Codeof Fair Testing Practices in Education
Educationhas evolved over time. In the society today, the government andsociety examine individual and his population through education. Thecenter of the exams today many a time focuses methods of conductinggood quality exams to test takers in a cost-effective manner. Thegovernment and other organization that sponsors the examination arealways interested in the policies that regulate the test examinersand the test takers.
Thetest administrators ought to prepare an exam that meets standard,test specifications, and purpose articulated by the test sponsors andthe set standards for quality exams. The Codeof Fair Testing Practices in Education(CFTPE) is, therefore, a guideline that regulates all theparticipants in an examination without biases. It ensures that thetest given is fair to examinee regardless without bias.
Examadministrators ought to deliver and conduct the examination in amanner that upholds the integrity of the testing scores as well asthe safety of the examination products. The examinees most of thetime has no option or say on How, Why, or when they are to take theexamination, and many a time feel mistreated in the process.According to the fairness is the initial consideration for the wholeaspect of examination both for the examiners and for the examinees.The CFTPE gives all examinees comparable and equal opportunities toready for the test as well as the information about the test.
Keywords: Code, Synthesis of Evidence of Reliability, Synthesis of Evidence ofValidity, psych educational, mental retardation
Codeof Fair Testing Practices in Education
TheCFTPEis a guideline for experts in the field of psychology and education.The obligation of the professionals in psychology is to give and usetests that are equal to everybody irrespective of age, disability,and religion (Willhaus et al., 2014). The fairness of the test is tomake sure that every person taking it is conversant with its featuresand the contents (Kornhaber,Griffith, & Tyler, 2014).Equality ought to be considered about the examination, as it is notan isolated factor but embedding the testing process (Vernon,2014).
McLaren(2015) analysis shows that the code encompassed broad areas such asadmissions and educational assessment including educationaldiagnosis2015).Itis, therefore, significant to have an understanding that the Code ofFair Testing Practices does not involve testing during employment,certification testing and any other type of testing that do notrequire education field. Furthermore, the core code test given byteachers to their students is not included in the Test (Urbina,2014).
Accordingto McLaren(2015),the people who established the examination are mostlyinstitution-based or researchers who form the test to set better thepolicies. For example, an educational agency instructs thedevelopment of services related to the test, sets the guidelines thatmonitor the improvement process of the test, and makes decisionsbased on it (Irvine& Kyllonen, 2013).The creators of the test have the ability to improve or change thecurrent test, and in doing so, they must follow the proper guidelineswithin the Code. The code of fair practice in education gives thosewho are tested and those who create it the proper guidance andassistance they require.
Accordingto Joint Committee on Testing Practices (2004), there are four vitalareas of the Code, and they are broken down as follows: (1)developing and selecting the appropriate test, (2) administering andscoring it, (3) interpretation and reporting of the results of thetest and (4) notifying those who take the test.
Element1. The Purpose
Theprimary objective of the test code is to plan or diagnosis a program.It has fourteen areas, which involves adaptive characteristics andeight areas, which includes maladaptivecharacteristics.The test is meant to assess adaptive functioning and independencewithin the community settings, people’s homes, employment, andschools.
Itsprimary focus is on most of the issues, which mark theinterpretations of the scores of adaptive behavior challenging. Theyinclude physical disability and the use of adaptive equipment theuse of communication methods, which are an alternative tasks, whichare not appropriate to age absence of a chance due to the safety ofthe environment and cognitive aptitude to comprehend socialanticipations for execution behaviors. The crucial part of mentalretardation is an adaptive behavior. Mental disorder is identifiedregarding the number of elements that include awareness andunderstanding of the surroundings, and the capability to get involvedin regular, social and economic life. It accounts for adaptivebehavior in the society if a person can fulfill those roles.Therefore the element is relevant in measuring mental retardation.Furthermore, adaptive behavior has proven to be accurate since it iscorrect and has quality standardizationAccording to (Joint Committee on Testing Practices, 2004).
Materialsrefer to structured interviews and checklist that are used by theadministrator of the test. The administrator chooses the appropriate.Numerous factors are incorporated into the test. It is apparent thatchoosing a test that determines the number of factors be imperativeto find direct implications requires defining what boundaries guardedin a given area. If there is an underlying effect to behavior change,then it is significant for the test to evaluate where its focus needsto be.
Element5. Technical Quality
Synthesisof Evidence of Reliability
TheCode of good testing Practice in education was publicly done on 2,180individuals the samples reflected the 1990 U.S. Censuscharacteristics. There has been a great proof of the dependabilityand legitimacy of the Code. It is a consistent measure of problemsassociated with behaviors. The test is significantly connected toother adaptive measures of behaviors and is immensely predictive ofplacements in different service settings and arrangements. The mainadvantages of the test are that its general cluster and sub-scaleperformance can be evaluated, enabling a polished analysis ofspecific domains of functioning.
Synthesisof Evidence of Validity
Fromthe test, there is some proof of construct legitimacy. It is limited,and it is derived from the test authors. The constructive legitimacyof the test was formed by relating the scores on the measures oflater age and to Cognitive Scale. However, the study should be donefor every case to evaluate the lawfulness of such verdicts.
Element6. Test Items and Format
Codeof testing and practices in education have strength and flaws as perthe test carried out. Accuracy and usefulness are the basis of itsstrength while the allowable time for administrators is the mainweakness. The test does identify practical limits of the test taker,and it does translate it into therapeutic goals. The test is given instructured interview or through the checklist as per the age ofexaminee. Likewise, the cognitive skills of the test taker aremeasured by directly testing him or her. The scoring of the test foran adaptive characteristic is done using numbers ranging from 0-3.0 =Never or rarely performs a task, 1 = Does work but not well, 2 = Doesfunction very well, up to 3 = Does work very well. Some factors areimperative to be put into consideration when caring out the test suchas time is to be left blank, only one answer is needed, individualaverage daily performance is considered, and the result should not beanalyzed excessively.
Element7. Test Procedures and Materials
Themethods used in assessment needs to be customized according to theneeds of the individual taking the test. In psychoeducationalevaluations, there are periodic evaluation and procedures commonlyused that are provided to schools and teachers of special education.That offers them the chance to document and measure weakness anddeficits in visual processing, academic achievements that arerequired by students of special needs and social skills (Brown,Bull, & Pendlebury, 2013). Thetest is free of any potentially offensive content and free of anyfoul language.
Element8. Modifications and Accommodations
Thetype of test is suitably altered to help people with debilities. Achecklist process done by the giver of the test concludes the forms.In that way, the people taking the test are provided with equallycomparable opportunity to do the test in ways suitable to them. Thisexamination is appropriate for anyone irrespective of his or herparticular needs.
Element9. Group Differences
Theprocess of sampling should be random to give each an equal chance ofbeing selected. Gathering of Intelligence tests should be as samples,which are stratified if necessary. In that method, the results arecollected in a demographical area (Campbell& Stanley, 2015).That would involve all of the people who fit into the relevantcharacteristics of the test that is to be administered. Since thetest is done independently, no significant difference has occurredwith different cultures tested.
TheCode of Fair Testing Practices in Education has been assessednumerous times, and it has demonstrated to be a valid method fortesting adaptive behavior. Recommendations to be made are (1) peoplewho are identified with mental retardation need improved measures and(2) scholars can add areas in the test that cover social cognitiveprocesses. Furthermore, there is a need for more funding to aid inanalyzing adaptive behavior deficits among people who are found withthe retardation of the mind.
Thereview of all the literature on intellectual functioning assessmentshows that the development rate across the life span of theindividual is different. In most instances, these approximations areaccurate during the review of mental functioning. However, that canonly be made from the test that was administered recently. Manyresearchers have found that the rate of intelligence in a wholepopulation upsurges at the rate of an estimated 3 IQ points in everydecade, which then gives rise to the same error of measurement formost inclusive tests for intelligence (Rindermann& Pichelmann, 2015).If a test has standards older than 10 to 12 years of age, it thencould yield an exaggerated score, or it could lead to thecontradiction of services to substantial numbers of people who couldhave been qualified for them. Test dealing with intelligence arecomplicated, and they need many dimensions to construct. It is,therefore, imperative that tests used should be more comprehensiveand assess more than one cognitive attribute.
Itis also required that the examiners have the right training andskills needed to carry out the test accurately. Furthermore, theexaminer should have the skills and knowledge to examine all clientsof different characteristics. The examiners are not only required tobe competent but also able to interpret the test results. In general,they should have skills and competencies to work with people of allbackgrounds, ages, and exceptionality without having trouble.
Mentalretardation diagnosis and composite scores from the test are to beused together for effective evaluation. A suitable part score isutilized in the place where the validity of a composite intelligentquotient, which is higher than 70, is in doubt. Noteworthy andexpressive differences among instrument’s part score indicateevidence of compromised validity. A suitable components’ score isbetter to be represented by the examiner in such cases to give anoverall level of mental functioning. However, if that does not proveto be valid, then the application of other methods is essential tosupport the diagnosis of mental retardation.
Inoverall terms, most of the health workers such as clinicians needdata obtained from IQ test, and standardized adaptive behavior scalesto make an appropriate diagnosis of mental retardation. That aidsthem in knowing better the response information to determine lack ofadaptive behavior deficits. Furthermore, the data aids in thebehavior development of the person who takes the test. The Code is atest, which was developed well, and it measures the adaptive behaviordemonstrated by the individual taking the test. There are still someprecincts associated with the test such as the absence of provisionsto the measurement of the skills by direct observation, but atpresent, the examiner does not want to interfere with the testtakers’ life.
Brown,G. A., Bull, J., & Pendlebury, M. (2013). Assessingstudent learning in higher education.Routledge.
Campbell,D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (2015). Experimentaland quasi-experimental designs for research.Ravenio Books.
Irvine,S. H., & Kyllonen, P. C. (Eds.). (2013). Itemgeneration for test development.Routledge.
JointCommittee on Testing Practices. (2004). Code of fair testingpractices in education. Retrieved fromhttp://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/fair-testing.pdf
Kornhaber,M. L., Griffith, K., & Tyler, A. (2014). It’s not education byzip code anymore–but what is it? Conceptions of equity under theCommon Core. Educationpolicy analysis archives,22,4-7.
McLaren,P. (2015). Lifein schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundationsof education.Routledge.
Rindermann, H.,& Pichelmann, S. (2015). Future Cognitive Ability: US IQPrediction until 2060 Based on NAEP. PLOSONE, 10(10),e0138412. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138412
Urbina,S. (2014). Essentialsof psychological testing.John Wiley & Sons.
Vernon,P. E. (2014). Intelligenceand Cultural Environment (Psychology Revivals).Routledge.
Willhaus,J., Burleson, G., Palaganas, J., & Jeffries, P. (2014). AuthoringSimulations for High-Stakes Student Evaluation. ClinicalSimulation In Nursing, 10(4),e177-e182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2013.11.006