Testing Our Children When the World Shuts Down: Analyzing Recommendations for Adapted Tele-Assessment during COVID-19 - Shelley Kathleen Krach, Tracy L. Paskiewicz, Malaya M. Monk, 2020
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0734282920962839
Abstract
In 2017, the National Association of School Psychologists described tele-assessment as the least researched area of telehealth. This became problematic in 2020 when COVID-19 curtailed the administration of face-to-face assessments. Publishers began to offer computer-adapted tele-assessment methods for tests that had only previously been administered in person. Recommendations for adapted tele-assessment practice had to be developed with little empirical data. The current study analyzed recommendations from entities including professional organizations, test publishers, and governmental offices. The samples for each were small, but the findings were noteworthy. Test publishers were unanimous in recommending the use of their face-to-face assessments through adapted tele-assessment methods (either with or without caution). Governmental agencies were more likely to recommend not using adapted tele-assessment methods or to use these methods with caution. Finally, professional organizations were almost unanimous in their recommendations to use adapted tele-assessment but to do so with caution. In addition to deviations in the types of recommendations provided, entities varied in how the information was distributed. About one-fifth (23.5%) of all entities surveyed provided no recommendations at all. About 45% of the remaining entities provided recommendations on their Web sites. The rest provided information through shared documents, online toolkits, peer-reviewed journals, and emails. Implications for the field of psychology's future crisis management planning are discussed in response to these findings.
Keywords tele-assessment, validity, best practices, technology, assessment, COVID-19, crisis, program evaluatio
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0734282920962839
Abstract
In 2017, the National Association of School Psychologists described tele-assessment as the least researched area of telehealth. This became problematic in 2020 when COVID-19 curtailed the administration of face-to-face assessments. Publishers began to offer computer-adapted tele-assessment methods for tests that had only previously been administered in person. Recommendations for adapted tele-assessment practice had to be developed with little empirical data. The current study analyzed recommendations from entities including professional organizations, test publishers, and governmental offices. The samples for each were small, but the findings were noteworthy. Test publishers were unanimous in recommending the use of their face-to-face assessments through adapted tele-assessment methods (either with or without caution). Governmental agencies were more likely to recommend not using adapted tele-assessment methods or to use these methods with caution. Finally, professional organizations were almost unanimous in their recommendations to use adapted tele-assessment but to do so with caution. In addition to deviations in the types of recommendations provided, entities varied in how the information was distributed. About one-fifth (23.5%) of all entities surveyed provided no recommendations at all. About 45% of the remaining entities provided recommendations on their Web sites. The rest provided information through shared documents, online toolkits, peer-reviewed journals, and emails. Implications for the field of psychology's future crisis management planning are discussed in response to these findings.
Keywords tele-assessment, validity, best practices, technology, assessment, COVID-19, crisis, program evaluatio
