April 2004 — Features

Print this article

Click here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal

The Potential, Pitfalls and Promise of Computerized Testing

By Bill McHenry, Leonard Griffith and Jim McHenry

  1. Run a simulation
  2. Hold a team meeting to discuss results
  3. Conduct a workshop for other school personnel

Other factors to consider include makeup dates, having on-site IT specialists during testing, and familiarity with testing protocol regarding incomplete tests.

When data of this sort is saved on a school's server, there is also the risk that some data will be lost or contaminated. To minimize this possible problem, printing test results immediately and making duplicate saves may be helpful. Finally, at no other time in the history of education has there been so much student information available on the school server. Determining who will have access to such privileged information, especially test results, needs to be closely evaluated. The testing team should determine who will have access to results prior to testing.

Conclusion

The use of computers in testing and assessing student performance has become significant in outcomes-based education. Because of the special circumstances and unique requirements involved in using computers, testing teams need to think about potential pitfalls long before the testing date. As schools continue to adjust to NCLB, clarity over the use and administration of testing via computers will emerge. By keeping problems to a minimum, administrators, guidance counselors and other testing-team personnel can be proactive in creating a testing scenario that will allow students to maximize their true potential.

References

Foshay, R. 2001. "Testing, Testing — D'es Anybody Know Why?" T.H.E. Journal, 29 (5): 40-42.

McDonald, D. 2002. "No Child Left Behind Act Mandates Assessment Measures." Momentum, 33 (3): 8-10.

Olson, A. 2001. "Data-Based Change: Using Assessment Data to Improve Education." MultiMedia Schools, 8 (3): 38-43.

Recio, L., J. Clark and A. Sevol. 2002. "New E-Technologies Simplify NCLB Requirements." T.H.E. Journal, 30 (3): 49-51.

Thomas, D. and W. Bainbridge. 2002. "No Child Left Behind: Facts and Fallacies." Phi Delta Kappan, 83 (10): 781-782.

Cite this Site

Bill McHenry, Leonard Griffith and Jim McHenry, "The Potential, Pitfalls and Promise of Computerized Testing," T.H.E. Journal, 4/1/2004, http://www.thejournal.com/articles/16718

copy text (above) for proper citation