Editing Examination: Issues Paper
Institute of Professional Editors Accreditation Board1 July 2007
Editing Examination: Issues Paper
The Institute of Professional Editors is preparing an accreditation scheme in which the first level of accreditation is achieved by examination. At the IPEd national conference in Hobart in May 2007, a demonstration of a sample exam received a positive and valuable response. At the conference, prospective examination candidates offered feedback (both in the plenary session and through the feedback box) on the content of the sample exam. They also expressed an overwhelming preference for completing their answers on screen rather than on hard copy.
This issues paper explores the ramifications of this response - both for refining the content and for using computers to complete the exam.
Requirements
Logistics and costs dictate certain requirements for the conduct of the examination. The IPEd Council and Accreditation Board are committed to making the administration of the examination cost-neutral while keeping costs for candidates as low as possible.
Attendance in person
Candidates must attend in person and show photo identification to sit the exam: it will not be possible to complete the answer paper on-line at home. The reason is to prevent cheating. Even with digital or biometric identification, a candidate sitting at home could arrange for someone else to do the exam in their name once they have completed the log-in.
The Accreditation Board feels that editors who are serious about their profession will make the effort to be present at the exam venue. Candidates who feel they are disadvantaged by having to attend in person should contact the Accreditation Board, who will endeavour to find a solution for their particular circumstances.
Confidential exam
Costs will be high if a new and exactly equivalent set of examination questions is produced each year, so the Assessors Forum will look at reusing some questions in later exams to reduce the costs of both setting and marking. Because it is important to maintain the confidentiality of the exam paper, candidates will not be permitted to remove any examination material from the room. This means, too, that candidates may not complete the exam using their own laptops. Although it is possible to include code in the exam paper that automatically deletes after a specified period, it could still be recovered from the memory cache.
Marking
The members of the Assessors Forum, who will mark the exam papers, reject the use of on-screen editing with Track Changes because they know from experience that it is difficult to read and therefore slow (and expensive) to mark. They ask that the first two sections of the exam, the individual sentences and the manuscript sample, be marked by hand.
Refining the exam paper
Discussion of the sample exam paper raised various points to be addressed in preparing the actual exam paper:
- Greater efforts will be made to broaden the focus of the exam to include editors who work outside the publishing industry. Section 3, which offers candidates a choice of several short-answer questions, will be enlarged from eight to twelve questions to accommodate varieties of editing practice such as science, maths, technical editing and non-book work.
- Scenarios that include a hypothetical relationship with a client or author will provide more background and briefing so that candidates can better judge how to respond.
- The exam will be adjusted to reduce the amount of handwriting required on the answer paper. For instance, instead of writing a complete letter to an author, candidates may be asked to list the points they would make in the letter.
Although the amount of handwriting could be reduced, some parts of the exam - such as the copyediting of a passage - need to be done in writing to facilitate marking (see above). However, some exam tasks - such as marking up a bibliography - are cumbersome to do by hand and one could argue that candidates who are not familiar with written mark-up may be prevented from displaying their true level of skill. Perhaps the marking system can make allowance for such perceived disadvantage.
Implications of an on-screen exam
If the exam is to be done on-screen computer laboratories must be hired. This has implications for logistics and costs.
Platform problems
Appropriate numbers of Macs and PCs need to be provided, depending on candidates' preferences. (The computer labs we have contacted cannot provide a virtual Mac on an actual PC or vice versa.) This is a considerable constraint and may reduce the numbers who can sit the exam at any one time - a venue may have to turn away Mac users although it has places for PC users, or vice versa. Since some computers would be idle, the costs per head would rise.
Unfamiliar working environment
Candidates will work on unfamiliar computers, without the benefit of the customised templates and macros that they normally use. Freelancers who occasionally work in house will be familiar with this situation.
Technical failure
Guidelines have to be drawn up to ensure that candidates are not disadvantaged by glitches and failures of equipment, and extra provision has to be made for appeals relating to these difficulties. This will add to costs and delays.
Output
The form in which the answer paper is produced from an on-screen exam may be Word files as email, disks or print, depending on the facilities of the venue. Candidates may need to verify the output, thus extending the time and technical support required.
Costs
Costs for an on-screen exam will certainly be higher, but they are difficult to quantify. The quotes obtained by the Accreditation Board vary considerably, depending on factors such as whether the room is hired for a half-day or a full day, whether the cost of technical support is included in the hire of the lab, etc. The figures given here cover the typical cost of hiring two computer labs and a second invigilator, plus technical support for set-up before the exam and assistance during it. They provide a rough indication only; the actual figures may be higher or lower, depending on the city and the venue.
Handwritten Exam
hire of room 300
1 invigilator (4 hrs @ $40) 160
total 460
On-Screen Exam
hire of 2 computer labs 1200
2 invigilators (8 hrs @ $40) 320
tech support (5 hrs @ $100) 500
total 2020
Another quote for hire of labs and tech support, excluding invigilators, was $100 per person, giving a total for 30 people of about $3320.
Taking into account the caveats above, these figures show that the on-screen exam will add at least $50 and possibly more than $100 to the sitting fee. (Of course the sitting fee is only one component of the exam fee, which must also cover the costs of administration, advertising, setting the exam and marking.)
Disadvantaging those who don't work on screen
Editors who work exclusively on hard copy may claim that an on-screen exam disadvantages them. Do we judge them as having failed Standard A5, knowledge of technology relevant to editing practice, and therefore having failed the accreditation exam?
However, as one respondent pointed out: ‘Some large and highly respected book publishing companies do not have editors working on screen; some companies have editors working on screen only where they deem it appropriate; and maths textbooks are still accepted in handwritten MS form and therefore necessarily edited on hard copy. We shouldn't run away with ideas of the trend being to on-screen and new worlds of editing - some of those companies are unlikely to change any time soon because they have sound editorial reasons for not switching.'
Do we attempt to accommodate editors who don't work on screen? If so, should they be given extra time to complete the exam?
Compromise solutions
It might be possible to develop a compromise:
- Have some questions to be answered on paper and others on screen; this is the process in exams conducted for various tertiary editing courses.
- Allow candidates to choose whether to sit the exam on paper, or on screen with an extra charge to cover the higher cost; of course special care would be needed in marking to ensure that neither group was disadvantaged.
These compromise solutions would provide flexibility for applicants but do not solve the problems of logistics and costs outlined above.
Other points raised
- The conference feedback included a question from an editor with a disability who would find it difficult to sit an exam in any form: special arrangements will be made for any candidate who suffers such a disadvantage.
- Some felt that the suggested 80% pass mark is too high. However, it will not advance the profession if we endorse the work of editors who are wrong more than 20% of the time.
- An editor who holds a post-graduate diploma with high distinctions is worried about failing the exam. We repeat that the exam is designed to test basic editing skills, and anyone with a tertiary editing qualification and a couple of years' experience should pass easily.
- It was suggested that software called Moodle might be helpful, but this program is designed for creating courses and promoting interactive learning rather than for testing knowledge and grading results.
- Another request was that the societies arrange a social event following the exam so candidates can celebrate and wind down, but we feel that they can probably make their way to the nearest pub without assistance.
- The Accreditation Board and Assessors Forum were gratified by this encouraging comment: ‘You're all doing an amazing job. Don't try to please everyone and cater to all exceptions. It's better to move ahead and make decisions than be immobilised by critics.'
What do you think?
The Accreditation Board invites constructive responses to this issues paper from members of the societies of editors. Please contact your society's delegate or email <vivienne@spressservices.com> by 15 August.
