Comments for Dennis on Data Forensics

Comment on What’s the big deal with sharing a few test questions? by digital loss prevention geek

digital loss prevention geek — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:04:18 +0000

I agree with you on honesty being the best policy. I sometimes think integrity and the thirst for knowledge for its own sake has fallen by the wayside. Another thing no one wants to do: take responsibility for one’s actions, i.e., the UCLA students!

Comment on Security insights from ATP 2008 by Jim Austin

Jim Austin — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:43:38 +0000

Dennis,

I think that I have met you at the Caveon booth before, but I know Jim Impara, Don Sorenson, Jamie Mulkey, and John Fremer quite well.

I would like your permission to share some of the elements of this blog (ATP 2008) with participants at our Test Development Workshops at Ohio State University. I refer in particular to the lawyerly advice and to the triangle with its emphasis on the “at risk” group. It seems to me that crossing the triangle with the temporal sequence of pre-, during-, and post-testing might suggest differentiated strategies (EX: for the at-risk group pre-testing, the goals should be to convince a potential cheater that there is no gain).

Anyway, we like to emphasize test security at the workshop, and my homespun index is the number of job postings for Director of Test Security that are popping up everywhere.

Cheers.

Comment on Chipping children: paranoia or panacea? by Mary R

Mary R — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:35:20 +0000

I had a conversation with a co-worker several months ago about chipping our children, but it was all done “tougue in cheek”. We both have small children and were thinking of the day they would decide that they want to go trick-or-treating by themselves. One of us said, ‘Well, by then our children will likely be chipped’ and another one of us said, ‘Maybe we can create a law that would allow us to do it’. We joked that we were sure we could get something like that passed if we could “brand” it somehow, like the “Amber Alerts”.

At any rate, we understood there were basic personal rights that would be violated so I am shocked at some of these policies that are being investigated – no matter if it is criminals or people with dementia being “chipped”. With other forms of diligence, we can protect both our personal rights as well as the safety of everyone.

Chip your tests, not your children. Mary R

Comment on The confused controversy of cell phones in schools by John

John — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:35:53 +0000

A thoughtful analysis. My sense is that attempts to take cell phones away from students are facing a very tough battle. For many parents, the ability for a child to communicate with them and vice versa is extremely important. It is always easy to go to extreme cases, but the school and college shootings argue so strongly for cell phone availability that I don’t think any argument will trump the depth of feeling involved.

The solution I like best of the ones that I have heard is that the student’s cell phone is in a clear plastic bag hanging behind him or her, turned off, and not accessible to anyone else. If a student is found with a phone on their person, they fail the exam, with some discretion to the school for the befuddled student who really did forget they had it in a pocket or somewhere.

Comment on ABC’s for taking a test by Tim

Tim — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:13:59 +0000

This was a very clever and informative blog entry. Kudos.

My only comment is that often the test stakes are much higher than getting laughed at or feeling like a failure. As one who has taken (and fortunately passed) 3 bar exams in 3 different States, I know how threatening the possibility of test failure can be. Failure on any one of them would have had serious consequences.

I remember well going to breakfast before the first bar exam with some friends who were also taking the exam, and half way through the meal, one guy said he was so nervous his food tasted like paste. Another candidate in the test room spilled coffee on his answer sheet seconds before the test began, and there were no extras! My friend who didn’t enjoy his breakfast passed the exam, but I don’t know about the other guy.

Comment on ‘Sabermetrics,’ baseball and steroids by Cyril Morong

Cyril Morong — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:24:36 +0000

I like what you are doing here. The graph is clear. Interesting that Clemens has more years. Who knows, one effect of PEDs is simply adding years. But I am still not sure that what Clemens is doing is unprecedented.

When Cy Young was 39, his ERA+ was 86. When he was 40, it was 129. So it went up 50%. When he was 41, it was 194. so it went up 50% again.

When Clemens was 40, his ERA+ was 112. When he was 41, it was 146. So it went up 30%. When he was 42, it was 226. So it went up 55%.

Those two events look very similar. Just one year difference in age. Cy improved even more over the two years than Clemens.

Then there is Ted Lyons. Here are his ERA+’s from age 33 on

32-97
33-97
34-157
35-101
36-112
37-132
38-171
39-137
40-111
41-173

He pithced 180 innings at age 41 in 1942. Even in 1942, most of the good hitters had still not joined the military (Williams and DiMaggio, for example were still there). Lyons had a career ERA+ of 118. So in his late 30s and early 40s, he was generally pitching well above his career average. My point is that late career improvements are not totally unheard of (although not common). I am not sure what Clemens has done in terms of an unusual age profile is much different than Lyons or Young