65+ Ways Schools Have Cheated on Testing: Manipulating High-Stakes Exam Scores for Political Gain

Drawn from government and media reports by FairTest: National Center for Fair & Open Testing

updated – December, 2018

Pre-Testing

• Fail to store test materials securely
• Encourage teachers to view upcoming test forms before they are administered
• Teach to the test by ignoring subjects not on exam
• Drill students on actual test items
• Share test items on internet before administration
• Practice on copies of previously administered “secure” tests
• Administer “practice” version(s) or real test to prepare selected students
• Exclude likely low-scorers from enrolling in school
• Hold-back low scorers from tested grade
• “Leap-frog” promote some students over tested grade
• Transfer likely low-scoring students to private schools, charters or homeschooling where no tests are required
• Push likely low scorers out of school or enroll them in GED programs
• Place likely low scorers in special ed classes where they are not tested
• Falsify student identification numbers so low scorers are not assigned to correct demographic group
• Urge low-scoring students to be absent on test day
• Leave test materials out so students can see them before exam
• Set up classroom desks and chairs to facilitate answer copying
• Urge high-performing students to do poorly o baseline test to boost reported “value-added” score gains

During Testing

• Let high-scorers take tests for others
• Overlook “cheat sheets” students bring into classroom
• Post hints (e.g. formulas, lists, etc) on walls or whiteboard
• Suspend exam administration to allow “re-teaching” of content on test
• Write answers on black/white board, then erase before supervisor arrives
• Allow test-takers access to dictionaries and other printed resources
• Let students look up information on web with electronic devices
• Allow calculator use where prohibited
• Encourage reliance on special calculator programs that can answer questions
• Ignore test-takers copying answers from each other
• Fail to screen for electronic devices that facilitate test-information sharing
• Permit students to go to rest room in groups
• Take lunch break mid-testing, allowing students and staff to discuss questions
• Discuss mathematical formulae after test booklets have been distributed
• Shout-out correct answers
• Use body language to indicate right and wrong responses (e.g. thumbs-up/thumbs down signals)
• Instruct students to “double check” specific, erroneous responses
• Pass out notes with correct answers
• Give students color-coded candies (e.g. green M & Ms for right answers; red for wrong)
• Read questions aloud to students not allowed this accommodation
• Urge students who have completed sections to work on others
• Allow entire class extra time to complete test
• Reclassify native English speakers as English Language Learners to give them additional time
• Leave classroom unattended during test
• Warn staff if test security monitors are in school
• Refuse to allow test security personnel access to testing rooms
• Cover doors and windows of testing rooms to prevent monitoring
• Give unnecessary accommodations to students without disabilities

Post-Testing

• Allow students to “make up” portions of the exam they failed to complete
• Invite staff to “clean up” answer sheets before transmittal to scoring company
• Review test-taker scratch paper to identify question content for future prep lessons
• Permit teachers to score own students’ tests
• Fill in answers on items left blank
• Rescore borderline exams to “find points” on constructed response items
• Erase erroneous responses and insert correct ones
• Provide false demographic information for test-takers to assign them to wrong categories for analysis
• Fail to store completed answer sheets securely
• Destroy answer sheets from low-scoring students
• Report low-scorers as having been absent on testing day
• Retroactively “withdraw” low-scorers from school to scrub average score data
• Share content with educators/students who have not yet taken the test via email, text, Facebook or Twitter
• Fail to perform data forensics on unusual score gains
• Ignore “flagged” results from erasure analysis
• Forge proctor signatures on statements that they read and followed test security guidelines
• Refuse to interview personnel with potential knowledge of improper practices
• Allow local school districts to investigate themselves after irregularities alleged
• Threaten discipline against testing impropriety whistleblowers
• Fire staff who persist in raising questions
• Fabricate test security documentation for state education department investigators
• Lie to law enforcement personnel

Bob Schaeffer 12/21/18