Debates for the Future of Assessment

Debate sessions have doubled this year! In fast-paced, 50-minute or 70-minute debates, speakers present diverging perspectives on a hot topic in the assessment industry. Don’t miss out on these exciting debates planned for the 2023 conference!


The Future of Test Delivery: A Healthy Debate of the Test Modality Trilogy

The assessment and testing industry has witnessed solutions developed and implemented at lightning speed to meet the needs of organizations in recent years. Many credentialing programs shifted from testing in-person at test centers to live, remote proctored environments. Now that organizations are positioning themselves to address the future of test delivery among the various modality options, there is a need to review and dissect information from recent examples of test delivery adaptations in the industry.

This session debate will present a 360° perspective to attendees relating to the vast number of variables to consider when evaluating the optimal test delivery model for their program(s). The debate teams will support either the “in-person testing model,” the “remote testing model,” or the “hybrid testing model.” Each debate team will have an opportunity to address key considerations necessary to roadmap test delivery solutions including:

  • Technology dependency
  • Security
  • Accessibility
  • Fairness in testing
  • Test-taker experience
  • Operations
  • Psychometric implications

Speakers: Joe Williams, IPC International; Maria Incrocci, Meazure Learning; Chris Beauchamp, Meazure Learning; Jessica Dangles, CBIC; Nathan Thompson, Assessment Systems Corporation; Sarah Schnabel, American Board of Ophthalmology


What is the Role of AI in Remote Proctoring?

The COVID-19 pandemic drove an explosion in digital assessment and remote proctoring, as organizations struggled to migrate on short timelines and small budgets. This has also accelerated the conversation, and in some cases backlash, around the use of AI in remote proctoring. Clearly, there is a future for AI in remote proctoring, but what is it?

This debate will bring together experts from four of the leading remote proctoring companies, each with a unique perspective. One is AI only, one is human only, and two are a blend of technology and human. Two are located outside of the US, providing a global perspective. Discussion points include:

  • Where does AI excel in protecting test integrity, humans?
  • For what problems or situations is AI or human proctoring not a good fit?
  • What are best practices and policies to implement AI proctoring?
  • How can bias affect AI proctoring, and how do we mitigate it?

At the end, we will welcome questions from the audience for the panelists to discuss, as well as welcoming their viewpoints, especially from a customer perspective.

Speakers: Don Kassner, MonitorEDU; Mike Murphy, ProctorFree; Jennifer Roski, Sumadi; Jorie Boswell, Assessment System Corporation; Kranthi Batula, Proctor360


Family Feud: Psychometricians vs. Exam Owners

This debate looks to juxtapose the psychometric ‘best practice’ against the exam owners doing what is feasible and in the best interest for their program. Thus, the two sides of the debate will first be two psychometricians, the other side three certification program managers.

Prior to the debate session, to add more context and potential contention to the debate, we will send out a survey to the industry. This survey will be designed to gather topics that are of contention between psychometricians and exam owners. Topics set to be included are sample sizes for different activities, appropriate time on activities, types of individuals to include in the stages of the process, definitions of terms, what constitutes legal defensibility, and how do you measure success.

Each team or side will be given the opportunity to guess the most common response to each survey question, as well as a chance to rebut the findings and their thoughts on best practice. While the goal of this debate is not to definitively come to a single solution, rather the focus is to highlight where there are differences of opinion. This session aims to help professionals with different backgrounds and priorities understand each other’s points of view through modeling of useful dialog. This, in turn can, help encourage healthy communications between owners and psychometricians, resulting in better outcomes for everyone.

Speakers: Casey Johnson, Alpine Testing Solutions; Robert Furter, Physician Assistant Education Association (PAEA); Jessi Mielke, Appian Corporation; Jill van den Heuvel, Consultant; Jim Henderson, Ping Identity; Middy Davis, Splunk


Debating the Future of Summative Testing

Summative testing has played a key role in education, admissions, and the workforce for decades. However, as more of our educational and work life goes online and more data becomes available about individuals, we must ask whether summative testing will continue to play a significant role in the future. Will traditional methods of summative exams taken at schools, training locations, or dedicated test centers be sufficient to meet the rapidly changing needs of customers? Will time intensive test design and development activities keep pace with accelerating market needs? Will testing become just one of several options individuals can use to demonstrate their qualifications for admissions, a job, or a profession? In this spirited debate regarding the future of testing, testing professionals from around the globe will explore these questions and the possible future of the testing industry.

Speakers: Kaitlynn Griffith, Law School Admission Council; Claire McCauley, Cambridge English; Camille Thompson, The College Board; Patrick Craven, City and Guilds; Bill West, Cornerstone Strategies; Jim Holm, Cornerstone Strategies; Shari Lewison, Cornerstone Strategies


View the Full Program