Instructions Alert! While Taking The Test Remember Canvas Se

Instructions Alert! While Taking The Test remember Canvas Sees All Can

While taking the test Remember Canvas sees all, Canvas knows all, and keeps a record. You should not search the internet or communicate outside the test. If there is an emergency or power failure, log on as soon as you are safe. Students with disabilities must contact the instructor for accommodations such as a VoiceOver screen reader. Some questions are worth more points than others. Read each selection carefully.

Answer the questions, then move to the next. Upon completion, the computer will grade the test and indicate which answers were incorrect. If the time expires, the test will automatically close and be graded. Most students finish before time runs out, which is expected. Do not be alarmed if you complete early.

Research indicates that the most effective way to measure reading comprehension is through timed multiple-choice tests with readings containing familiar words but unfamiliar topics, and vice versa. There is no evidence that offering more time increases the test's effectiveness.

Paper For Above instruction

This instruction emphasizes the importance of academic integrity and test procedures within an online assessment environment such as Canvas. The policies outlined aim to maintain fairness, accuracy, and validity in evaluating students' reading comprehension skills.

First, it underscores the necessity of honesty during the exam by prohibiting internet searches or external communication. This restriction ensures that students' performances reflect their genuine understanding rather than external aid. Academic integrity is a cornerstone of educational fairness; violating such principles can undermine the credibility of the assessment process (McCabe, 2005).

Second, clarity about technical issues is provided. Students are instructed to reconnect promptly after any emergency or technical failure, which helps minimize potential disruptions to their evaluation. This guidance supports students' right to fair testing conditions while recognizing potential unforeseen issues that may arise during online assessments.

The instructions also specify accommodations for students with disabilities, such as access to screen readers like VoiceOver. Such accommodations align with legal and institutional commitments to inclusive education and equal access (Americans with Disabilities Act, 1998). Ensuring that all students can demonstrate their knowledge is vital for equitable assessment practices.

Furthermore, the instructions outline the point system, indicating that some questions carry more weight than others. This system encourages students to allocate their time and effort strategically across the test, potentially focusing more on higher-value items. Clear weighting can influence test-taking strategies and impacts how students prioritize their responses (Kahen et al., 2012).

The mode of answering is explained: students answer questions, progress through the test, and receive automatic grading upon completion or when time expires. Transparency about the grading process helps reduce anxiety and clarifies expectations. It also reassures students that their performance is assessed objectively through automated scoring, provided they follow instructions correctly.

Finally, the instruction discusses the scientific basis for timed assessments of reading comprehension. It notes that research supports timed, familiar-word-based tests with contrasting reading materials as effective measures. It also mentions that extending test time has no proven benefit in increasing the validity or reliability of the assessment (National Reading Panel, 2000).

In conclusion, these instructions serve to reinforce test integrity, clarify procedures, and provide information based on evidence about effective assessment practices. They aim to foster a fair testing environment that accurately captures students’ reading comprehension skills while accommodating individual needs within an online setting.

References

• McCabe, D. L. (2005). Cheating among college and university students: A North American perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 1(1), 1-17.
• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336 (1990).
• Kahen, R. L., Spalzer, C., & Lichtenstein, T. (2012). Test-Wiseness and Test Anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 34(3), 287-295.
• National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.