommodations to reflect the learners’ needs. Third, test outcomes are measurable (Roshan, 2016). However, the results may be meaningful if the exam is not administered well. Thus, test administration is a critical process in student assessment. District and statewide procedures exist to help guide supervision and ensure fair and dependable outcomes.

An assessment cycle involves a series of logical steps, including test design, administration, and evaluation (Eriksson & McGee, 2015). Adequate procedures for exam supervision are essential for assessing learners and making inferences about the outcomes. Information gleaned from scholarly research shows that issues of dishonesty in tests may be reduced by strengthening student identity verification. Educators administering the exams are obligated to implement specific measures and state policies on ethical test management. According to Amigud (2013), validation protocols in proctored tests must involve physical authentication of identification documents before taking the exam or ascertaining of a student’s identity profile in the case of remote invigilation. Biometric methods, such as fingerprint scanning, may also be used to validate the authenticity of test takers (Amigud, 2013).

The administration of statewide tests follows recommended testing procedures and security steps. The aim is to guarantee valid and accurate results and avoid giving some test takers undue advantage. Contemporary dishonest practices when taking tests are diverse and aided by technology. Student misconduct in face-to-face assessments may involve collusion with another person outside the test center using micro scanners or cameras (Kelley & Dooley, 2014). Weak testing procedures and security measures pose risks to the institution, including damage to reputation, equity issues for all learners, under-qualified graduates, etc. Therefore, effective institutional responses are required to assure assessment integrity.

Proper test administration entails two critical elements. The first one is the replication of the conditions that the assessment designers specified in the delivery requirements (Roshan, 2016). These contextual factors include the milieu in which the test piloting occurred. The second element is reproducing these conditions for all examinees so that nobody is advantaged or disadvantaged by the administration practices or policies. The aim is to remove extraneous sources of variation that limit the validity and meaningfulness of test scores. An essential principle in exam administration is according all candidates an equal chance to achieve optimal outcomes by reducing cheating issues or distractions (Roshan, 2016). Thus, the test environment should support test takers both physically and psychologically to attain intended results.

Additionally, efforts to instill positive attitudes towards a test are required. According to the U.S. Department of Education (2013), student preparation should involve creating a healthy testing culture to ease anxiety or pressure related to the exams. Helping students approach the test with the right attitude can minimize irregularities. Further, teaching them ethical student behavior by conveying expected standards can reduce unethical conduct. It is also critical that administrators have adequate qualifications and preparation to manage the test properly and guarantee valid and reliable scores. Moreover, they should show high-level accountability to enhance the accuracy of the outcomes (U.S. Department of Education, 2013). Therefore, an efficient testing exercise requires adequate planning and preparation of both the test takers and administrators.

Smooth test administration involves a repertoire of measures taken before, during, and after the exam. The security of testing materials is a paramount initial step in administering tests. According to the Florida Department of Education (2018), all testing instruments must be secured to prevent students from accessing the questions before the exam session. As a good practice, the materials could be kept in secure rooms away from test takers and assessors. This action constitutes a critical accountability role of exam administrators. The security can also be enhanced through a regular release of new standardized tests to cohorts (Thurlow & Kopriva, 2015). A smooth proctoring includes notifying candidates of the test time and ensuring that special needs students have assistive devices, lighting, etc. (Thurlow & Kopriva, 2015). Further, the administrator should be conversant with invigilation procedures, including timing and exam rules.

The pre-test security measures can only yield valid outcomes if the test conditions meet administration standards. According to Brewer, Knoeppel, and Lindle (2014), in most cases, the district exam guidelines require that the testing environment be fair and devoid of prohibited activities, such as reading, discussing, copying, or explaining passages or questions. Further, the examiner should refrain from giving clues to learners during a test. In case a student seeks for clarification, it would be fair to explain the problem to the entire class. Unauthorized help or suggestions from the administrator or any other party would affect the validity of the results.

Good test administration also requires the examiner to patrol the exam room regularly and unobtrusively to prevent cheating (Kaukab & Mehrunnisa, 2016). Proctoring requires the physical presence of a teacher to deter the use of unauthorized communication devices during the test. Additionally, informing the students about the time left would help them plan appropriately. The security of the test materials after a successful testing process rests with the administrator. He or she should gather and account for all issued and unissued papers and keep them in a safe locker (Kaukab & Mehrunnisa, 2016). The examiner should also ensure that the test takers’ scripts tally with the identification details entered in the attendance list.

Interview Summary

The Interviewee

Ms. X is a professional middle school counselor. She earned a bachelor’s in Psychology from the University of South Florida and a master’s degree in Counselor Education between the ages of 18-25. When she started college, Ms. X was on the Biomedical Science track until she reached Organic Chemistry and decided medicine and science were not for her. During that time, she was enrolled in a psychology course and fell in love with the mind. Subsequently, she became interested in exploring human behavior and decided to switch gears at that point. She never thought or wished to be a middle school counselor when growing up or beginning college, but she felt as if the stars were aligned. Ms. X chose middle school counseling as her first job and has been working at Liberty Middle School in Tampa, Florida, for the past five years since graduating from college. She says, “It is more than likely I will not do this forever. In most of the days, I go home stressed to the max, but the kids are the reason I am here. I plant seeds every day in the hope that they will be watered and bloom whether I will be there to see it or not”.

Ms. X is a true example of a dedicated educational leader who understands the importance of academic achievement, curriculum assessment, instruction, and testing procedures and security in the state of Florida. She is also familiar with test design, knowledge and skills assessed, and accommodations for students with disabilities. Her input on assessment procedures and security would be useful in understanding best practices in the administration of tests.

Questions, Responses, and Interpretations

What are the training requirements of those administering the FSA (Florida State Assessment) assessment?

Answer: They must be instructional personnel trained by a testing chair (selected guidance counselor). They must also sign a testing agreement.

Interpretation: Test administrators of the FSA are licensed instructors in the district who have gone through relevant training offered by a guidance counselor. Thus, those who are not academic professionals or untrained cannot administer the FSA. Additionally, they must sign a test administration and security agreement for purposes of accountability.

Beyond the initial training for testing administrators, are additional resources available?

Answer: The FSA website (training and resources section) contains reference documents and manuals for administrators.

Interpretation: A smooth administration process requires well-trained staff. The online materials support the management of the FSA test. Administrators can consult or refer to downloadable training resources available on the agency’s website at any time. The information may be used to organize and manage test sessions in line with statewide or district rules and regulations.

What are the security protocols the test coordinator follows for receiving and disbursing testing materials?

Answer: They entail keeping all instruments in a locked room, testing administrators, checking in and out materials from a secure cabinet each day.

Interpretation: The standard testing protocol for FSA assessment entails safeguarding the facility or cabinet where the materials are kept before, during, and after the examination. The aim is to prevent leakage of the test questions to candidates, which would compromise the validity of the scores. The security of the materials is a role of the administrators. They must make sure that candidates do not access the questions before taking the test.

What are the school testing coordinator’s responsibilities after testing?

Answer: He/she handles reports, checks in all materials, sends off scripts to the district, and addresses any testing concerns.

Interpretation: Expected actions after testing include accounting for all materials issued in a report. The school coordinator checks testing materials and scripts to ensure they tally with the information on the attendance register before dispatching them to the school district for evaluation. He or she also handles testing concerns and emergencies, including incidences of cheating, illness, etc., and makes a comprehensive report on these occurrences.

With test security, are test administrators informed during training on inappropriate actions and the consequences involved?

Answer: Yes, all this information is in the testing agreement that they sign and retain a copy.

Interpretation: The agreement on test administration and security specifies the expected ethical conduct of administrators. This binding document lays out the prohibited activities, permitted accommodations for special needs students, and testing and grading procedures. Thus, by signing this agreement, the administrator assumes liability and accountability for his or her actions during the assessment.

A Summary of Findings, Reflections, and Insights

From the literature review, it is clear that test administration is a critical component of the assessment process. District testing procedures and regulations must be followed to guarantee the security of the exam materials and integrity of the scores. Granting all candidates a fair opportunity to sit the test by providing conditions conducive to optimal performance is a fundamental practice in administration. Educators must also instill positive attitudes towards exams in test takers to reduce anxiety and promote ethical conduct. On the other hand, administrators must be supported through adequate training and clear guidelines on testing procedures and obligations to enhance accountability.

Testing is a foundational practice within the teaching-learning paradigm. In my view, vouching for integrity in high-stakes tests would translate into meaningful results. Invigilated individual exams provide a means of preventing academic misconduct, as they involve fair conditions to all test takers. Thus, test administration is an important pillar of a testing cycle. If tests are administered properly, the likelihood of exam irregularities and cheating will diminish significantly. For this reason, I would root for measures that build competencies of the administrators, including training and workshops, to ensure effective proctoring. Additionally, clear administration protocols coupled with district-administrator agreements could improve accountability and help achieve outcomes that are valid and reliable.

The analysis in this paper gives insights into the rationale for adopting test procedures and security during testing. The goal is to guarantee optimal student performance by providing a fair exam environment. The Florida State guidelines for FSA administration requires administrators to manage test sessions in line with their training and standard procedures (Wiley et al., 2015). They should assume the responsibility of securing the exam materials, facilitate accommodations for students with disabilities, address emergencies and concerns, report irregularities, and supervise test takers to prevent unethical conduct. They must also sign security agreements to affirm their commitment to a fair testing process.

References

Amigud, A. (2013). Institutional level identity control strategies in the distance education environment: A survey of administrative staff.The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(5), 129-143. Web.

Brewer, C., Knoeppel, R. C., & Lindle, J. C. (2014). Consequential validity of accountability policy: Public understanding of assessments. Educational Policy, 29(5), 711-745. Web.

Eriksson, L., & McGee, T. R. (2015). Academic dishonesty amongst Australian criminal justice and policing university students: Individual and contextual factors. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 11(5), 1-15. Web.

Florida Department of Education. (2018). Florida standards assessments. Web.

Kaukab, S. R., & Mehrunnisa, S. (2016). History and evolution of standardized testing – A literature review. International Journal of Research – Granthaalayah, 4(5), 126-132. Web.

Kelley, R., & Dooley, B. (2014). The technology of cheating. In Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering: IEEE International Symposium (pp. 1-8). Chicago, IL: IEEE.

Roshan, N. A. (2016). The principles of good test administration. International Journal of Modern Language Teaching and Learning, 1(4), 126-129. Web.

Thurlow, M. L., & Kopriva, R. J. (2015). Advancing accessibility and accommodations in content assessment for students with disabilities and English learners. Review of Research in Education, 39(1), 331-369. Web.

U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Testing integrity symposium: Issues and recommendations for best practice. Web.

Wiley, A., Hembry, T. R., Buckendahl, C. W., Forte, E., Towles, E., & Nebelsick-Gullet, L. (2015). Independent verification of the psychometric validity for the Florida standards assessment: Final report. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!