This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Cavanaugh, S. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cavanaugh, S. H. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Response to a Legal Challenge

Five Steps to Defensible Credentialing Examinations

Applied Measurement Professionals

In 1975 the National Board for Respiratory Therapy (currently the National Boardfor Respiratory Care) was named as a defendant in a class action suit filed on behalf of three individuals seeking relief for alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil RightsAct of 1964, as well as the Sherman Antitrust Act. Although a pretrial settlement was reached, the conduct of this case demonstrates the potential vulnerability of credentialing examinations to complaints regarding discrimination and the necessity for credentialing organizations to be socially responsible for the potential use of test results by employers. The board has since instituted a systematic five-step research and development process that is used for all of its examinations to ensure and document that they are fair, valid, and defensible. This article recounts the salient aspects of the class action suit, discusses implications and current applicable technical standards and legal guidelines, and describes the components of the "Five Step Examination Development Process. "

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 14, No. 1, 13-40 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/016327879101400102


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?