Once the assessment is designed and in a format suitable for previewing, it is important for states to let sensitivity review teams examine the assessment (in the format in which students will see the test). Reviews by these teams are common practice in states, and are often encouraged by test vendors. When creating bias and content review teams, it is important to involve members of major language groups, disability groups, and support groups. Grade level experts, representatives of major cultural and disability groups, researchers, and teaching professionals all make up an effective review team.
Reviewers will need the following information to perform a careful and comprehensive review:
Bias and design issues may arise in test development and are not problematic if caught by review teams. Sensitivity reviewers are charged to flag items that may cause “problems for certain subgroups, where the "problems" are due to their subgroup status rather than their knowledge of the content. An efficient way to "flag" items is to use a review sheet, which provides reviewers an opportunity to mark potential issues with items, thus providing opportunities for further discussion among reviewers. By using a structured form, reviewers are more likely to provide specific feedback to test vendors. Such feedback allows for items to be re-examined for design issues, rather than (as is often the case) summarily rejected for unclear reasons. When using structured forms, item reviewers then create a "win-win" situation for advocates and vendors. In other words, they are able to give test vendors specific information about what may be an issue in items. Vendors can then determine whether changes can be made to items without having to remove items from item banks entirely. Item-specific review and whole test review forms can be used for item reviews.
Next: Universal Design Step 4