Psychological Testing on the Internet New Problems, Old Issues

Jack A. Naglieri George Mason University Fritz Drasgow University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign Mark Schmit SHL Litigation Support Group Len Handler University of Tennessee

Aurelio Prifitera Harcourt Assessment Amy Margolis Brooklyn Learning Center

Roberto Velasquez San Diego State University

The Internet has significantly changed the way people conduct business, communicate, and live. In this article, the authors’ focus is on how the Internet influences the practice of psychology as it relates to testing and assessment. The report includes 5 broad sections: background and context, new problems yet old issues, issues for special populations, ethical and professional issues, and recommendations for the future. Special attention is paid to implications for people with disabling conditions and culturally and lin- guistically diverse persons. The authors conclude that eth- ical responsibilities of psychologists and current psycho- metric standards, particularly those regarding test reliability and validity, apply even though the way in which the tests are developed and used may be quite different.

At their spring and fall 2000 meetings, members ofthe Committee on Psychological Tests and As-sessment (CPTA) discussed issues related to psy- chological testing and assessment on the Internet. They recognized that as psychological test instruments become more readily available via the Internet, issues arise con- cerning, for example, test reliability, validity, administra- tion, item security, and test-taker confidentiality. Members of CPTA’s parent boards—the Board of Scientific Affairs (BSA), the Board of Professional Affairs (BPA), the Board of Educational Affairs, and the Board for the Advancement of Psychology in the Public Interest—reviewed and en- dorsed the idea of creating a task force to examine these issues. Specifically, BSA and BPA members agreed that it was important for the American Psychological Association (APA) to be a leader in discussing new and emerging technologies in psychological testing, assessment, and re- search and in providing information about Internet-based testing and related issues. They noted that a jointly spon- sored BSA–BPA task force on Internet-based testing would complement other APA groups focusing on related issues. The Task Force on Psychological Testing on the Internet was therefore formed, with a broad mission of reviewing current practices on Internet-based psychological testing and determining psychometric, ethical, legal, and practical implications of this approach to testing particularly for

individuals from culturally and linguistically diverse populations.

Task force members were chosen to reflect expertise across a broad range of testing areas (e.g., educational, school, employment, forensic, career–vocational, clinical, cross-cultural, neuropsychological), to be knowledgeable in Internet technology, and to represent the concerns of diverse groups that may be affected by testing. Their pri- mary objective was to prepare a report, which informs the profession of psychology about emerging issues and prob- lems in Internet testing and actions psychologists can take to protect the integrity of testing and the consumer. An accompanying objective was to devise mechanisms for informing and educating the public about potential prob- lems with Internet testing.

This article is organized into the following five broad sections: (a) background and context, (b) new problems yet old issues, (c) issues for special populations, (d) ethical and professional issues, and (e) recommendations for the fu- ture. Throughout these subsections, both practical and sci- entific issues are discussed with careful consideration of the consequences of decisions based on information obtained from Internet tests. The goal was not to provide a thorough summary of all Internet testing practices, but rather to describe broadly the current state of practice. It will be- come obvious to the reader, as it did to the committee, that many issues about Internet testing practices are similar to those faced by the profession in the past. This report also contains recommendations for the profession’s response to current developments in Internet-based psychological testing.

Jack A. Naglieri, Department of Psychology, George Mason University; Fritz Drasgow, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign; Mark Schmit, SHL Litigation Support Group, Boul- der, Colorado; Len Handler, Department of Psychology, University of Tennessee; Aurelio Prifitera, Harcourt Assessment, San Antonio, Texas; Amy Margolis, Brooklyn Learning Center, New York, New York; Roberto Velasquez, Department of Psychology, San Diego State University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jack A. Naglieri, Department of Psychology, George Mason Univer- sity, MS 2C6, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030. E-mail: [email protected]

150 April 2004 ● American Psychologist Copyright 2004 by the American Psychological Association 0003-066X/04/$12.00

Vol. 59, No. 3, 150 –162 DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.3.150

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

Background and Context Growth of the Internet The past decade has witnessed a rapid expansion of the Internet. The foundations of the Internet began in the 1960s as part of the U.S. defense system development and the inception of new data-passing technologies. Since then it has grown from a university-based network to a worldwide network of interconnected computers accessible to people through many media in all civilized parts of the world (Abbate, 1999). The number of sites available on the In- ternet and the number of users grow larger each day. This relatively new and revolutionary communication network has significantly changed the way people conduct business, communicate with others, and live.

Over the past 10 years, the number of Internet sites and users has grown from hundreds to millions. As of July 2001, there were over 125 million Internet sites (Internet Software Consortium, 2001). Approximately 143 million, or about 54%, of all U.S. citizens have home access to the Internet (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2002). In fact, a recent report suggests that only 24% of Americans are truly offline, with no direct or indirect experience with the In- ternet (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2003a). Although access varies worldwide by country, it is clear that similar percentages hold, on average, across the globe and that more than 500 million people around the world have access (Nielsen/NetRatings, 2001). Further, close to 40 million U.S. citizens have access to the Internet at work. At home, the average U.S. user spends about 26 hours a month on the Internet; while at work, the average user spends over 75 hours per month on the Internet (Nielsen/ NetRatings, 2003). Clearly, the Internet is quickly becom- ing a medium as pervasive as radio and television, with the capacity for infinitely more two-way communication.

There is no doubt that the Internet is quickly becoming one of the most pervasive communication and commerce media in the world (Abbate, 1999). It is also quite clear that usage and access will continue to grow for years to come. For example, although ethnic minority members in this country were sometimes among the last to utilize the In- ternet, their usage has grown significantly over the last five years (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2002). Individuals with disabling conditions are also connecting in growing numbers (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2002). Further advances in technology, such as broadband, allowing quicker and larger transmissions of data, are likely to increase Internet activities. The impact of the Internet has been, and will continue to be, substantial for all people and organizations, including professional groups. The profes- sion of psychology is among the groups that are beginning to explore opportunities and issues, both positive and neg- ative, concerning the Internet (Barak, 1999). And so we should, as many individuals look to the Internet for psy- chological information. A recent report suggested that 23% of Americans with Internet access have looked for infor- mation about a mental health issue such as depression or anxiety (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2003b).

Growth of Internet Testing Why has Internet testing created so much interest? Internet advocates stress better, faster, and cheaper services and products, and Internet testing provides many good illustra- tions of this principle. For example, a new test with ac- companying translations could be made available around the world almost instantly. Test publishers can download new tests to secure testing sites in a matter of moments, while other test developers can put tests on their Web sites and make them available to anyone with an Internet con- nection. Updating a test is also much easier. For example, revising a paper-and-pencil test requires printing and dis- tributing new test forms and answer keys and printing new or revised test manuals, an expensive process that may take several months or years. Revisions of a test that appears on the Internet can be downloaded to testing sites around the world in a few minutes at virtually no cost.

In many paper-and-pencil testing and assessment pro- grams, examinees typically receive their scores and inter- pretive reports a month or two after they take a test. Their answer sheets must first be mailed to the test publisher, where they are scanned and scored, and perhaps inter- preted. Then reports are created, printed, and mailed back to the examinees. In an Internet setting, responses are recorded in computer files as examinees answer each item. Software that computes test scores and generates interpre- tive reports can be run as soon as the last item is answered, with examinees receiving feedback within a few seconds of completing the test.

Internet testing is more scalable than paper-and-pencil testing. In the language of the Internet, scalable means that adding volume results in very little additional cost. There- fore, over the course of a year, the number of times people who visit a Web site and respond to a test may increase, for example, from 5,000 per month to 10,000, but the test

Jack A. Naglieri

151April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

publisher does not incur the costs associated with printing, distributing, and scoring 5,000 additional paper-based tests. Of course, eventually an additional server may be required, but additional test administrations are much lower in cost in an Internet setting compared with paper-and-pencil admin- istration. Additionally, because of the minimal costs in- volved, tests and assessments could be made available at no cost to respondents. For example, researchers may put tests and assessments on their Web pages hoping that people will complete the assessment in order to receive a score report. In exchange, the researcher obtains the data pro- vided by the respondents. Test publishers sometimes put free assessments on their Web sites as a means of attracting potential customers.

Goals of Testing Internet tests and assessments can be classified into three broad categories according to their goals. First, many In- ternet tests, instruments, and surveys are designed for per- sonal development and growth and may or may not be scientifically based. Measures such as these are usually designed for the layperson or public consumer. These in- struments may be used to identify specific personality characteristics or traits (e.g., motivation for success; match- making), determine suitability for a particular type of job or trade, or facilitate psychotherapy (e.g., a personal rating of depression or anxiety). Second, many traditional psychod- iagnostic measures like the Minnesota Multiphasic Person- ality Inventory (MMPI), the Minnesota Multiphasic Per- sonality Inventory—2 (MMPI–2), and the Beck inventories now appear on the Internet. These instruments are typically used to make important diagnostic and treatment decisions regarding individuals. In addition, there are Web pages that are devoted to ways to respond so as to create a desired

result, especially in forensic settings where instruments like the MMPI–2 may be pivotal. Finally, cognitive ability tests, certification tests, and licensing exams can be admin- istered via the Internet with the purpose of identifying the best candidates to be awarded some scarce resource (e.g., a job or admission to graduate school) or credential. Here the test or assessment is used to make an important decision about the examinee, usually related to access into a pro- fession or area of study (e.g., medicine, psychology, etc.).

The goals of a test have important implications for how the measure should be administered. For example, a test that is designed for personal development or growth is less likely to be affected or contaminated by some response style. The person is likely to be candid and open, and not defensive or guarded. In these situations, there is little motivation for dissimulation on the part of the respondent. On the other hand, when a measure is used to make a decision about the examinee, the process is more likely to elicit a motivation to obtain a better score. If test takers are sophisticated, they will answer items in a way that they believe maximizes their positive results. For example, an individual may fake good on a personality inventory or cheat on a cognitive ability test. Much more care in test administration is needed in such situations.

Benefits of Internet Testing The benefits of Internet testing are speed, cost, and conve- nience. Testing over the Internet provides rapid communi- cation of findings to clients, patients, researchers, and the public. It also allows researchers to collect data rapidly, conveniently, and at lower costs than in face-to-face re- search settings. Internet testing is cheaper and more effi- cient; it saves valuable time and provides results more rapidly and easily compared with face-to-face testing. Ben- efits of Internet testing also include sensitization and fa- miliarization of testing to potential clients and the presen- tation of test materials in a consistent, uniform manner. The more that potential clients become familiarized with these procedures, the more comfortable their approach to the tests can be, reducing spurious sensitization and situational effects.

Internet testing is also beneficial in that it allows patients in rural settings to be tested, where it would be difficult or impossible to travel to a testing center or to the office of a testing professional. Internet testing is of value to patients who lack transportation to such sites or to those who cannot travel because of physical limitations. In addi- tion, tests may be presented in a precise manner or in interesting and novel ways, so that the client’s attention to the testing task is enhanced, compared with face-to-face administration.

Differences Between Testing and Psychological Assessment The important distinction between testing and psychologi- cal assessment (Matarazzo, 1990) is particularly important for Internet testing sites. Internet site developers as well as many others unfortunately use the terms testing and psy- chological assessment synonymously when actually these

Fritz Drasgow Photo by Harry Zanotti

152 April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

terms mean quite different things. Testing refers to the administration, scoring, and perhaps the interpretation of individual test scores by applying a descriptive meaning based on normative, nomothetic data. The focus here is on the individual test itself. Administering a test is typically a relatively simple process that can be conducted by psychol- ogists and possibly testing technicians, sometimes with relatively little training, or even by a computer. Although more than one test may be given, the emphasis in each case is the comparison of each individual test score with the scores of an appropriate normative group.

Conversely, in psychological assessment, the empha- sis is typically on the person being assessed and the referral question, rather than on specific test results. Typically, an array of tests is given with an emphasis on their integration, taking many factors other than normative findings into account. The results of the tests are integrated among themselves, in the context of additional available patient– client data, such as history, observations, referral source, and information from friends and/or relatives. The eventual goal of the assessment is to answer the referral question or questions. Tests are typically used in the psychological assessment process, but much more information and often much more complexity is involved. The integration and interpretation of data in the assessment process requires a high degree of skill, psychological sophistication, and education.

The distinction between testing and psychological as- sessment is important because most of what is available on the Internet is testing, not psychological assessment. There- fore, the issue of method variance is an important one; for example, the test results obtained on the Internet may be inaccurate because of the specific method used in the testing and because there is no psychologist available to

assist in interpretation. Although it is conceivable that assessment on the Internet may be possible someday, the requirements for appropriate psychological assessment ex- ceed current Internet capabilities.

Psychometric Advantages

Computerized tests provide some psychometric advantages in comparison with paper-and-pencil assessments. In fact, considerable research has been conducted to document and demonstrate these advantages. A brief summary is pro- vided here; more detail can be found in Sands, Waters, and McBride (1997) and Drasgow and Olson-Buchanan (1999).

An Internet test and assessment provides more accu- rate scoring compared with a traditional paper-and-pencil test. Optical scanning of paper test forms encounters diffi- culties with stray pencil marks, incomplete erasures, and insufficiently darkened answers. In computerized testing, an examinee enters a response, the response is displayed on the screen, and the examinee is provided an opportunity to change the answer. Suppose an examinee has selected “B” as his or her response. The computer monitor will then display a darkened circle next to option “B” and will allow the examinee to change the response or proceed to the next item. If the examinee goes to the next item, well-designed software will correctly record and score the “B” response. A significant source of errors is removed when optical scanning is not used.

Internet testing and assessment is especially well suited for the use of item response theory (IRT; Hambleton & Swaminathan, 1985; Hulin, Drasgow, & Parsons, 1983; Lord, 1980). For example, computerized adaptive tests that tailor difficulty to the ability level of each examinee can be efficiently delivered through this medium. In this process, IRT technology would be used to select which items are given so that they are of appropriate difficulty for each examinee. Internet assessment can also offer the potential for assessing abilities and skills not easily assessed by paper-and-pencil methods. For example, Vispoel (1999) developed a computerized assessment of musical aptitude; Ackerman, Evans, Park, Tamassia, and Turner (1999) cre- ated a dermatological test that allows examinees to pan in and out as they examine color images of skin disorders; and Drasgow, Olson-Buchanan, and Moberg (1999) developed an assessment that uses video clips to assess respondents’ conflict-resolution skills. These and many other needs can be effectively met using computerized technology that can be delivered via the Internet.

New Problems Yet Old Issues Test–Client Integrity

In the same way that we do not allow clients to take tests at home, given that they might not take them privately, Internet testing encounters this old problem with a new twist. When the goals of the test taker differ from the goals of the test user, it is important to confirm the identity of the person answering items. The simplest and most effective method is to require test takers to go to a secure test site and show a government-issued photo ID such as a driver’s

Mark Schmit

153April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

license or passport. Of course, test administration at such sites is inconvenient and expensive. When a test or assess- ment is not administered at a secure test center, there are a number of ways to check a test taker’s identity (e.g., “What is your mother’s maiden name?”). Unfortunately, such methods can easily be circumvented; a more talented ac- complice can sit with the supposed test taker and provide answers to items.

Segall (2001) suggested a clever means of confirming the validity of test takers’ administered tests remotely via the Internet. He has proposed Internet administration of the lengthy Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) enlistment test used by the U.S. military. Seg- all’s idea is that individuals could take the ASVAB at their convenience in nonsecure locations. Individuals who ob- tain scores qualifying for enlistment would then travel to secure test centers, where they would be administered a much shorter confirmation test composed of highly dis- criminating items. A statistical procedure developed by Segall would then be used to check whether the test taker’s original responses are consistent with the responses from the confirmation test. This method was found to be very effective at detecting cheating in a simulation study. A combination of informing examinees that a confirmation test will be administered as well as applying Segall’s sta- tistical analysis may also prove to be effective in discour- aging cheating.

Test Security Levels of security can range from highly secure and re- strictive (e.g., high-stakes testing programs) to unsecured and permissive (low-stakes testing). As might be expected, the greater the level of security, the higher the cost for implementing and maintaining an application. The level of

security implemented for a given test or test site should be appropriately matched to the usage of the test. Secure test environments should use a three-tier server model. Within this model, the test system is actually made up of three independent servers: an Internet server, a test application server, and a database server. It is imperative that the application server is solely dedicated to the test application. In order to maximize the security of client data, a separate data server should be maintained behind a secure firewall. This configuration reduces the possibility of unauthorized intrusions into client test data. If scoring and reporting services are required, it is recommended that these appli- cations be placed on yet a fourth server in the middle tier with the application server in order to minimize processing bottlenecks that may affect the test application or data access. Regular and frequent backups of all collected data should be conducted, and the provider should be able to give prospective customers a detailed disaster recovery plan. Redundancy allows a site to continue to operate even if one of its components completely fails. A reputable provider will have redundancy on all systems throughout its site including incoming and outgoing communications lines. As with any secure application, client and adminis- trator password formats need to be robust (nontrivial) and actively maintained. Finally, server traffic should be ac- tively and continuously monitored for intrusions.

On the client side, one of the most important security considerations is the prevention of unauthorized copying by the examinee or an observer and printing of test items. This can partially be achieved within a browser by dis- abling access to menu selections such as cut, copy, paste, export, save, save as, print, print screen, and so forth. Hot keys and right mouse context menu selections should also be disabled. However, it is only possible to partially secure items by controlling browser functions. Even with such controls in place, it is still possible for more technically knowledgeable examinees to make use of operating system features and other applications to capture items from the screen. Therefore, where full client-side security is re- quired, it is necessary to install a test security agent on the client’s desktop, which completely prohibits an examinee from dropping out of the test application while it is in operation. Such an application prevents users from launch- ing screen recorders, word processors, e-mail applications, and any other unrelated application that may be used to compromise the security of test items.

Issues for Special Populations The delivery of psychological tests through the Internet provides the opportunity to meet the needs of a wide variety of individuals, in particular, important special pop- ulations including people with disabling conditions and culturally and linguistically diverse persons.

People With Disabling Conditions

A critical issue in determining appropriate accommoda- tions for a person with a disability is demonstrating the clear relationship between the individual’s deficit and the

Len Handler

154 April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

nature of the accommodation. The challenge of determin- ing the type of accommodations required for Internet-based assessment arises in part because little is known about the unique aspects of testing in this format. Although many of the accommodations developed for paper-and-pencil test- ing can be used for Internet assessments, new issues will likely arise. As psychologists begin to make recommenda- tions to institutions on behalf of individuals with disabili- ties or on behalf of institutions attempting to design fair testing practices for groups of individuals with disabilities, it is important to consider new types of accommodations to address the unique problems inherent in Internet assessment.

Accommodations may be considered in terms of op- erating at the level of the individual or at the level of the group. At the individual level, adequate accommodations include alterations in the testing environment. Although this is standard practice with paper-and-pencil testing, unique challenges may be encountered with Internet assess- ments because the computer may be permanently affixed in one position. Adjusting the height and placement of the table on which the computer sits is critical for an individual in a wheelchair. For some disabilities, accommodations require alterations to test administration itself rather than alterations to the environment. For example, a reader is often recommended for individuals who are sight impaired or who have a specific reading disability (e.g., dyslexia). During Internet-based assessment, there is likely to be a new vocabulary to describe the spatial layout of the mate- rial and the actions taken by the reader (e.g., rather than stating, “I am filling in Answer A on the scantron sheet,” the reader might say, “I am clicking Choice A on the answer screen”). These accommodations are not unique to testing over the Internet, but are unique to testing on a

computer platform, the frequency of which will likely increase as Internet technology advances.

At the group level, a lack of equal access to technol- ogy may result in poorer test performance for some groups. Households with lower incomes have reduced access to computers and therefore the Internet. Assessment over the Internet, therefore, may be confounded by the novelty of the format. For example, during cognitive testing, individ- uals who are less familiar with computers will have a greater cognitive load due to divided attention than indi- viduals who are familiar with computers. Further, a lack of familiarity with the security and privacy features of the Internet may influence performance. In this sense, low access to computers may be viewed as a disability that requires accommodations to ensure fair testing.

Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Groups

Many culturally and linguistically diverse groups, includ- ing Latinos and African Americans, have been among the last to connect to the Internet because of economic and/or access issues. Yet, the number of people from these and other minority groups who have access to the Internet is increasing dramatically. For these groups, the Internet is proving to be a tool that connects them to their country of origin, resources in a particular language or dialect, and so forth.

Like the majority Euro-American population, mem- bers of these groups have also begun to access the Internet for information related to mental health and psychology. For example, it is not unusual for a Spanish-speaking Latino to seek out information about a particular mental condition or even a psychological test instrument through the Internet. The person is now likely to find information in Spanish, usually from an Internet site in Latin America. Similarly, the person may seek information about a partic- ular test that he or she is about to take that will be admin- istered by a psychologist (e.g., for employment screening or child custody purposes).

There remain many unanswered questions regarding the psychological testing and assessment of these groups via the Internet. In many ways, these issues are similar to concerns related to test use with culturally diverse or mi- nority groups (e.g., fair assessment). For example, it is unclear if it is necessary to have separate norms, including norms for minorities, for an instrument that is administered via the Internet versus administered in the traditional man- ner. Also, a review of various Web pages indicated that many instruments are poorly translated, or have been mod- ified for use with Latinos in the United States or Latin America, by Spanish-speaking professionals usually out- side of the United States. Additionally, older measures, such as the MMPI, can still be found in Spanish despite the appearance of recent translations of the MMPI–2 that are superior to the translations of the older MMPI. People may use old and outdated instruments in a manner that is inap- propriate or problematic, which may then result in negative consequences for clients and the public.

Aurelio Prifitera

155April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

Ethical and Professional Issues Ethical issues abound for psychologists who use the Inter- net in their practice. Many of these issues are being ad- dressed by specific APA committees (American Psycho- logical Association, 1997). Although all of the ethical issues surrounding the use of the Internet in the practice of psychology are important, we confine our discussion to the issues specifically raised around Internet testing. Our dis- cussion is framed by the current APA Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psycholog- ical Association, 2002), specifically Section 9, Assessment, which covers most of the issues surrounding Internet testing.

The first ethical issue to be considered is the profes- sional context in which the Internet testing takes place. The associated ethical principle is as follows: 9.01 Bases for Assessment

(a) Psychologists base the opinions contained in their recommen- dations, reports, and diagnostic or evaluative statements, includ- ing forensic testimony, on information and techniques sufficient to substantiate their findings.

(b) Except as noted in 9.01c, psychologists provide opinions of the psychological characteristics of individuals only after they have conducted an examination of the individuals adequate to support their statements or conclusions. When, despite reasonable efforts, such an examination is not practical, psychologists doc- ument the efforts they made and the result of those efforts, clarify the probable impact of their limited information on the reliability and validity of their opinions, and appropriately limit the nature and extent of their conclusions or recommendations.

(c) When psychologists conduct a record review or provide con- sultation or supervision and an individual examination is not warranted or necessary for the opinion, psychologists explain this

and the sources of information on which they based their conclu- sions and recommendations. (American Psychological Associa- tion, 2002)

The issue raised by Internet testing is how testing is placed into a professional context when conducted on the Internet. Many tests on the Internet are accompanied by little other than some broad statements about the use of the test. Further, test takers may not read instructions or may ignore disclaimers more than in face-to-face situations (Barak & English, 2002). Under these principles, test materials that are posted for self-administration and interpretation on the Internet should be accompanied by a statement to the test taker that clearly defines the bounds and limitations of the professional relationship with the client that can be achieved through this medium. This may seem a bit coun- terintuitive given the impersonal nature of Internet com- munications. However, a potential client who is browsing the Internet for professional advice is seeking a trust rela- tionship. Providing preliminary test materials for diagnos- tic or evaluative purposes therefore implies an offer to form this trust relationship. Thus, the limitations of the relation- ship that can be developed through an impersonal medium such as the Internet should be clearly described in an opening statement to the test taker. In addition, test pro- viders may need to make available contact information (e.g., e-mail address, phone number) for those who do not completely understand directions or the purpose of the test. Finally, the limits of the feedback provided to the test taker following the test should be clearly described both before the test and preceding feedback. This description should clearly describe the potential limitations of conclusions and recommendations that can be made as a result of a very limited and potentially nonpersonal Internet approach.

The next area of ethical consideration involves the appropriate use of Internet testing and assessment. The ethical principle states the following:

9.02 Use of Assessments

(a) Psychologists administer, adapt, score, interpret, or use assess- ment techniques, interviews, tests, or instruments in a manner and for purposes that are appropriate in light of the research on or evidence of the usefulness and proper application of the techniques.

(b) Psychologists use assessment instruments whose validity and reliability have been established for use with members of the population tested. When such validity or reliability has not been established, psychologists describe the strengths and limitations of test results and interpretation.

(c) Psychologists use assessment methods that are appropriate to an individual’s language preference and competence, unless the use of an alternative language is relevant to the assessment issues. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

Internet testing, in many cases, has been simply a process of putting paper-and-pencil or computerized tests onto a new medium. However, although research has explored the equivalence of some forms of computerized and paper-and- pencil tests (e.g., Mead & Drasgow, 1993), very little research has been conducted on the equivalence of Internet

Amy Margolis

156 April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

testing with these other formats. This may call into ques- tion the evidence for the usefulness of these tools. Further, tests that may have been developed and researched in a proctored setting are now often being used in an unproc- tored context that is facilitated by the Internet and its widening accessibility. This approach calls into question the proper application of the techniques. The effects of both the medium and the context require additional research to ensure appropriate use of tests and assessment on the Internet.

As noted earlier, an advantage to using the Internet to deliver tests is that it may provide greater accessibility and reach than an approach that requires an individual to be at a certain place, at a particular time. This advantage can also create a challenge. Wider access may cause a difference in the populations for which the test was developed versus the ultimate population that has access. For example, a preem- ployment test may be specifically developed and re- searched for a management population. Under more tradi- tional conditions, applicants for these management positions may be required to test at a specific location where a significant effort and commitment is involved. However, the Internet may provide easy access to a differ- ent population where a nonqualified candidate could decide that he or she might just take the test on the off chance that he or she might gain entry to an otherwise inaccessible position.

Normative issues are also a related concern for Inter- net test delivery. With good intentions, a test may be placed on a Web site by a psychologist in the United States, but someone in China may have access to it and complete the test. Feedback may be based only on U.S. norms. An inadvertent, but inappropriate, use of norms is the result. This is clearly an area of great potential for the inappro-

priate use of tests and associated norms. Psychologists will need to make substantial efforts to collect demographic information prior to testing and to provide feedback only to individuals in groups for which normative data are available.

The next area of ethical consideration involves in- formed consent. The ethical principle states the following: 9.03 Informed Consent in Assessments

(a) Psychologists obtain informed consent for assessments, eval- uations, or diagnostic services, as described in Standard 3.10, Informed Consent, except when (1) testing is mandated by law or governmental regulations; (2) informed consent is implied be- cause testing is conducted as a routine educational, institutional, or organizational activity (e.g., when participants voluntarily agree to assessment when applying for a job); or (3) one purpose of the testing is to evaluate decisional capacity. Informed consent includes an explanation of the nature and purpose of the assess- ment, fees, involvement of third parties, and limits of confiden- tiality and sufficient opportunity for the client/patient to ask questions and receive answers.

(b) Psychologists inform persons with questionable capacity to consent or for whom testing is mandated by law or governmental regulations about the nature and purpose of the proposed assess- ment services, using language that is reasonably understandable to the person being assessed.

(c) Psychologists using the services of an interpreter obtain in- formed consent from the client/patient to use that interpreter, ensure that confidentiality of test results and test security are maintained, and include in their recommendations, reports, and diagnostic or evaluative statements, including forensic testimony, discussion of any limitations on the data obtained. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

Gaining true informed consent through electronic means is likely to create unique challenges for psychologists. As noted earlier, the impersonal and standardized nature of Internet testing programs are not likely to fit all individuals the same. In other words, it may be very difficult to provide true informed consent to all individuals completing tests through the Internet. In many cases, it will not be known whether the person completing the test is capable of giving informed consent or whether permission is required from a legally authorized person. Take, for examples, a preteen who poses as an individual over 18 years old or a patient under the legal guardianship of another who gives consent in order to gain access to testing. Psychologists who wish to use testing on the Internet, other than for excepted practices, will need to find ways to deal with this thorny problem of how to authenticate informed consent over the Internet.

The next area of ethical consideration involves the appropriate release of test data. The ethical principle states the following: 9.04 Release of Test Data

(a) The term test data refers to raw and scaled scores, client/ patient responses to test questions or stimuli, and psychologists’ notes and recordings concerning client/patient statements and behavior during an examination. Those portions of test materials that include client/patient responses are included in the definition

Roberto Velasquez

157April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

of test data. Pursuant to a client/patient release, psychologists provide test data to the client/patient or other persons identified in the release. Psychologists may refrain from releasing test data to protect a client/patient or others from substantial harm or misuse or misrepresentation of the data or the test, recognizing that in many instances release of confidential information under these circumstances is regulated by law. (See also Standard 9.11, Main- taining Test Security.)

(b) In the absence of a client/patient release, psychologists pro- vide test data only as required by law or court order. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

Psychological test data reveal very personal details about human characteristics, behaviors, preferences, and capabil- ities. This type of data is not only valuable to psychologists, but is also valuable to sales, marketing, political, and other groups who may or may not have the individual’s best interest in mind when deciding how to use these data. Therefore, it is imperative that measures be taken to pro- vide secure sites for the collection of psychological test data on the Internet. Without secure sites, test data could be intercepted, corrupted, or changed by unscrupulous data thieves and hackers. There are three major principles of Internet security, and psychologists using the Internet for testing should take proactive steps in each of these areas to protect test takers (Howard, Paridaens, & Gramm, 2001). The first principle is confidentiality, which deals with keep- ing information from being viewed by unintended readers. Encryption technology is designed to provide confidential- ity by scrambling data so that only the appropriate senders and receivers can read the data. The second principle is integrity, which is concerned with keeping information from being altered. Message digests are fingerprints that do not allow the changing of information or at least can detect when information has been changed. The final principle is authentication, which relates to identifying the origins of the data. Digital signatures can provide the authentication through a system of keys that are used both in the sending and receiving of messages to identify the sender as authen- tic. Given the value and highly sensitive nature of psycho- logical test data, psychologists should use technologies in each of these areas to secure data.

The sharing of data and reports is infinitely easier as a result of Internet-based access to databases. People any- where in the world can access databases anywhere else at the click of a button, given the correct security clearance. This ease of access provides more opportunity than in the past for both the intentional and the inadvertent release of data to unqualified individuals. Safeguards must be put in place by psychologists, in conjunction with information technologists, to avoid the release of data to those who are unqualified to use it. Although there are many technolog- ical safeguards available to protect data, the psychologist’s responsibility goes further. It extends to building lines of communication, to the use of training materials, and to other means of safeguarding data that involve the human element that is more likely to result in security breaches compared with the failure of technology.

The next ethical issue of note in the use of tests on the Internet has to do with test development efforts. The ethical principle reads as follows:

9.05 Test Construction

Psychologists who develop tests and other assessment techniques use appropriate psychometric procedures and current scientific or professional knowledge for test design, standardization, valida- tion, reduction or elimination of bias, and recommendations for use. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

Traditional test construction techniques are appropri- ate for administration over the Internet in proctored test environments. However, as noted earlier, tests developed in a paper-and-pencil format and researched in monitored and controlled situations cannot be assumed to provide equiv- alent measurement when administered over the Internet in unmonitored and uncontrolled situations. Therefore, addi- tional studies of test equivalence and norming should be conducted over the Internet, with subjects completing the test under conditions that represent those that the intended target population will experience (Epstein, Klinkenberg, Wiley, & McKinley, 2001).

Advances in computer and Internet technologies have provided the medium for many new advances in testing. Video-based simulations, virtual reality, computer adaptive testing, and precision measurement of physiological re- sponses are examples of technological advances that are shaping the new testing landscape (Olson-Buchanan, 2002). Integrated systems approaches are also beginning to appear. For example, in the area of preemployment testing, methods and tools such as job analysis, recruitment sys- tems, prescreening tools (i.e., questionnaires, application blanks, etc.), selection tests, interviews, and hiring deci- sions are being integrated in a fully Internet-based or en- terprise system that challenge the existing psychometric knowledge base (Drasgow & Olson-Buchanan, 1999; Funke & Schuler, 1998). Therefore, it is incumbent on psychologists to understand the bounds of current psycho- metric methods and to establish, research, and report on new methods that support emerging technological ad- vances. It would be unethical to develop new measurement tools that cannot be held to existing psychometric standards (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Mea- surement in Education, 1999) without providing arguments and evidence for new or revised standards. Advances in testing spurred by the Internet should be encouraged, but associated advances in psychometric theory may be a man- datory part of this advancement (i.e., in cases where exist- ing models are inappropriate).

The interpretation of Internet test results poses some unique ethical considerations. The relevant ethical princi- ple is as follows:

9.06 Interpreting Assessment Results

When interpreting assessment results, including automated inter- pretations, psychologists take into account the purpose of the assessment as well as the various test factors, test-taking abilities, and other characteristics of the person being assessed, such as

158 April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

situational, personal, linguistic, and cultural differences, that might affect psychologists’ judgments or reduce the accuracy of their interpretations. They indicate any significant limitations of their interpretations. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

Internet testing will often be conducted in unproctored and in variable environments. Test takers will likely be in unstand- ardized settings (e.g., home, library, school), and psycholo- gists will have little or no way of knowing exactly what conditions might exist that could influence or limit interpre- tations. This problem may be alleviated to some extent by the use of instructions to test takers, but it is likely that this will only reduce a small amount of irrelevant variability in scores. Further, when tests are completed in unmonitored situations, there is currently no way to guarantee the true identity of the test taker (Schmit, 2001). Thus, psychologists will need to weigh carefully the importance they place on tests adminis- tered over the Internet. Confirmatory methods, administration of equivalent forms, or gathering of data through additional methods will almost always be necessary before making any- thing other than preliminary evaluations, diagnostic, or pre- dictive decisions.

Gaining an understanding of the test-taking skills and specific personal characteristic of the test taker poses an even greater challenge, given the impersonal approach that characterizes most Internet-based testing and assessment. For example, in preemployment testing situations, a pro- vider may have no way of knowing whether an applicant has a particular disability that might affect the test results and invalidate the possible interpretation of those results. Similarly, a test may be posted in English for use in coun- seling, but the test taker speaks English only as a second language. Unless the test taker is asked about this condi- tion, the interpretation of results will likely be flawed. The point is that psychologists using Internet testing and assess- ment must make provisions for understanding the unique needs of test takers that may ultimately affect the interpre- tation of results.

In addition, test takers must be given information that clearly identifies the purpose of the test so that they can determine whether the test is appropriate for their situation. However, this may not be as easy as providing a purpose statement. The test taker will need help understanding whether the test is a fit for his or her situation. There will likely be a need for prescreening the test taker to help him or her understand whether the test or assessment is right for his or her situation.

The next set of ethical issues to be considered with regard to Internet testing involves the use of Internet tests by unqualified persons. The ethical principle states the following: 9.07 Assessment by Unqualified Persons

Psychologists do not promote the use of psychological assessment techniques by unqualified persons, except when such use is con- ducted for training purposes with appropriate supervision. (Amer- ican Psychological Association, 2002)

The Internet has made it very easy for anyone to publish any kind of material in the public domain. This freedom has led many to assume that anything published on

the Internet is in the public domain and can be copied and used by anyone who chooses to do so. These and other Internet crimes are raising significant challenges for many professions (Reno, 2000). Whole tests, scales, and test items posted on the Internet can be copied and used by unqualified people. It is the responsibility of psychological test publishers and authors to keep their works under tight control and to report copyright violations. Most do this well with customers who use appropriate channels to gain ac- cess to the materials. However, publishers and authors must scan the Web for whole and partial elements of tests that require professional training for administration or interpre- tation. Partial tests are likely to be the most difficult to identify, yet they may be the most damaging, as the original psychometric properties are likely denigrated. Consistent with Principle 9.11 (cited below) publishers must also protect their copyrights on test materials. It is the duty of the psychology profession to protect the public from un- scrupulous vendors who exploit the Internet with tests of others or, worse yet, with bad renditions of the original test.

Principle 9.07 is written in a way that may suggest that psychologists take reactive steps rather than proactive steps in the protection of the profession. However, others have taken more proactive measures to protect the public. For example, a mental health consumer advocacy and educa- tion program has stepped up a process for checking cre- dentials of online counselors (Ainsworth, 2002). Online therapists can register with this organization and have their credentials (e.g., education, experience, background) checked. Therapists who pass this check are issued a spe- cial icon for posting on their Web site. Clients can go to the advocacy group’s Web site to verify the authenticity of the therapist. A similar program could be established by a consortium of test publishers who have or plan to have their psychological test products administered on the Internet.

The next ethical principle to be considered deals with outdated test materials. It reads as follows:

9.08 Obsolete Tests and Outdated Test Results

(a) Psychologists do not base their assessment or intervention decisions or recommendations on data or test results that are outdated for the current purpose.

(b) Similarly, psychologists do not base such decisions or recom- mendations on tests and measures that are obsolete and not useful for the current purpose. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

The Internet is full of obsolete and outdated information. Consumers often have difficulty sorting out the current from the outdated pages available on the Internet. Consis- tent with the discussion of the previous principle, when partial or whole replication of test materials is made through uninformed or fraudulent acts, these tests materials are likely to become obsolete or outdated, because the original publisher updates the materials. Further, it is quite easy for Web publishers to forget about published pages on the Internet that may be updated in different places, yet the old materials remain available to the public. Finally, psy- chologists who do not closely watch the literature and other

159April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

materials from test publishers may inadvertently use out- dated materials online. Others may resist change and in- tentionally use outdated materials. As previously noted, test publishers and authors must carefully monitor the Internet for obsolete and outdated materials and take both proactive and reactive steps to curb and eliminate these practices.

Third-party vendors of Internet tests and associated services also have a set of ethical issues to consider. The relevant ethical principle states the following: 9.09 Test Scoring and Interpretation Services

(a) Psychologists who offer assessment or scoring services to other professionals accurately describe the purpose, norms, valid- ity, reliability, and applications of the procedures and any special qualifications applicable to their use.

(b) Psychologists select scoring and interpretation services (in- cluding automated services) on the basis of evidence of the validity of the program and procedures as well as on other appropriate considerations.

(c) Psychologists retain responsibility for the appropriate appli- cation, interpretation, and use of assessment instruments, whether they score and interpret such tests themselves or use automated or other services. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

The Internet is full of psychological, para-psychological, and pop-psychology tests, as described in earlier sections. Psychologists must find ways to differentiate themselves from the mass of alternatives that do not meet professional standards (American Educational Research Association et al., 1999). Providing the information described in this ethical principle is the first step in overcoming such con- fusion. Psychologists who provide tools to other trained professionals should go beyond the simple provision of providing basic psychometric information to potential us- ers. Steps could be taken to show the equivalence of Internet testing with traditional forms of the measure (Ep- stein et al., 2001). Efforts should also be made to provide consultation and training to test users regarding the chal- lenges faced in using tests on the Internet (Barak & En- glish, 2002). The training should be specific to tests and populations that will take the tests. Processional vendors of psychological tests to be used on the Internet may be able to overcome some of the noise of Internet marketing by becoming professional Internet test consultants. Producers of pop-psychology tests should be made to issue more detailed disclaimers, or warnings, describing their tests as entertainment and not as true tests, just as tobacco manu- facturers must issue store warnings on cigarette packages.

The advent of technological breakthroughs and the ease of conducting a professional practice that results from these innovations can occasionally blind adaptors to the fundamental qualities that comprise quality tools. Psychol- ogists must learn to discriminate among efficient delivery tools, flashy format, face-valid content, and psychometric quality. All of these qualities may be important to a psy- chologist in choosing a vendor, but the foundations of psychometrics are still necessary conditions that should be the first hurdle in a multihurdle decision process. Technol- ogy advances should not be considered in a vacuum when choosing an Internet test.

Perhaps one of the greatest challenges of Internet testing will involve the explanation of results to test takers. The ethical principle dealing with this issue is as follows:

9.10 Explaining Assessment Results

Regardless of whether the scoring and interpretation are done by psychologists, by employees or assistants, or by automated or other outside services, psychologists take reasonable steps to ensure that explanations of results are given to the individual or designated representative unless the nature of the relationship precludes provision of an explanation of results (such as in some organizational consulting, preemployment or security screenings, and forensic evaluations), and this fact has been clearly explained to the person being assessed in advance. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

Providing feedback to test takers over the Internet is a topic of concern to many psychologists. There are at least three major ethical issues to consider. First, there are limited ways to understand the conditions under which the test taker completed the test. Did the individual complete the test or did someone else help or do it for him or her? Under what environmental conditions was the test taken? These and many other questions should be answered in order to provide accurate feedback. Second, it is very difficult to provide feedback, particularly negative feedback, to a test taker without knowing the person’s emotional and mental state. The wrong type of feedback could exacerbate the individual’s condition. Third, it is difficult to provide test takers with immediate emotional support in cases where the feedback has traumatic effects on an individual. It is also difficult to know the extent of these reactions in the first place. Given these severe limitations and many other pos- sibilities, psychologists should rarely provide feedback over the Internet. When they do provide feedback, pro- cesses for resolving these ethical issues either in “real time” or within a reasonable time period should be established. Feedback should generally be limited and should include directions for seeking additional information and help through other means. Ultimately, feedback should rely on multiple methods of evaluation to provide assessment re- sults consistent with professional best practice.

Another rather charged area of ethical concern is the maintenance of test security when tests are delivered over the Internet. The ethical principle covering this set of issues is as follows:

9.11. Maintaining Test Security

The term test materials refers to manuals, instruments, protocols, and test questions or stimuli and does not include test data as defined in Standard 9.04, Release of Test Data. Psychologists make reasonable efforts to maintain the integrity and security of test materials and other assessment techniques consistent with law and contractual obligations, and in a manner that permits adher- ence to this Ethics Code. (American Psychological Association, 2002)

As the music industry can attest, the ease of posting ma- terial on the Internet has led to widespread violations of copyright laws. Many psychological tests and assessments are copyrighted because much effort was expended in their

160 April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

development. These instruments constitute much of test publishers’ intellectual capital and must be safeguarded. It is unethical and illegal for unauthorized parties to distribute or use such copyrighted materials. In fact, a quick search of www.ebay.com on any given day will produce quick access to many copyrighted and sensitive test materials. For ex- ample, a quick search on June 18, 2003, produced the opportunity to bid on an MMPI Manual for Administration and Scoring together with unused testing materials as well as the opportunity to purchase Rorschach Psychodiagnostic Plates.

In this section, we have made an attempt to raise issues, offer guidance, and delineate some of the ethical issues surrounding Internet testing. Although we have touched on many issues, this is certainly not a comprehen- sive list. We have shown, however, that the current APA Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2002) provide strong guidance for Internet testing. We believe most issues can be resolved by studying these principles and making conservative interpretations that protect both clients and the general public.

Recommendations for the Future This examination of the issue of testing on the Internet leads to several conclusions. First, and perhaps most im- portant, is that the current psychometric standards, includ- ing test reliability and validity, apply even though the way in which the tests are developed and delivered may be quite different. Unfortunately, because there are many more tests that are now available via the Internet, there is much variability in the quality of these tests. The extent to which there is documented evidence of the reliability and validity of these tests is also quite variable because many Internet tests do not seem to meet standards established by the profession. This puts consumers in the unfortunate position of having the responsibility of evaluating the quality of the information they receive, often with little knowledge and skill to do so. One conclusion is obvious: Internet testing should be subjected to the same defensible standards for assessment tools (American Educational Research Associ- ation et al., 1999) as paper-and-pencil tests when their results are used to make important decisions. Still, new methods and combinations of methods that are made pos- sible by emerging technologies will push the boundaries of existing psychometric theory, and it is up to psychologists to test and expand the limits of psychometrics to keep pace with these innovations.

The Internet provides a tremendous opportunity for testing, and with that opportunity comes a corresponding need for the ethical and professional use of these tests and a responsibility to expand our science to test the usefulness of these interventions. Despite the flash and sparkle of Internet testing, critical questions of the validity of the inferences made from test scores must be demonstrated. This is a fundamental issue of test validity that must be weighed in relation to the ease of availability, cost, and convenience of Internet testing. All of these advantages become irrelevant if scores are used in ways that are not

supported by evidence of validity. The Standards for Ed- ucational and Psychological Testing (American Educa- tional Research Association et al., 1999) provides extensive information about what is needed to justify a particular use of a test. Internet test developers and test users should carefully read the Standards and ensure that their tests are used in appropriate ways.

Although the Internet has considerable potential as a means of testing, assessment will require the integration of information obtained via this medium with other relevant information. For this reason, what is typically available on the Internet is testing in contrast to psychological assess- ment. The test results obtained on the Internet may be inaccurate for a variety of reasons and therefore there must be a professional available to verify the validity of the information and assist in interpretation. Although it is conceivable that future Internet testing methods may ap- proach a psychological assessment, the requirements for appropriate psychological assessment exceed current Inter- net capabilities. Practitioners must, therefore, be mindful of this distinction and utilize the Internet for its strength and augment it with their assessment skills.

Tests can be placed on the Internet in a manner that suggests authority and conveys confidence, although many of these tests may have little to no documentation of reliability and validity, test takers often ignore disclaimers that might appear, and self-administered tests can yield inaccurate interpretations. What is needed is considerably more accountability of the Internet site authors so that the user receives the same kind of protections obtained in traditional assessment sessions. Similarly, test developers and publishing companies that enter into Internet testing programs should ensure that Internet tests are held to the same psychometric standards as traditional tests. This would include, for example, documentation summarizing standardization samples, reliability, and validity as well as additional evidence, such as equivalence of tests delivered on Internet and paper, uniformity of stimulus quality on different displays, and so forth, to ensure high quality test administration.

There are tremendous opportunities provided by In- ternet testing. This article has described many of them, and other innovations await discovery. The importance of this new method of testing and assessment is clear, as is the need for formal guidelines for Internet-based tests and the many ways in which psychologists may use this environ- ment for a variety of applications. We encourage psychol- ogists to think creatively about how their research and practice can be improved by Internet testing. Times have changed as the Internet has brought testing out of the secure environment controlled by a licensed professional psychol- ogist or psychometrician. As testing becomes more acces- sible, it is important to realize that the principles of good testing still apply and the ethical standards for psycholo- gists are still fundamental. Balancing widespread accessi- bility with good practice presents a critical challenge to psychologists for the new millennium. There are many issues that await resolution. Over the years to come, much research and critical thinking will be required to address

161April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

these issues. We believe that psychologists should look forward to this work with excitement and enthusiasm.

REFERENCES

Abbate, J. (1999). Inventing the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ackerman, T. A., Evans, J., Park, K. S., Tamassia, C., & Turner, R.

(1999). Computer assessment using visual stimuli: A test of dermato- logical skin disorders. In F. Drasgow & J. B. Olson-Buchanan (Eds.), Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 137–150). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ainsworth, M. (2002). Credentials check. Retrieved January 11, 2002, from http://www.metanoia.org/imhs/identity.htm

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.

American Psychological Association. (1997). Services by telephone, tele- conferencing, and Internet: A statement by the Ethics Committee of the American Psychological Association. Retrieved January 11, 2002, from http://www.apa.org/ethics/stmnt01.html

American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychol- ogists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 47, 1597–1611. Avail- able from the APA Web site: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code1992.html

Barak, A. (1999). Psychological applications on the Internet: A discipline on the threshold of a new millennium. Applied & Preventive Psychol- ogy, 8, 231–246.

Barak, A., & English, N. (2002). Prospects and limitations of psycholog- ical testing on the Internet. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 19, 65– 89.

Drasgow, F., & Olson-Buchanan J. B. (Eds.). (1999). Innovations in computerized assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Drasgow, F., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Moberg, P. J. (1999). Develop- ment of an interactive video assessment: Trials and tribulations. In F. Drasgow & J. B. Olson-Buchanan (Eds.), Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 177–196). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Epstein, J., Klinkenberg, W. D., Wiley, D., & McKinley, L. (2001). Insuring sample equivalence across Internet and paper-and-pencil as- sessments. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 339 –346.

Funke, U., & Schuler, H. (1998). Validity of stimulus and response components in a video test of social competence. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 6, 115–123.

Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston: Kluwer Academic.

Howard, B., Paridaens, O., & Gramm, B. (2001, 2nd Quarter). Informa-

tion security: Threats and protection mechanisms. Alcatel Telecommu- nications Review, 117–121.

Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., & Parsons, C. K. (1983). Item response theory: Application to psychological measurement. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

Internet Software Consortium. (2001, July). Internet domain survey. Re- trieved January 11, 2002, from http://www.isc.org/ds/WWW-200107/ index. html

Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Matarazzo, J. D. (1990). Psychological assessment versus psychology testing: Validation from Binet to the school, clinic, and courtroom. American Psychologist, 45, 999 –1017.

Mead, A. D., & Drasgow, F. (1993). Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 449 – 458.

Nielsen//NetRatings. (2001). Hot off the net. Retrieved January 11, 2002, from http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/hot_off_the_net.jsp

Nielsen//NetRatings. (2003). Monthly usage statistics. Retrieved May 1, 2003, from http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/news.jsp?section�dat_to

Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (2002). Computer-based advances in assessment. In F. Drasgow & N. Schmitt (Eds.), Measuring and analyzing behavior in organizations (pp. 44 – 87). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2003a). The ever-shifting internet population. Washington DC: Author.

Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2003b). Internet activities. Re- trieved May 1, 2003, from http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/chart .asp?img�Internet_A8.htm

Reno, J. (2000, September). Statement by the Attorney General. Sympo- sium of the Americas: Protecting intellectual property in the digital age. Retrieved January 11, 2002, from http://www.usdoj.gov/archive/ ag/speeches/2000/91200agintellectualprop.htm

Sands, W. A., Waters, B. K., & McBride, J. R. (Eds.). (1997). Comput- erized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Segall, D. O. (2001). ASVAB testing via the Internet. Unpublished manuscript.

Schmit, M. J. (2001, September). Use of psychological measures for online recruitment and pre-employment selection. In L. Frumkin (Chair), Internet-based assessment: State of the art in testing. Sympo- sium conducted at the 109th Annual Conference of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA.

U.S. Department of Commerce. (2002). A nation online: How Americans are expanding their use of the Internet. Washington, DC: Author.

Vispoel, W. P. (1999). Creating computerized adaptive tests of music aptitude: Problems, solutions, and future directions. In F. Drasgow & J. B. Olson-Buchanan (Eds.), Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 151–176). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

162 April 2004 ● American Psychologist

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

1

Zuzana  Bic,  Dr.P.H.,  MUDr.   E-­‐‑mail:  [email protected]  

2019  

PubHlth  1  –  Principles  of  Public  Health   Online  Class, Fall 2019

Department  of  Population  Health  and  Disease  Prevention,  Program  in  Public  Health,   College  of  Health  Sciences,  University  of  California,  Irvine  

Cover design by UCI student FahrzadAlikoza, alumni PubHlth 199 & 198 Public Health for the Corporate World

2

Instructor   Zuzana  Bic,  DrPH,  MUDr.   Email:[email protected]  

Online  office  hours:  Mon.  &  Fri.  from  7:00  9:00  a.m.;   Chat or Zoom

Contact   Information  

Accessing  midterm  &final  exams:contact  Proctor  U  (see  class  website)   Canvas  technical  issues: https://eee.uci.edu/help/faq/general/

TA   Name:  TBA  &information  will  be  on  the  class  website  

Course   Prerequisites  

Official:  N/A   Non-­‐Official:  

1. Self-­‐motivated  and  self-­‐disciplined 2. Able  to  learn  without  personal,  face-­‐to-­‐face  interaction  with  the  instructor 3. Able  to  follow  written  instructions 4. Not  easily  frustrated  when  there  are  technical  problems

Course   Description  

Introduces  the  major  concepts  and  principles  of  public  health  and  the  determinants  of  health   status  in  communities.  Emphasizes  the  ecological  model  that  focuses  on  the  linkages  and   relationships  among  multiple  natural  and  social  determinants  affecting  health.  4  hours  lecture  

Course   Summary  

This  is  an  online  class.  There  are  no  meetings  in  the  classroom.  Audio-­‐lectures,  Power  Point   presentations,  additional  readings,  web-­‐links,  study  materials,  assignments  and  exams  are   online.  Communication  with  instructor  is  by  e-­‐mail,  via  discussion  board  on  the  class  website,   and  on  Skype.  All  assignments  are  submitted,  graded  and  returned  through  the  class  website.  

Course   Material  

E-­‐textbook   Available   Directions  on   class  website  

REQUIRED   TEXT:  Online   version   as   an   E-­‐book   and/or   hard   copy   is   available   at   your  University   bookstore  or  directly  from  the  publishing  house  at:  http://www.jblearning.com/ More information will be on your class website.

INTRODUCTION  TO  PUBLIC  HEALTH,  Mary-­‐Jane  Schneider,  5th  edition,  2017,  ISBN:  978-­‐1-­‐284-­‐ 08923-­‐3,  Jones  and  Bartlett  Publishers,  40  Tall  Pine  Drive,  Sudbury,  MA  01776,  Phone:  978-­‐443-­‐ 5000,www.jbpub.com

Lectures,  links  and  videos  are  available  on  the  class  website.  

Course   Objectives  

COURSE  OBJECTIVES:  

UPON  SUCCESSFUL  COMPLETION  OF  THIS  COURSE,  STUDENTS  WILL  BE  ABLE  TO:   q Understand  “What  is  Public  Health”.  DISCUSSION  FORUM   q Synthesize   and   apply   the   concepts   of   public   health   for   health-­‐related   conditions.   ACTIVE  

PARTICIPATION     q Understand   the   role  of  public  health  by  analyzing   topics  on  public  health  and  society   from  

current   media/current   research,   and   suggest/develop   various   types   of   intervention.   RESEARCH  PAPER  

q Speak  about  public  health  problem  and  evaluate  it  based  on  PH  concepts.  PRESENTATION                WITH  PEER  REVIEW   q Synthesize  and  apply  information  pertaining  to  public  health  in  the  terms  of  science,  politics,  

policy,  epidemiology,  statistics,  prevention  and  society.  MIDTERM  AND  FINAL  EXAM   q Gain  a  stronger  understanding  of  the  concepts  of  public  health.  WEEKLYQUIZZES  

3

Email  Info   • Check  your  uci.edu  email  on  a  regular  and  consistent  basis! • Configure  your  uci.edu  account  to  forward  your  emails  to  your  personal  email  account  if  you

do  not  usually  check  your  uci.edu  email  over  the  summer. • On  all  email  correspondence,  always  include  your  first  and  last  name,  the  class  in  which  you

are  enrolled  in  (“PH  1”  in  either  in  the  text  of  the  message  or  in  the  subject  line),  and  the original  email(s)  if  a  reference  is  necessary.

• Allow  24  hours  for  a  response  from  your  instructor  and/or  TA

Course   Requirements  

Course  Requirements   • Lectures,  Links  and  Videos  each  week • Discussion  Forum  assigned  topic  each  week • Presentation  a  5-­‐minute  audio  narrative  PowerPoint  presentation  with  6-­‐10  slides  and  a

peer  review  evaluation  of  a  classmate’s  presentation • Research  Paper  based  on  the  specific  public  health  problem    and  will  be  the  same  topic

as  presentation   • Active  Participation  each  week • Quizzes  10  questions  each  for  7  quizzes • Exams  midterm  and  final  exam;  $15  fee  for  Proctor  U  for  each  exam • Extra  Credit  up  to  9  points  of  possible  extra  credit

*More  detailed  information  at  the  extended  syllabus  at  your  class  website

Estimated   Weekly  Time   Commitment  

Lectures     Discussions   Research  Paper   Exams   Quizzes   Presentation  with  peer  review   TOTAL  

120  minutes   120  minutes   120  minutes   150  minutes   30  minutes   60  minutes   Approx.  10  hours  each  week  for  assignments  

Note:  Online  classes  should  take  the  SAME  amount  of  time  as  traditional  classroom  courses.  

Due  Dates   Write  down  these  dates  on  your  calendar.  Do  NOT  rely  on  reminders  from  your  instructor!!   Please  note:  All  due  dates  are  in  Pacific  Daylight  Time.  

Week  1   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Quiz  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

Week  2   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Quiz   (Extra  Credit)  Syllabus  Quiz  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.     Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.  

Week  3   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Quiz  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

Week  4   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Quiz  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

4

Week  5   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   MIDTERM  EXAM  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

Week  6   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Presentation   Mandatory  Peer  Review  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday  @  11:00  p.m.   Sunday  @  11:00  p.m  

Week  7   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Quiz  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

Week  8   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Research  Paper  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday  @  11:00  p.m.  

Week  9   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Quiz  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

Week  10   Active  Participation   Discussion  Forum   Quiz  

Every  Sunday  @  11:00  p.m.   Every  Wednesday  (Post  1)  and  every  Sunday  (Post  2)  @  11:00  p.m.   Friday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

Week  11   FINAL  EXAM   Monday:  Open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  

Late  Policy   • Active  Participation/Discussions:  Late  submission  (-­‐  5)  points  will  be  deducted  for  24-­‐hour

period  after  11:00  p.m.  No  acceptance  after  24  hours. • Late  quizzes  will  NOT  be  accepted • Research  Paper:  Late  submission  (-­‐  5)  points  will  be  deducted  for  24-­‐hour  period  after  11:00

p.m.    No  acceptance  after  24  hours. • Presentation:  Late  submission  (-­‐  5)  points  will  be  deducted  for  24-­‐hour  period  after  11:00

p.m.  NO  acceptance  after  24  hours.

Grading   System  

Discussion  Forum  (9%)   Research  Paper  (24%)   7  Quizzes  (2%)   2  Exams  (50%)   Presentation  with  review  (6%)   Active  Participation  (9%)   TOTAL  (100%)  

*Extra  credit  is  added  to  (Active Participation  9%  value)

100  points  (10  points  each  week)   75  points     35  points  (5  points  each  week)   120  points  (60  points  each)   30  points  (25  points  for  presentation;  5  points  for  review)   100  points  (10  points  each  week)   460  points  

*TBA  points

Mandatory   Turnitin   Submission  

Please  note  you  need  to  submit  your  Research  Paper  to  turnitin  via  Canvas  under  Assignments  –   in  your  class  website.  Your  paper  will  be  NOT  accepted  if  it  is  not  submitted  to  turnitin  through   Canvas  link.  This  means  you  must  use  the  Canvas  link  to  submit  your  paper  to  turnitin.  

5

Grading  Scale   NOTE:  Grades  are  not  based  on  a  curve.  Your  grade  will  be  calculated  by  adding  the  points  you   earn  on  each  assignment.  Please  note  each  assignment  has  its  own  VALUE!!!  Grade  is  calculated   as  a  summation  of    %.  

Out  of  100%   Scale:  

A+  ≥    100    >  A  ≥    93.5    >  A-­‐  ≥    90   B+  ≥    86.5    >  B  ≥    83.5    >  B-­‐  ≥    80   C+  ≥    76.5    >  C  ≥    73.5    >  C-­‐  ≥    70  

D+  ≥    66.5    >  D  ≥    63.5    >  D-­‐  ≥    60    >  F  

Lecture   Schedule  

Weeks  1  &  2:   Weeks  3  &  4:   Weeks  5  &  6:   Weeks  7  &  8:   Weeks  9  &  10:  

Chapters  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6  and  links   Chapters  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  12  and  links   Chapters  13,  14,  15,  16,  17,  18  and  links   Chapters  19,  20,  21,  22,  23,  24  and  links   Chapters  25,  26,  27,  28,  29,  30,  31  and  links  

CODE OF CONDUCT: All participants in the course are bound by Code of Conduct, https://aisc.uci.edu/students/academic-integrity/index.php (link to browser) Anyone caught cheating or in any other way in violation of the university policy on academic honesty will receive an F in the class. There are no exceptions to this rule. "Learning, research, and scholarship depend upon an environment of academic integrity and honesty. This environment can be maintained only when all participants recognize the importance of upholding the highest ethical standards. All student work, including quizzes, exams, reports, and papers must be the work of the individual receiving credit. Academic dishonesty includes, for example, cheating on examinations or any assignment, plagiarism of any kind (including improper citation of sources), having someone else take an examination or complete an assignment for you (or doing this for someone else), or any activity in which you represent someone else’s work as your own. Violations of academic integrity will be referred to the Office of Academic Integrity and Student Conduct. The impact on your grade will be determined by the individual instructor’s policies. Please familiarize yourself with UCI’s Academic Integrity Policy (https:// aisc.uci.edu/policies/academic-integrity/index.php) and speak to your instructor if you have any questions about what is and is not allowed in this course."

INSTRUCTIONS

How  to  listen  to  the  LECTURES,  see  video  clips,  access  links  and  print  lecture  notes   1. Log  into  the  class  homepage. 2. Click  on  the  appropriate  lecture,  video  clips  and  links. 3. Click  on  lecture  notes  –  you  may  print  the  information.

How  to  do  the  DISCUSSIONS   1. Discussions:    Week    1-­‐‑2  discussions:  Please  find  your  assigned  group  under  Course  Documents  section 2. Weeks  3-­‐‑10:  You  will  be  automatically  assigned  by  the  TA  through  Canvas. 3. You  will  write  and  respond  to  the  assigned  question  by  submitting  your  Discussion  Post  #1  every  Wednesday

before  11:00  p.m.  (minimum  150  words  –  maximum  200  words  and  type  “word  count”  and  provide  an  accurate word  count  at  the  end  of  the  discussion  post)

4. As  soon  as  you  post  your  discussion  response  in  the  Forum,  you  will  see  your  classmates’  discussion  posts.  Please choose  one  and  write  your  Discussion  Post  #2  in  response  to  it  and  post  it  every  Sunday  before  11:00  p.m. (minimum  150  words  –  maximum  200  words  and  type  “word  count”  and  provide  an  accurate  word  count  at  the end  of  the  discussion  post)

5. Each  “Discussion  Post”  should  include  your  thoughts  and  opinion.  See  rubric  for  more  information.  See  sample under  course  document.

How  to  do  the  ACTIVE  PARTICIPATION   6. Write  1  paragraph  with  your  thoughts,  opinion,  (see  rubric  below  and  sample  at  course  document)  with  a

minimum  of  150  words  and  maximum  of  200  words  and  type  “word  count”  and  provide  an  accurate  word  count at  the  end  of  the  paragraph.

7. Submit  every  Sunday  before  11:00  p.m. How  to  write  and  submit  the  RESEARCH  PAPER  

1. Follow  the  rubric  and  type  your  research  paper  in  a  Word  document  (doc  or  docx)  or  pdf 2. To  submit:  Click  on  class  homepage,  click  on  “Assignments”,  which  is  linked  to  turnitin,  and  upload  your  paper. 3. You  may  submit  your  final  paper  only  once  and  only  paper  submitted  into  canvas  link  will  be  accepted.

6

How  to  take  the  QUIZZES   From  the  homepage,  click  on  “Quizzes”  under  each  week,  open  only  every  Friday  from  1:00am  –  11:00  p.m.  You   will  have  20  minutes  for  10  questions  –  only  T/F  and/or  multiple-­‐‑choice  questions.  

How  to  check  your  GRADE  BOOK  and  your  points   1. Check  your  updated  score  every  Tuesday  after  11:00  p.m.  From  the  class  homepage,  click  on  Gradebook. 2. Please  review  your  points  and  feedback  for  each  assignment.  If  you  have  questions,  please  email  your  instructor

and  request  for  feedback  so  you  do  not  repeat  the  same  mistake  for  the  remaining  assignments. How  to  take  the  EXAMS  

1. Review  the  study  guide  that  is  posted  under  the  Study  Guide  for  midterm  and  for  final  exam. 2. Log  into  the  class  homepage  and  click  on  the  exam  you  need  to  take.  Follow  the  instructions  for  saving  your

answers  and  submitting  your  exam. 3. Please  be  aware  that  the  midterm  and  final  exams  are  open  from  1:00  a.m.  –  11:00  p.m.  You  will  have  60  minutes

for  60  questions  for  each  exam.  The  first  time  you  can  start  to  take  exam  is  at  1:00  a.m.  and  the  last  time  when  you can  start  to  take  the  exam  is  at  11:00  p.m.  You  need  to  finish  at  11:59  p.m.

4. You  will  take  the  midterm  and  final  exam  online,  in  a  proctored  setting.  You  will  be  connected  to  a  live  person during  your  exam.  He  or  she  will  be  there  to  guide  you  through  the  process  and  assist  with  any  technical problems.  Please  read  detailed  instructions  on  the  course  home  page  –  in  the  “Course  Documents”  section.  You need  to  pay  to  Proctor  U  for  your  exams:  $15  for  each  60-­‐‑minute  exam  (60  questions).

5. If  you  would  like  to  discuss  the  questions  you  missed,  you  will  need  to  talk  to  the  instructor  during  office  hours or  send  an  email  to  the  instructor.

How  to  do  the  PRESENTATION  and  PEER  REVIEW   1. You  will  prepare  a  5-­‐‑minute  audio  narrative  with  6-­‐‑10  slides  and  post  your  presentation  on  the  class  website. 2. You  will  follow  the  rubric  and  complete  a  peer  review  evaluation  for  one  selected  presentation  in  your  group. 3. This  peer  review  is  suppose  to  be  a  critical  analysis  of  the  assigned  presentation.  Based  on  the  rubric  -­‐‑  Please

answer  the  categories  in  a  paragraph  style. 4. Please  write  a  (minimum  150  words  –  maximum  200  words  and  type  “word  count”  and  provide  an  accurate

word  count  at  the  end  of  the  per  review. How  to  do  EXTRA  CREDIT  (TBA  points)  

The  information  regarding  extra  credit  will  be  available  at  your  class  website  under  course  documents  and  also  under  specific   week.  

GRADING  CRITERIA   Research  Paper  (75  points)   Point  Deductions   Failed  to  submit  the  assignment   Please  see  rubric  below  

-­‐‑  75  points  

Discussions  (10  points/week)   Failed  to  post  2  discussions   Failed  to  post  1  discussion   Not  reaching  the  minimum  of  150  words  or  going  over  the  maximum  of  200  words     Failed  to  type  “Word  Count”  at  the  end  and  include  an  ACCURATE  number  of  words   Failed  to  include  your  opinions,  thoughts/ideas  in  your  responses  (see  rubric  below)   Failed  to  post  Discussion  Post  #1  by  Wednesday  by  11:00  p.m.  (see  late  policy  page  3)  

-­‐‑  10  points   -­‐‑  5  points   -­‐‑  5  points   -­‐‑  0.5  points   -­‐‑  5  points   -­‐‑5  points  

Active  Participation  (10  points)   Failed  to  submit   Not  reaching  the  minimum  of  150  words  or  going  over  the  maximum  of  200  words     Failed  to  type  “Word  Count”  at  the  end  and  include  an  ACCURATE  number  of  words   Failed  to  include  your  opinions,  thoughts/ideas  in  your  responses  (see  rubric  below)   Failed  to  submit  on  time,  Sunday  at  11:00  p.m.  (see  the  late  policy  page  3)  

-­‐‑  10  points   -­‐‑  5  points   -­‐‑  0.5  points   -­‐‑  5  points   -­‐‑5  points  

7

Scores  for  assignments  are  based  on  the  grading  rubrics  below.  

RESEARCH  PAPER  RUBRIC   You  will  choose  your  topic  from  the  pool  of  topics  at  your  class  website.   Required  Elements   5  Points   Separate  cover  page  

• Must  include  public  health  topic,  title,  name,  ID,  class,  year  and  instructor’s  name /  1  

Total  pages:  3   • Single  spaced  with  minimum  of  2  &  2/3  pages  of  written  text  and  1/3  page  of  references

/  1  

Paragraph  titles   • Paper  must  be  organized  into  paragraphs  with  the  following  titles:  (1)  Public  Health

Problem;  (2)  How  to  Solve  the  Problem;  (3)  Public  Health  in  the  Future

/  1  

Correct  spelling  and  grammar   /  1   Format  12  pt.  font,  Times  New  Roman,  1  to  1.25  in.  margins  on  sides,  top  and  bottom)  

Research  Paper  total  pages:  4  (cover  page  and  3  pages)  

/  1  

References   10  Points   5  references   3  scholarly  references   References  in  AMA/APA  format   All  references  in-­‐text  citations    

/  5   /  3   /  1   /  1  

1. Public  Health  Problem 20  Points   Description  and  analysis  of  the  specific  PH  problem.   Please  include:     #1.  Why  does  this  problem  exist  in  this  society?     #2:  How  did  this  happen   #3:  Where  did  this  happen?     #4:  What  are  the  risks  for  the  community  in  the  future?   #5:  What  are/were  the  etiological  factors?  

/  4   /  4   /4   /4   /4  

2. How  to  Solve  the  Public  Health  Problem 20  Points   Description  of  how  the  problem  was  solved  and  needs  to  be  solved   Please  include:   #1:  Include  specific  2  examples,  such  as  public  health  intervention  programs  and  public  health   policies     #2:  Include  2  examples  of  how  the  problem  was  solved  from  other  cultures/countries  and  from   history/from  the  past    

/  10  

/10  

3. Public  Health  in  the  Future 20  Points   Discussion  on  how  to  prevent  public  health  (PH)  problem   Please  include:   #1:  Conclusion  with  justification  from  research  literature:  what  should  be  done  to  prevent  the   recurrences  of  the  problem  –  give  2  examples   #2:  Add  your  opinion  on  the  PREVENTION  of  this  PH  problem  in  the  future  –  give  2  examples  

/  10  

/10  

Miscellaneous   Point  Deductions                  Each  quotation  mark   -­‐  10  

8

               Late  submission   -­‐  5  for  24-­‐hours  after  11:00  p.m.  NO  acceptance  after  24  hours.                  Turnitin  

1-­‐5%   No  point  deduction   6-­‐10%   -­‐  10   > 11% Score  of  0  on  paper  

ATTENTION:     Please  be  sure  that  your  research  paper  includes  only  your  own  creative  words!  You  are  not  allowed   to  use  your  previous  work  with  a  similar  topic  for  this  paper.  You  are  not  allowed  to  copy  entire   sentences  from  published  sources.  Quotation  marks  are  not  allowed.  Please  explore  the  turnitin   website:  http://turnitin.com/  

TOTAL   75  Points  

RUBRIC  FOR  DISCUSSION  POST  #1  AND  DISCUSSION  POST  #2   Points   Category   Explanation   5   Thought-­‐‑provoking  or  challenges  new  

idea  informed  by  reading  or  lesson   This  rating  is  given  to  posts  that  present  a  new  idea  or  challenges   others  posts  based  on  information  from  lesson  or  textbook  or  other   scholarly  source.  

3   Opinion  based  on  information  from   reading  or  lesson  

This  rating  is  given  when  a  person  writes  a  fact-­‐‑based  forum  post.   The  facts  could  come  from  a  lesson  or  a  chapter  from  the  textbook,  or   another  scholarly  external  source.  

2   Answered  as  required,  but  nothing   more  

This  rating  is  given  when  a  post  answers  all  parts  of  my  question,  but   does  nothing  more.  May  show  an  absence  of  depth  or  thought.  

0   Inappropriate  or  insufficient  postings   This  rating  is  given  to  posts  that  do  not  meet  my  grading   requirements.  Used  for:  agreement  without  new  substance,  general   humor,  posts  that  do  not  fit  into  the  current  discussion.  

RUBRIC  FOR  ACTIVE  PARTICIPATION  FOR  WRITTEN  PART   Points   Category   Explanation   10   Thought-­‐‑provoking  or  challenges  new  

idea  informed  by  reading  or  lesson   This  rating  is  given  to  posts  that  present  a  new  idea  or  challenges   others  posts  based  on  information  from  lesson  or  textbook  or  other   scholarly  source.  

6   Opinion  based  on  information  from   reading  or  lesson  

This  rating  is  given  when  a  person  writes  a  fact-­‐‑based  forum  post.   The  facts  could  come  from  a  lesson  or  a  chapter  from  the  textbook,  or   another  scholarly  external  source.  

4   Answered  as  required,  but  nothing   more  

This  rating  is  given  when  a  post  answers  all  parts  of  my  question,  but   does  nothing  more.  May  show  an  absence  of  depth  or  thought.  

0   Inappropriate  or  insufficient  postings   This  rating  is  given  to  posts  that  do  not  meet  my  grading   requirements.  Used  for:  agreement  without  new  substance,  general   humor,  posts  that  do  not  fit  into  the  current  discussion.  

0  or  10   Only  if  there  is  a  question,  this  will   apply  

Correct  or  incorrect  answer  

PRESENTATION  AND  PEER  REVIEW  RUBRIC   LOGISTICS   8  Points  

9

Clarity,organization,  informative  level  and  presentation  style   Topic  on  the  title  slide   Full  name   Time  limit  (5  -­‐  6  minutes)   Presentation  style   Clarity   No.  of  slides:  5  -­‐  10  

/  1   /  1   /  2   /  1   /  1   /  2  

PRESENTATION  SLIDES   17  Points   Final  presentation  should  include  the  following:   1. Public  Health  Problem Description  and  analysis  of  the  specific  PH  problem. Please  include: #1.  Why  does  this  problem  exist  in  this  society? #2:  How  did  this  happen, #3:  Where  did  this  happen? #4:  What  are  the  risks  for  the  community  in  the  future? #5:  What  are/were  the  etiological  factors?

2. How  to  solve  the  Public  Health  problem How  the  problem  needs  to  be  solved  or  how  was  it  solved  with specific  examples  referenced. Please  include: #1:  Description  of  2  strategies,  such  as  PH  intervention  programs and  PH  policy #2:  Please  add  2  examples  of  how  the  problem  was  solved  from other  cultures/countries  or  from  history

3. Public  Health  in  the  Future How  to  prevent  the  PH  problem. Please  include: #1:  Conclusion  with  justification  from  research  literature:  what should  be  done  to  PREVENT  the  reoccurrence  of  the  PH  problem. #2:  Add  your  opinion  on  the  PREVENTION  of  this  PH  problem  in the  future.

4. References Use  AMA/APA  citation  format.

1. Public  Health  problem

#1:  Why?   #2:  How?   #3:  Where?   #4:  What?   #5:  Factors  

2. How  to  solve  the  problem

#1:  2  strategies  

#2:  2  examples  

3. Public  health  in  the  future

#1:  Prevent  

#2:  Opinion  

4. References  on  the  slide

/1   /1   /1   /1   /1  

/2.5  

/2.5  

/  2.5  

/  2.5  

/2  

PEER  REVIEW   5  Points   Check  if  all  components  are  included  in  another  presentation.   This  review  is  suppose  to  be  a  critical  analysis  of  the  assigned   presentation.  Please  answer  the  following  categories  in  a   paragraph  style.   #1:PH  problem   #2:How  to  solve  the  problem   #3:Public  Health  in  the  future   #4:References   #5:  Additional  thoughts,  opinion  

“word  count”  word  count  listed  at  the  end   word  count  of  a  minimum  of  150  or  not  going  over  the  maximum   word  count  of  200  

Peer  Review  

/0.5   /1   /0.5   /0.5   /1  

/0.5   /1  

10

TOTAL   30  Points   (25  points  for  presentation;  5  points  for  peer   review)  

SOME  EXAMPLES  OF  THE  CASES  AND  TOPICS  TO  BE  COVERED  IN  PUBLIC  HEALTH  1  

What  is  Public  Health?   Public  Health:  Science,  Politics,  and  Prevention  

Analytical  Methods  of  Public  Health   Epidemiology:  The  Basic  of  Science  of  Public  Health   The  Role  of  Data  in  Public  Health    

Biomedical  Basis  of  Public  Health   The  Resurgence  of  Infectious  Diseases  

Social  and  Behavioral  Factors  in  Health   Do  People  Choose  Their  Own  Health?     How  Psychosocial  Factors  Affect  Health  Behavior  

Environmental  Issues  in  Public  Health   A  Clean  Air  Environment:  The  Basis  of  Public  Health     Safe  Food  and  Drugs:  An  Ongoing  Regulatory  Battle     Population:  The  Ultimate  Environmental  Health  Issue  

Medical  Care  and  Public  Health   Why  the  U.S.  Medical  System  Needs  Reform   Public  Health  and  the  Aging  Population    

The  Future  of  Public  Health   Public  Health  in  the  Twenty-­‐First  Century:  Achievements  and  Challenges