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
1,350+ Accredited, 4-Year Colleges & Universities with ACT/SAT-Optional Testing Policies for Fall, 2022 Admissions