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 >>> >>