Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Testing Procedures Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee proposes swapping 'practical' tests for 'project' submissions in several certifications
Summary
Members agreed to add the term "project" alongside or in place of "practical" for certain certifications, a change that would allow coordinators to issue project-style assessments (task books/portfolios) rather than on-site proctored practicals in some cases; members flagged accreditation and validity implications.
The subcommittee discussed replacing language that currently requires on-site, proctored "practical" examinations with the word "project" for a list of certifications, including the officer series, fire inspector, firefighter instructor and several technical certificates.
Staff and regional coordinators explained the operational difference: a "practical" is an in-person, proctored skills test evaluated live; a "project" or task-book is completed by the candidate off-site (often at the workplace) and then submitted for review. Todd (regional coordinator) said converting certain assessments to projects would relieve scheduling pressure and allow candidates to complete 100 percent of required skills in a single project submission rather than random, proctored skill evolutions.
Several commissioners and attendees stressed accreditation risks. Subcommittee members noted that accrediting bodies and Pro Board expectations require validation and positive control of the testing environment for some practical skills. The subcommittee discussed two implementation options: (1) require candidates doing projects to submit through a standardized course-approval process and limit who may grade projects (approved evaluators/proctors), or (2) centralize practical administration at commission testing events. Members asked staff to draft a policy that defines which certifications may use projects, what constitutes an acceptable project submission, and what additional proctor/evaluator approvals are required.
The subcommittee instructed staff to add "project" language wherever credential descriptions currently mention "practical" and to specify in the redlines that projects will be evaluated according to adopted performance standards and accreditor requirements. Staff will circulate updated language for the full packet.
