How Proctored Exams Harm The Public

And another question…

What is the big difference between a proctored exam you have to pass to get licensed and a proctored exam you have to pass to get into a private association? There is a big difference, and it isn’t in the proctoring or the exam.

Gotta run, be back tonight.


In certain instances, there may already exist the potential for great property damage, bodily injury and death that the inspector may not catch…some of it, possibly, may even be within the scope of his inspection. He is not the cause of anything, however, other than the generation of an inspection report.

Not in all cases! :slight_smile:

As a college professor I proctor exams for ______ ?
Free perhaps, or as part of my condition of work, or perhaps even as a volunteer.

Exams are most often a requirement to be granted and certified as a “competent” person in that field. Proctoring is just a means to assure that the “person” taking the exam is the correct person that is registered in the “course/program”.

Whether the exam is proctored or not will not stop “cheating”. However, proctoring in most cases proves to discourage “cheating”.

An incompetent inspector is simply a person not “qualified enough” to meet the minimum standard. They are a danger to the public and also to the profession.

It has nothing to do with an exam other than the exam, whether proctored or not, it simply helps identify the persons weakness. So what is the next step “certify” this person or make them study and retake the course/program until they reach that minimum pass grade. Perhaps that is why some associations require the validation and proctored examination model, as their baseline for certification. Without it - define what is required to be a true professional.

To assume that exams are not useful in identifying the deficiencies in gaps in the inspectors database of required skills and knowledge is misleading to the inspector, the consuming public and likely a sure fire recipe for a lawsuit or business failure.

This is not to say that even “certified” inspectors can eventually run into same legal challenges. But they are likely to be significantly better at performing a much higher level of inspection without the same concern of being legally challenged.:slight_smile:

Inspectors sued are most often sued (tort law) in Canada for Negligent Misrepresentation. I know of no cases in Canada where an inspector was criminally negligent for causing death or injury directly. However I am aware of a case in Ontario where an inspector failed to comment on a railing on a staircase and a person fell and became quadapalegic and sued, but can’t remember the outcome because it was quite awhile ago and I believe the inspector had professional liability insurance. As far as property damage we all know first hand that items can be damaged accidentally or through testing.

I fail to understand how having a proctored exam or not is related to death and injuries and property damage. Even if one is sued under negligent misrepresentation five elements are required to be proven.

They are:

  1. there must be a duty of care based on a special relationship between the parties,

  2. the representation made by one party to the other must be false, inaccurate or misleading,

  3. the representation must be made negligently,

  4. the person to whom the representation is made must have reasonably relied on the representation and,

  5. the reliance must have been detrimental to that person with the consequence of his suffering damages.

So an incompetent inspector who doesn’t know he’s incompetent can fail to point out dangers which may harm consumers? Anyone disagree?

Gromicko writes:

The answer is…

Unlike the former, everyone need not pass the latter. A government can mandate that all inspectors pass a minimum standard proctored exam. If you don’t pass, you may not compete. However, a trade association has to entice inspectors into passing an exam. Those who don’t pass can still compete as inspectors. Those who choose not to take the exam at all can still compete as inspectors.

Anyone disagree?

Hang in there, the end is near.

Another question?

When a home inspection organization administers a proctored exam, what party bares the financial burden of the costs of proctoring?

I know people who have cheated on all types of tests proctored or not! (university law exams and etc.) It’s up to the person. Even if theres someone standing over their shoulder there always a way to cheat, and get away with it; don’t think that just because an exam is proctored that someones not going to cheat. It would make it easyer to cheat if no ones around to watch but in this type of work you can have as many aids as you need for reference material, especially in the field. Ask any (type of) engineer and I guarantee that they don’t know everything and have to refer to reference books all the time.

It all depend on the type of person.

I have taken every test there is regarding both state licensing, which was the National Home Inspectors Exam, the ashi exam, the INACHI exam, and none of them would make an inspector a better inspector if the tests were passed in my opinion.

All of the questions are just a baseline (silly questions) so an individual or the testing institution (if proctored) knows the inspector just knows the basics of the profession, there are way too many circumstances in the field in which none of the testing makes any difference if a person passed or failed.

The circumstances the inspector finds at the inspection require way more knowledge than is on any test provided by any proctoring agency or association.

None of the testing I took has questions in which certain circumstances which each one of us come across daily are a question in the tests, which is the most important part of this profession, combining common sense with building construction knowledge.

As an example:

Different types of Flashing installations and how they relate to the performance of the building being one prime example of a circumstance in which if an inspector did not know how a house or commercial building should be constructed to keep water out of it none of the testing would be helpful, field experience is a must, combined with common sense, and what makes different types of material when applied in combination function if installed correctly, or why things fail if they are not installed correctly. Lot of common sense involved in this profession, combined with field experience, testing is silly.

Basically I think any proctored test is a waste of time and money.

The inspector better know everything there is to know about every system and component in a building which is required to be inspected by a standards of practice, if the inspector doesn’t, he will either be in court, or out of business.

Trevor I agree, but are proctored exams really hurting the public - or would the reverse be true, that unproctored exams might be open to larger discrepancies and opportunities for abuse?

Simply is there more of an opportunity to cheat or have a surrogate take it ones place in an unproctored exam?

What’s the purpose of a proctored exam? I do not see it as a waste of time and money if it needs to validate who is actually doing the exam.

What are some of the moral hazard pressures on academic integrity? Heberling (2002) argues that the Internet provides a readily available medium for academic dishonesty. Students can use a number of search engines that allow the “writing” of papers using a cut and paste approach. Other Internet sites called Digital Paper Mills or Web Paper Mills specialize in satisfying the demand for student papers (Heberling, 2002). Students may buy a paper that seems to meet the needs of a particular research requirement. While the Internet is an obvious example of a pressure on academic integrity, there are others.

There are the problems of who is taking a course assessment or preparing a research paper (the registered student or a surrogate), unauthorized use of resources (open notes with a closed book exam), unauthorized collaboration on an assessment (relying on others), and technology difficulties such as “my computer crashed” (Olt, 2002) Since distance education students not come into do face-to-face contact with the instructor, it can be argued that a climate is created which increases the likelihood of moral hazard problems such as using the work of others to meet course requirements. What can instructors do to ensure that work completed by a student is his or her work and not the work of someone else?
**Teaching MPA Students Using a Distance Education Format: **
Techniques to Promote Academic Integrity
Paper presented at the 27th **National Teaching Public Administration Conference **
**February 12-14, 2004 **University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
**David R. Shetterly **- **Troy State University **

Or perhaps this commentary from:

McCabe and others are especially alarmed by the ethical climate in high schools. More than half the 4,500 students in his 2001 study saw nothing wrong with cheating on tests (74 percent admitted doing so) or plagiarizing. Results were similar in a 1998 survey of those listed in Who’s Who Among American High School Students. These are the crème de la crème, all bound for university; indeed, McCabe predicts even more erosion of integrity in higher education when upcoming generations arrive. As he told the Chronicle of Higher Education, their typical attitude is, “If it’s on the Internet, it’s public knowledge, and I don’t have to cite it.”

How in the world does a proctored exam have anything to do with intelligence? It doesn’t. The sole purpose of proctoring is to a) ensure identity of the examinee, b) to ensure no cheating, even if it is open book.

Claude, it refreshing to see you post very verifiable info rather than speculative comments and speculative info posted by the uninformed!


Another question…

Does an exam that alerts the exam taker when he/she answers incorrectly, like the quizzes InterNACHI uses in, have any reason to be proctored?

And another question…

Why aren’t proctored exams normally taken over and over once the exam is passed, like non-proctored ones are?

Nick asked:

Yes, otherwise there is no verification as to who the person claims to be.

Nick asked:

Who says you can’t retake a proctored exam. Its done all the time!

I would also like to thank those that gave me the greenies! Now thats the spirit of professionalism. :slight_smile:

Bull writes:

Not me.

Anyway, why aren’t proctored exams normally taken over and over once the exam has been passed, like non-proctored exams?

Proctored exams can be retaken. ASHI permits it, and so do many other learning institutions.

And another question…

Why do the proctored home inspection exams cost money to take?