Proposal Under Review to Reconstitute the National Commission on
Testing and Public Policy
Heather Roberts-Fox
APA Science Directorate
A little known proposal is currently under review by a number of
foundations that could have a major impact on the future of testing in the United States.
RAND Corporations Institute on Education and Training ("RAND") and Boston
Colleges School of Education Center for the Study of Testing Evaluation and
Educational Policy ("CSTEEP") submitted a proposal in late 1997 to reconstitute
the National Commission on Testing and Public Policy.
"Never heard of it," you might shrug, and "Why should I
care?" I can picture the blank look on your faceI shared it until very
recently. A bit of background follows.
The National Commission on Testing and Public Policy (NCTPP) was formed
in 1987 as an interdisciplinary body composed of individuals with expertise, interests,
and experience in a wide variety of fieldseducation, business, labor, law,
assessment and measurement, and manpower development and training (a prominent member of
the Commission at the time was none other than Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton). The
Commissions mandate was: (a) to investigate trends, practices, and impacts of the
use of standardized test instruments and other forms of assessment in schools, the
workplace, and the military; and (b) to recommend improvements in testing that would
promote the identification and nurturing of talent, especially among racial, ethnic, and
linguistic minorities. Over a 3-year period, the Commission held hearings, heard
presentations from a range of experts, and invited and reviewed over 50 papers. On May 23,
1990, the NCTPP released its 3-year study, From Gatekeeper to Gateway: Transforming
Testing in America. The study, which was funded by the Ford Foundation and
administered through Boston College, details the Commissions 3-year examination of
the role that testing plays in education and the workplace. The studys guiding
recommendation was that testing policies and practices should be restructured to help
people develop their talents and to help institutions become more productive, just, and
accountable.
One conclusion, in particular, reached by the members of NCTPP elicited
concern from many administrators of large scale testing programs. The report read,
"The lack of an audit or regulatory agency, the absence of mechanisms to interpret
and enforce existing professional test standards uniformly, and the limitations of court
challenges mean that the industry that develops the products used to regulate access to
opportunities, and to hold individuals and institutions accountable, is itself largely
unregulated and unaccountable. Government-sponsored testing in our society is too
important, and the consequences to test takers too serious, to exempt the testing industry
from thorough independent review, regulation, and accountability" (NCTPP, 1990,
p.22). To remedy this, the Commission called for "the development of additional
institutional means to examine the quality of tests and assessment instruments and to
provide oversight of test use" (p.13).
The current proposal endorses the recommendations from the Commission
and proposes to implement them by establishing an independent body to monitor testing.
Specifically, the proposal requests that the Ford Foundation, in conjunction with other
major foundations concerned with issues of equity around standards and test-based
educational reform, reconstitute the NCTPP as an independent, institutional oversight
agency that will review testing programs and catalyze close consideration of the diverse
uses of testing. They are also proposing that the reconstituted Commission become a
permanent institutional entity. The proposal asserts that they "do not see the
reconstituted NCTPP regulating, accrediting, or licensing testing" (p.12, emphasis in
original). Rather, the proposal indicates they will monitor, evaluate, and document
aspects of national, state, and local testing programs. They suggest that cases may be
selected for review based on (a) the number of people affected, (b) the stakes associated
with test use, (c) the vulnerability of groups affected, and (d) the new and cutting edge
nature of the testing programs. Given that the Ford Foundation previously sponsored the
NCTPP activities, and partially funds Boston Colleges CSTEEP program, there is a
strong likelihood that the new proposal will be funded. However, no decision had been
reached at the time this article went to press. [Editors note: Author has learned
that the proposal will be funded by the Ford Foundation no later than September 1, 1998.]
It is important for SIOP members to note that the emphasis of the
current proposal is on educational testing. Although the previous Commission included
testing in the workplace and the military in their study, the proposed structure appears
only to cover high-stakes educational tests that are for the most part publicly sponsored.
There is no indication in this proposal that the Commission will seek to evaluate testing
in the employment setting with the start-up funds from the foundation. However, APA will
continue to monitor the status of this project and will keep SIOP members informed.
TIP
Vol. 36/No. 1 July, 1998
July 98 Table of Contents
|