Nope, “proctoring” has nothing to do with anything medical. Rather, it relates here to whether or not a company assigns someone to watch over test-takers as they take an examination of the psychological type.
In his latest posting, Jamie of selectionmatters.com discusses a symposium he attended on proctoring in the context of internet testing.
The specific concern is whether people who take an unproctored exam (again, nothing to do with doctors!) will say, ahem, cheat.
The assumption is that perhaps for certain tests, if there is no one in the room “watching over,” test-takers are likely to use other sources (e.g., a friend or a calculator) to take an exam that prohibits such sources.
Jamie reports from this symposium:
The short version of most of the presentations was that mean test scores don’t go up over time when you offer unproctored testing
He points out, however, that relatively few of those Internet tests are measuring cognitive ability (e.g., math, vocabulary, etc.). Rather, most of them are assessing personality or other constructs that are difficult to cheat on anyhow.
Jamie, however, points out that a better solution than eliminating well-designed and properly validated tests may be to have applicants who pass the Internet test and become finalists take a second version of the test, with a proctor present.
I’m not sure whether this is good news or neutral news, but read more about the issue here.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing.
Subscribe by RSS
Subscribe by Email
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment