Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Testing And Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
POST staff say removing closed 'Appellate B' subtest raised scores; committee urges agencies to reassess pass points
Summary
POST staff reported that removing the closed reading subtest from the post‑entry law enforcement test (Appellate B) coincided with a rise in mean scores (from a total‑t score mean of 42 to 49.73). Committee members warned of unintended consequences for academy preparedness and report writing and asked POST to return in March with performance linkage data.
POST staff told the advisory committee that removing the closed reading component from the post‑entry law enforcement test (commonly called Appellate B or PELP B) and recalibrating scores coincided with a measurable increase in candidate test results.
Staff Services Manager Melanie Singley outlined the change and the rationale: POST’s examination development team reviewed an earlier study with CSU Sacramento finding the closed subtest added little incremental value and that the item type was difficult to migrate to an online platform. Singley said the closed subtest was removed effective January 2025 and staff recalibrated means and standard deviations to maintain comparability between paper‑and‑pencil and the future online delivery.
Joanna Medina, a researcher on POST’s exam development team, presented statistics from POST’s analysis: “From January 2024 to December 2024, the total t‑score mean was 42. In January 2025, after the closed subtest was removed, the total t‑score mean was 49.73.” Medina said the team expects changes in item quality and the recalibration to contribute to higher observed scores.
Committee members responded with practical concerns. Several academy directors and law‑enforcement providers said they have observed higher pass rates and an influx of newly qualifying candidates, which they flagged as driving up costs for background investigations and remediation. A sheriff and other members said they have seen increases in initial failures in some academy components — notably collision investigation and report writing — and questioned whether higher test scores predict field‑ready writing skills.
POST staff urged agencies to review local pass points and recommended that agencies consider adjusting cut scores in light of higher aggregate performance. Singley and Medina recommended that local agencies ‘‘re‑evaluate your pass points if you’re seeing higher scores’’ and noted that POST intends to return to the committee with further analyses linking PELP results to academy performance metrics.
The committee also discussed the role of artificial intelligence and editing tools. Members said some applicants may have relied on AI or grammar tools in prior training or education, affecting demonstrated writing ability. POST staff said they are developing guardrails for training and will study how the test performance relates to subsequent academy outcomes.
What’s next: POST staff recommended bringing a March follow‑up presentation to the committee with expanded performance metrics and analysis of whether the higher scores meaningfully predict success in academy coursework and on report‑writing assessments.
