An Alternative to Mandatory Test Disclosure

Abstract

Challenges to tests and test items have led to demands and legislation for mandatory disclosure. Disclosure is tantamount to a loss of item security, a consequence that hampers subsequent test development and equating efforts. Examining boards therefore oppose disclosure. This article describes a new test critique procedure developed by the National Board of Examiners in Optometry that may be used by other credentialing boards. This procedure encourages candidates to identify potentially flawed items during rather than after the test. Candidates therefore retain the opportunity to challenge the test, while a board is able to retain item security. Other benefits of this procedure are discussed.