Tests should not be given back to students. Instructors should be able to
go over incorrect answers with students.
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 3:22 PM Eva J <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Kris,
> I understand what you are saying. I am sure you know that many of our CIS
> candidates are not college educated, maybe not even high school graduated,
> and quite possible English is not their first language.
> CIS certification is not analogous to a medical license, a pilot’s
> license, or even an exam such as the SAT or ACT.
>
> My fear is that EMS companys will go back to custom training that directly
> apples to their workforce.
> Sorry about that, I inadvertently hit the sent button and had to take
> care of a quick job.
> in continuation to previous email.. above
> I have developed custom electronic assembly, cable building, quality
> assurance and quality control courses to suit my customers. Generally, I
> advocate for IPC training to my customers; however, some customers are
> unsatisfied with the lack of hands on training relative to presentation
> time. Yes, customers like the J-STD-001 certification, but really they want
> their employees to know how to solder. Understanding the requirements is a
> different level.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 2:40 PM Eva J <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Kris,
>> I understand what you are saying. I am sure you know that many of our CIS
>> candidates are not college educated, maybe not even high school graduated,
>> and quite possible English is not their first language.
>> CIS certification is not analogous to a medical license, a pilot’s
>> license, or even an exam such as the SAT or ACT.
>>
>> My fear is that EMS companys will go back to custom training that
>> directly apples to their workforce. resort to
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 1:51 PM Kris Roberson <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Evamaria,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for your insights about the training process and the
>>> certification process. As an experienced trainer, your thoughts on the
>>> training are necessary for the improvement of the training programs.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would like to give some information before I comment on your specific
>>> points.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the past, IPC training and certification have been viewed and treated
>>> as a single entity. The training was conducted, the exam was given and
>>> everything was viewed as a learning experience for the students. In a
>>> typical *learning* environment, this is the proper way to educate an
>>> individual.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, a *certification exam * is not a learning tool. A
>>> certification is the verification and validation of an individuals
>>> knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) in regard to a topic or subject.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A License and a certification differ in only one thing. A license is
>>> issued by a government body. A certification is issued by a non-profit
>>> organization. In all other matters, the two documents are the same.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> An individual who attempts the exam for a medical license, a pilot’s
>>> license, of even an exam such as the SAT or ACT for college entry do not
>>> receive the questions missed in the review. If any review is offered, the
>>> candidate may receive areas of missed topics, but no questions or answers
>>> are presented.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The same is true for the IPC Certifications. At the CIS level, the
>>> training is modular. If a student does not pass a module exam, the
>>> instructor has a clearly defined topic of study in which the student and
>>> instructor can review. The modules are structured to allow for this focus
>>> of study.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With the above information, I would like to respond to the items in your
>>> email.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1 – “Instructors need to know generally what types of questions are
>>> being missed…”
>>>
>>> - As noted above, a failed module exam shows that a student does not
>>> understand the concepts and criteria of a section of the document. The
>>> review can be limited to that portion of the document being tested (e.g.
>>> Wires and Terminals, Through hole, SMT… etc.).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> a. – “It gives the instructor ability to improve instruction technique”
>>>
>>> - IPC has contracted with a Psychometrician for the full review of
>>> the questions and programs.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - As the review is completed, and with the abilities of the new EDGE
>>> 2.0 systems, the psychometrician and the supporting certification committee
>>> will review the performance of the questions. Any question that are not
>>> psychometrically sound or are performing poorly will be removed or
>>> re-written.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Instructors will also receive information on how their classes
>>> have performed on a quarterly basis. As the questions are confirmed sound
>>> and are performing correctly, any recurring patterns in the individual
>>> instructor’s classes should show up as outlying data points. The instructor
>>> whose students consistently perform poorly in one area where the balance of
>>> the industry instructors do not have the same issues will know to review
>>> the teaching of that section of the program.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> b. “Instructors should provide IPC feedback on [questions]”
>>>
>>> - This is one area where IPC instructors will need to make a
>>> modification to the current practices. In a certification exam, any
>>> individual who teaches a subject must not view, know, or in any way
>>> interact with the questions on the exams. The *only* time a question
>>> should be viewed (other than by the developing group) should be by the
>>> candidate during the exam.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Any instructor who is aware of a question about a particular
>>> section or topic may emphasize this section more than another. I do not
>>> mean to imply intent of wrong-doing. Even with the very best of intentions,
>>> an instructor is ultimately human. As your passionate email demonstrates,
>>> you want the best education and outcome for your students. The tendency of
>>> a good-hearted, well intentioned instructor would be to make sure that the
>>> students cover a specific area where a known exam question answer will be
>>> found.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Going forward, development committee for an exam will be made up
>>> of 5-10 individuals from industry and education. These individuals will be
>>> guided by an IPC staff liaison and the Psychometrician. No person who
>>> teaches (who holds a current CIT for a subject area, or intends to hold a
>>> CIT certificate for that subject area in the next two years) will be
>>> eligible to sit on the certification committee for that program.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2 – “Students need to know what questions they got wrong”
>>>
>>> - Please refer to my responses above. Students need to know the
>>> areas in which they make errors, not the exact questions. A review of the
>>> exact question exposes the exam questions to compromise. In keeping with
>>> international standards for Certification Programs that Certify Individuals
>>> (IS0-17024), the exam questions must be protected for the integrity,
>>> efficacy, and above all, defensibility. If a question is compromised, the
>>> legal defensibility of the exams and the entire certification program can
>>> be called into question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> – “Students/ companies pay to receive training and instruction”
>>>
>>> - You are absolutely correct. They do pay to receive *training*.
>>> That training is to come from the trainer through the use of the training
>>> materials or (in the case of a CIS who wishes to challenge test) an
>>> equivalent preparatory program. In that training it is appropriate to use
>>> visual aids, PPTs, videos, quizzes, practice exams, and whatever other
>>> method is deemed to be useful in preparing that student to take the
>>> certification exam. However, that is not the certification exam.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - After the training, the individual pays IPC for access to attempt
>>> the *certification exam*. The Certification exam is the final
>>> verification of the individual’s KSAs in regard to the standard. It is
>>> nothing more. As written above, it is not a learning tool. This is
>>> absolutely a different way of thinking from the way IPC programs have been
>>> conducted in the past. Once again, this is a move toward improving the
>>> integrity, efficacy, and defensibility of the programs.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> a. & b. “Students not will be able properly navigate documents if they
>>> are getting questions wrong and don't know why.” & “Also, students will not
>>> able to properly apply requirements if they do not understand criteria.”
>>>
>>> - The students do not need the individual questions to learn and
>>> understand the use of the document and the criteria. The students need to
>>> review the content and the concepts of the document through the training.
>>> If questions are missed on the certification exam the student knows that
>>> he/she should go back and review the section.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> MITs and CITs are definitely IPC’s front line. For this reason it is
>>> important for those trainers to understand the correct training of the
>>> programs. IPC must remove any disservice that may have been done in the
>>> past process so the IPC programs will be effective, complete, conducted
>>> with integrity, and will be defensible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I invite all MITs and CITs to participate in the *Training Development
>>> Process. *One great improvement that has been made is the addition of
>>> Carlos Plaza as IPC’s Director of Education Development. Carlos brings a
>>> wealth of knowledge and experience in Education design. With the Training
>>> Committees, Carlos will work to improve the *Training * component of
>>> the programs. Some improvements may include fewer PowerPoint slides and
>>> better use of interactive media, use of knowledge check-ins, and practice
>>> tests in the training program to help instructors judge the preparedness of
>>> the students for the *Certification exam. *There are many more
>>> improvements in the works and I highly encourage all trainers to become
>>> involved.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With industry help, feedback, and participation the IPC programs can
>>> meet the needs of our industry with the best training we can develop. Then
>>> when the certification exam is completed and a student passes the exam,
>>> that individual will be able to state with confidence that they truly do
>>> meet or exceed the requirements to have the designation of a Certified IPC
>>> Specialist.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mr. Kris Roberson
>>>
>>> IPC- Association Connecting Electronics Industries®
>>>
>>> Director of Certification Programs
>>>
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> Please be sure to add [log in to unmask] to your approved email list.
>>>
>>> *E-mail Opt-in/Manage Preferences* <http://www.ipc.org/opt-in>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Eva J <[log in to unmask]>
>>> *Sent:* Friday, November 9, 2018 9:56 AM
>>> *To:* IPC Helpdesk <[log in to unmask]>; certification <
>>> [log in to unmask]>; ipc training <[log in to unmask]>
>>> *Subject:* students and instructors should know what test questions
>>> they get wrong
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> IPC Director of Certification and IPC President,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I read the "helpful" article on the help desk portal and I am very
>>> disappointed that trainers / instructors and students can not see what
>>> questions were incorrect. 2 things....
>>>
>>> 1. Instructors need to know generally what types of questions are being
>>> missed and why for process improvement and to validate student
>>> understanding.
>>>
>>> a. It gives the instructor ability to improve instruction technique,
>>> material presentation which helps reinforce important criteria.
>>>
>>> b. Instructors should provide IPC feedback on incorrect, ambiguous, and
>>> misleading test questions that confuse everyone! Frequently students get
>>> the same wrong questions, which then instructors and IPC can do trend
>>> analysis, test/curriculum efficacy, and instructor awareness.
>>>
>>> 2. Students need to know what questions they got wrong. Students/
>>> companies pay to receive training and instruction! It is not all about the
>>> certification. Instructors are there to help them learn and understand.
>>>
>>> a. Students not will be able properly navigate documents if they are
>>> getting questions wrong and don't know why.
>>>
>>> b. Also, students will not able to properly apply requirements if they
>>> do not understand criteria.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In closing, IPC and trainers are doing their students and EMS / CM
>>> companies (all of which are our clients) a disservice by not properly
>>> training students; they will not be able to learn from their mistakes if
>>> they don't know what is wrong. We as trainers are obligated to help
>>> students learn and understand the information we are
>>> presenting....especially when they get test answers wrong!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have been conducting skilled based training for 25 years and IPC
>>> training for over 15 years.
>>>
>>> MIT/CIT trainers are essentially IPC's front line to knowledge and
>>> understanding for all new students (clients) and EMS / CM companies.
>>> Consider implementing this little process improvement to help our clients
>>> get the most out of our training by providing test answers to students and
>>> trainers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Evamaria Jones
>>>
>>> CID Certified in PCB Design Principles
>>>
>>> CIT IPC J-STD-001
>>>
>>> CIT IPC-A-610
>>>
>>> CIT IPC-A-620
>>>
>>> CIT IPC-7711/IPC-7721
>>>
>>> senior Quality Engineer
>>>
>>> Specialized Technology Electronics
>>>
>>
|
