Policies and Standards, Their Role and Revision:The Case of Ethics in Testing in North Carolina

Martha S. Ward

Guilford County (NC) Schools

INTRODUCTION

High stakes testing has been in place in North Carolina since the late 1970's with highly visible, nationally norm-referenced tests administered to all students in several grades, as well as minimum competency testing as part of high school graduation requirements. A writing assessment began in 1984. North Carolina-developed tests for all students in eleven high school courses were phased in beginning in 1986. This same year, promotion standards for three grades were put in place, and were not removed until 1996. Nationally norm-referenced tests were replaced by North Carolina-developed tests in 1993, and were administered to all students in grades three through eight. (Note that, as required by law, samples of students are tested with a norm-referenced test for purposes of a national comparison.) The competency requirement for graduation was raised considerably for the class of 1998 (Ward, 1995). A computer proficiency requirement for high school graduation is in place for the class of 2001.

The current "back to basics" movement resulted in cuts in the state testing program, so that only reading, mathematics, and writing tests are required in the elementary and middle school grades. The computer proficiency and competency requirements, and testing in the "core" high school courses, remain as well. Other tests (science and social studies in the elementary and middle school grades, and advanced mathematics and science courses in high school) are currently offered at "local option."

The state's accountability programs have run a parallel track (North Carolina State Board of Education, 1995). Prior to 1988, school systems could voluntarily participate in an accreditation program, which involved site visits to evaluate broad program components and opportunity standards. In 1988 accreditation was changed to a mandatory program which included student performance standards. School systems and schools were also challenged to go beyond accreditation standards and set their own annual goals. Additional, "Report Cards" for school systems were added, with the first publication occurring in 1990. Similar reports for individual schools were first issued in 1994.

Just when we thought that the stakes for testing could not possibly get higher, the North Carolina State Board of Education introduced its newest plan, referred to as the "New ABCs of Public Education." The ABCs, which go into effect for the 1996-97 school year, are based on the basics, high standards, increased local control, and accountability. The focus will be on schools rather than school systems. Schools with solid performance and exemplary growth(1) are eligible for monetary reward, while low performing schools with inadequate growth and getting worse over time will be provided with targeted intervention. If after assistance and intervention, they still fail to make reasonable growth, "takeover" administrators may be appointed, and loss of tenure for administrators and teachers may result as a last resort. Changes to public school law are currently being sought, so that the new ABCs can go into effect as planned for the 1996-97 school year.

The first Testing Code of Ethics for North Carolina Testing Personnel, Teachers, and School Administrators was published by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction in 1988. The purpose for the document was twofold. One, there was an obvious concern for the overall integrity of test results, with respect to the validity of individual and group test scores. Of equal concern, though, was the notion of a "level playing field" for the school systems.

Generally, the intent was to put in writing the professional standards to which anyone with responsibilities related to assessment must adhere. The original document (Appendix A) drew from the National Education Association's Code of Ethics of the Education Profession, and the National Association of School Psychologists' Principles for Professional Ethics. The Testing Code of Ethics has been inserted into the center of every Test Administrator's Manual published by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction since 1988. Because regulations state that every test administrator must be trained in the use of the appropriate test administrator manual, every teacher who administered a North Carolina tests since 1988 presumably was trained on the Testing Code of Ethics.

In 1995, the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction convened a working committee, later referred to as the Task Force for Ethics in Testing, to revise the Testing Code of Ethics. It was felt by many that the then seven-year-old document needed to be generally updated, and that it could more specifically address issues pertaining to the North Carolina testing programs. One example of the general need to update is that North Carolina Public School Law used to state that the statewide testing program was to help identify and correct student needs in basic skills, rather than to provide a tool for comparing individual students or to evaluate teacher performance. Although that wording is no longer part of the law, and is clearly not in line with the spirit of the New ABCs, reference to it is made in the original Testing Code of Ethics. Changes in the use of technology since 1988 have also necessitated revisions. As an example, virtually no one transmitted student achievement records electronically in 1988, while it is commonplace today. Thus, the concept of the confidentiality of student records must be conceived more broadly.

It was also felt that a revised Testing Code of Ethics was needed to provide an up-to-date framework for other work in the area of ethics in testing. As Mehrens and Kaminski (1989) pointed out, there is a continuum of sorts with respect to test preparation activities. This continuum ranges from good teaching practices, i.e., teaching the goals for the curriculum which will be tested at some point, to actual practice on the test which will be given. Although outright cheating is recognized by most people, there are "gray areas" of understanding in many cases. Therefore, another major goal of the Task Force on Ethics in Testing was to begin work on core documents, which could later be expanded. The expanded documents are intended to specifically define, with examples and vignettes, which activities are recommended, which are acceptable, and which are not acceptable, with respect to test security, test preparation activities, test administration activities, and scoring, reporting, and interpreting test results.

The Task Force was comprised of individuals with responsibilities involving state testing, or with an expressed interest in issues surrounding ethics in testing. The individuals represented a broad range within the North Carolina education community. A listing of these individuals, their job titles, and their affiliations is provided as an appendix to the document.

The Task Force collectively agreed to move the work in the area of ethics in testing forward by producing draft versions of two documents. The first document was a model Board of Education policy on ethics in testing, which the State Board might recommend to local Boards of Education. The second was the draft revision of the Testing Code of Ethics.

Several North Carolina school systems have local Board of Education policies which address these issues, and these were examined and found to be helpful. However, the Task Force drew most heavily from standards proposed by the State of Ohio Department of Education for adoption by the Ohio State Board of Education (personal correspondence, 1994). A comparison of the Ohio materials and the North Carolina draft Board of Education policy shows that the North Carolina policy is considerably shorter. It was felt that brevity was key. More definition of intent has been provided by also drafting the regulations to be associated with the policy. This design allows for adjustments to be made to the regulations, in most cases by the school system administration, without the need for a change in the local Board policy. A copy of the draft Model LEA School Board Policy and the associated regulations are included in Appendix B.

In drafting the revised Testing Code of Ethics, the Task Force had a good start in the original document. Additionally, the Joint Committee on Testing Practices (1988) and that National Council on Measurement in Education (1995) both provided excellent resource documents on fair practices in testing. The results of the Task Force work are quite different, thought, to fit the needs of local school systems. The final revised Testing Code of Ethics is provided as Appendix C.
.
Until further action is taken by the State Board of Education or the Department of Public Instruction, the work of the Task Force is done. The following recommendations were provided for the consideration of the State Board of Education (SBE) and the Department of Public Instruction:

  1. That the structure and composition of the Task Force on Ethics in Testing be formalized, and that the Task Force be charged with continuing its work in this important area;
  2. That the draft versions of the revised Testing Code of Ethics and Model Local School Board Policy on ethics in testing be approved, so that distribution to LEAs can commence; and
  3. That the Task Force be authorized to seek legal and other specialized advice on issues related to professional practice and disciplinary action.
Additionally, development of supporting materials was suggested:
  1. A detailed document on ethics in testing. Although the Testing Code of Ethics is critical as a brief set of guidelines which can be disseminated widely, more complete information which helps to distinguish between ethical and unethical practice is needed as well. Clear-cut examples and scenarios or vignettes over a broad range of topics will be used.
  2. A series of assessment briefs on topic related to ethics, such as appropriate test preparation activities, would be useful to teachers, as well as those in training at institutions of higher education.
  3. Checklists for teachers and principals. These checklists, which could be used throughout the year, would detail good teaching and testing practices.
  4. Videotapes for use with both pre-service and in-service teachers. Examples include a general tape on test security, or the appropriate uses of released test items.

References

Joint Committee on Testing Practices. (1988) Code of Fair Testing Practices in Education. Washington, D.C.: (Mailing Address: Joint Committee on Testing Practices, American Psychological Association, 750 First Avenue, NE, Washington, D.C., 20002-4242).

Mehrens, W. A., and Kaminski, J. (1989). Methods for Improving Standardized Test Scores: Fruitful, Fruitless, or Fraudulent. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 8, 14-22.

National Council on Measurement in Education (1995) Code of Professional Responsibilities in Educational Measurement.

North Carolina State Board of Education (May 1995). State of the State, Educational Performance in North Carolina, 1994. Raleigh, North Carolina.

Ward, M.S. (Fall, 1995). "Changing Standards in North Carolina: New Face of Competence" Voice, Vol. 7 No. 2, 12-13. Raleigh, NC: Schools Boards Association of North Carolina.

(1)The North Carolina tests used in elementary and middle schools are reported on a developmental scale, so that growth from year to year can be assessed. The results from the end-of-year tests will serve as the pre-test for the following year. A pretest will be administered at the beginning of the third grade, and at the beginning of the "core" high school courses, so that growth can be estimated.