Yes, according to ASQ web page, the member rates for various certifications are going up by another USD 30 and Non member rates up to USD 75 !
http://www.asq.org/portal/page?_pageid=33,32429,33_32570&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

1. Do you think this cost will affect exam takers?
Iam not sure whether this difference will affect North American exam takers. However, I think this will affect the growth of International exam takers from developing countries.

2. If ASQ has no other option but to increase, what additional value added service you think could be provided by ASQ?
I think, ASQ could send the Strength, Weakness report to all exam takers. Currently ASQ sends to those who are not successful in the exam.
There could be many exam takers who have passed on the margin of Error. There could be many who scored extremely well in one area and poor in the other area, yet passed the exam. Hence, all of us need a feedback to improve on our understanding of BOK irrespective of Exam outcome. ASQ could offer this value added service for all exam takers.

Your thoughts on my question 1 and 2 ?

Regards,
Govind.

Govind,

As to do with #1, I really don't think it will deter anybody sitting for the exams, they already cost an arm and a leg, why not throw in a big toe;)

As to #2, I wish I could have seen the results of my exam, as said, I would hav liked to know my strengths and weaknsses.

Al...

Yes, according to ASQ web page, the member rates for various certifications are going up by another USD 30 and Non member rates up to USD 75 !
http://www.asq.org/portal/page?_pageid=33,32429,33_32570&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

1. Do you think this cost will affect exam takers?
Iam not sure whether this difference will affect North American exam takers. However, I think this will affect the growth of International exam takers from developing countries.

2. If ASQ has no other option but to increase, what additional value added service you think could be provided by ASQ?
I think, ASQ could send the Strength, Weakness report to all exam takers. Currently ASQ sends to those who are not successful in the exam.
There could be many exam takers who have passed on the margin of Error. There could be many who scored extremely well in one area and poor in the other area, yet passed the exam. Hence, all of us need a feedback to improve on our understanding of BOK irrespective of Exam outcome. ASQ could offer this value added service for all exam takers.

Your thoughts on my question 1 and 2 ?

Regards,
Govind.


1. Those who are serious about taking the exam will still do so. They likely pay more than this increase for gasoline to commute to work anyway. So, those who think certification will help them to earn more, or be more competetive in the job market, will continue to pursue it.

2a. I also think we should be given a breakdown of how we did, even if we pass. I know I am weak in statistics, but for some reason passed the CQE anyway (I am stronger in qualitative than quantitative subjects). I would like to know just what areas to study harder on if I took the test again, since I would unlikely collect enough points for recert.

2b. ASQ should work harder to reach the small business community, who thinks quality is a product or service aspect measure--a hot hamburger, clean store, taxi on time, etc. This is especially important to nonmanufacturers, as I described in my SBIR report. ASQ's overall focus is still on high end product/service design and well-developed systems, even though the vast majority of firms are very small, and think of different challeges, such as employee turnover and Workmen Comp costs. ASQ does a great job in preaching to the choir, but a frankly lousy job in outreach to the very early stages of business performance enhancement. ASQ needs to start at the beginning, and jettison the term "quality" because it's so widely misunderstood.

ASQ will likely lose me because of this. My CQE cert expires in 2006, and CQA in 2005. I last held a job using these certs in 2001. They are mysterious to the market I am trying to penetrate as a small business performance advisor. Manufacturing shrinkage has made these certs practically obsolete, unless we can do a better job of marketing to the businesses still here. I'm working on educating this market and prying open a niche, but I could use help from the organization that is supposed to really understand the need for what we do.

Oddly, when a supplier to one of the big automotive OEMs attempts to raise his price, he encounters great resistance because the OEMs always try to ensure there is a competitor lurking who can take the business at a lower price.

As ASQ sets itself up as a sole source monopoly, it doesn't bother to justify ANY of its price raises. There is a point at which the marketplace finds or creates an alternate (or modifies its operations to do without) to offset the power of the monopoly.

Essentially, this happened with 6S certifications and ASQ jumped into 6S to get a piece of the pie. (Note that in many cases, ASQ has been undercutting the prices other providers charged for 6S certification.)

My guess is that many folks who may have to pay their own fees for ASQ certification will think long and hard to determine if there is a real cost benefit to holding the certificate before spending those dollars.

I note many organizations are no longer paying ASQ dues for their employees and even more are refusing to pay for certification exams.

If Jennifer's information is valid in other parts of the country as well - then many small organizations have no knowledge about ASQ certifications and therefore see no dollar value of such certification or the holder of one to their organization.

Caveat - please note: the Body of Knowledge represented by the ASQ certifications is still good and valid. Soon, some smart entrepreneur (maybe even one of you reading this screed) will say, "Hey! Study that Body of Knowledge, but come to me and take the test for half price. I'll give you a certificate." If that somebody has a good organization (some internet college, perhaps?) with a fair reputation, a lot of the current test takers who just want some sort of certificate to show they know the Body of Knowledge may abandon ASQ and flock to the new guy on the block.

It could happen. As a long-time ASQ member, I know there is every chance there are practitioners without certificates who are much more skilled and adept than those who do have certificate. (It only stands to reason that if there are non-college graduates who are more skilled and adept in academic fields than some (not all) college graduates, there must be a similar situation regarding ASQ certificates.)

So, the question really is, "Is ASQ pricing its product (certification) so high it will invite competitors back into the business of selling certificates at a lower price?"

I think Wes nailed it in the context that is often overlooked, which of course is body of knowlege. Once one has this, in a business climate that no longer recognizes a certification (I've seen an awful lot of deer-in-the-headlight looks) or thinks it doesn't apply to them, recert efforts and expense may become a questionable value.

2nd, this is a competetive labor environment, and the individual is being asked more often to assume personal risk for professional development. Workers will continue to accept this risk while the job market favors the employer, but I am reading they are feeling attracted to organizations who invest in their employees' readiness. These employers are said to enjoy higher productivity, can reduce costly defects more easily, and have lower employee turnover. When the labor market pendulum reverses and competition for labor preoccupies management as well as a push for lower costs, these investors in workforces will likely have the last laugh (see Business Week's October 25 article about George David of United Technologies Corp.--"The Unsung CEO").

As the public's understanding of Quality moves away from Fitness For Use and into an identity more like Business Performance, there may be increased certification coverage. There are schools that offer degrees in quality management; we need to see more of the awareness creep into MBA programs, too. It's beginning, where courses in ethics are now being demanded and I even read about a Harvard Business School seminar on Breakthrough Customer Satisfaction--happy gasp! :applause:

This may take some time, since I noted a distinct dropoff in awareness levels among rural small business owners during my SBIR project. Where awareness is low, demand for the BOK is lower, and certfications mean squat. IMO, ASQ would benefit from recognizing this and making an outreach effort that mines demand from the nonmanufacturing small business sectors, the largest in the U.S. but an almost utterly neglected market.

2. If ASQ has no other option but to increase, what additional value added service you think could be provided by ASQ?
I think, ASQ could send the Strength, Weakness report to all exam takers. Currently ASQ sends to those who are not successful in the exam.
There could be many exam takers who have passed on the margin of Error. There could be many who scored extremely well in one area and poor in the other area, yet passed the exam. Hence, all of us need a feedback to improve on our understanding of BOK irrespective of Exam outcome. ASQ could offer this value added service for all exam takers.

Your thoughts on my question 1 and 2 ?

Regards,
Govind.
Well, my thoughts on # 2 anyway=
I do not think highly of the feedback the last time I failed an exam (I had a 510 where a 520+ was passing). The feedback was basically targeted at the BOK sections and did not tell me what specifically was incorrect (kind of like saying you want to deliver a package to a friend across the country but only want to give the shipper the name of the city and state they live in, nothing else, no name, no address)... I think it would be more appropriate for ASQ to identify specific questions that were answered incorrectly (all of them) along with the correct answer. Then (at least) I would be able to learn what I answered wrong, learn why my answer was wrong, and ultimately not get it wrong the next time. This would be helpful even if you passed an exam... it would be a measure of how well you really did.

just my :2cents:

Also, if they were more forthcoming with the strength / weakness details, more people might be willing to re-take an exam after their certificate expires instead of going all-out to get the credits they need so they can avoid a re-certification exam (I know many who opt for the CEU's instead of re-taking the exam. I have heard most of my friends with ASQ Cert's say they are afraid to re-take it because they don't know how well they actually did last time)...

E

As I see it, two goals and philosophies are in conflict when we consider the question of identifying the exact questions which were wrong and what the correct answer should have been.


The test creator doesn't want to endanger the integrity of future test sessions by identifying questions which may be difficult, because future test takers may learn of them and skew the results on subsequent tests.

The test taker wants a benchmark to determine whether he misinterpreted information in the Body of Knowledge or whether he just didn't study it or even whether he just made a foolish error in marking the answer.
The conflict between the two views arises because of the nature of administering an international test. The Scholastic Aptitude Test tries to resolve this conflict by giving the test takers a numeric score versus a pass/fail report. In addition to a numeric score, Educational Testing Service also reports a percentile rank to show where the raw score places in relation to other test takers. A numeric grade would help folks make a determination whether to study and retake the test rather than work to get ceu (continuing education credits) to avoid retaking the test. Obviously, it would be more helpful to the test taker to have more details, but I doubt folks would be happy at the extra cost involved to create completely new exams for every session.

Other ideas on resolving the conflict between test maker and test taker?

Yes, according to ASQ web page, the member rates for various certifications are going up by another USD 30 and Non member rates up to USD 75 !
http://www.asq.org/portal/page?_pageid=33,32429,33_32570&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

1. Do you think this cost will affect exam takers?
Iam not sure whether this difference will affect North American exam takers. However, I think this will affect the growth of International exam takers from developing countries.

2. If ASQ has no other option but to increase, what additional value added service you think could be provided by ASQ?
I think, ASQ could send the Strength, Weakness report to all exam takers. Currently ASQ sends to those who are not successful in the exam.
There could be many exam takers who have passed on the margin of Error. There could be many who scored extremely well in one area and poor in the other area, yet passed the exam. Hence, all of us need a feedback to improve on our understanding of BOK irrespective of Exam outcome. ASQ could offer this value added service for all exam takers.

Your thoughts on my question 1 and 2 ?

Regards,
Govind.

I forwarded this thread link yesterday with subsequent discussions to Ms.Sally Harthun of ASQ, Certification Offerings for her feedback.
Ms.Harthun replied within a day and kindly agreed to share this feedback with Elsmar.
Regards,
Govind.

Reply from Ms.Harthun:

"Hi Govind - Thanks for sending this to us. I've asked our Psychometrician, Sheila Connolly to comment on some of the aspects of the threads. Here is her response:

Each time the Certification Board is asked to make a decision on the basis of cut-score study data, we review the types of error that can be made: 1) passing someone who should fail; and 2) Failing someone who should pass. In every instance, the Cert Board has made the decision that it is better to fail someone who should have passed. Therefore, the kind of "margin" mentioned in the thread below is exactly the opposite of what is true. Candidates do not pass on the margin of error; in fact, they fail on the margin of error.

With regard to providing "strengths & weaknesses" reports to passers, we have considered a number of different ideas in this area, but the Standards for Psychological and Educational Testing which we use as our basis for the ASQ examination programs has many cautions about reporting such information, as it can contribute to test misuse. One example of test misuse would be when 2 employees from a company take the CQx test. One of them passes with a score of 88 and the other passes with a score of 90. The "misuse" comes in when someone uses the information from that test result and decides that the candidate who scored 90 is more qualified - is a "better" CQx" - than the employee who scored 88. The fact that both of them passed the exam is all the employer needs to know. Both of them have been successful in the CQx body of knowledge, and both are certified accordingly.

Another aspect of this example is that no one knows whether the person who scored 88 got five very difficult questions right, while the person who scored 90 didn't get any of those hard questions right but did score well on a series of "easy" questions, and scored well enough on those relatively easy questions to get 2 more right than the person who scored 88.


As far as the price increase:
When reviewing the Certification fees, a decision was made to increase them for a number of reasons. Among them, the fact that the fees have not kept pace with the increased cost of administering the exams, the certification fees have not increased for over three years, and when benchmarking other associations, ASQ's certificate fees are still among the lowest. As the prices aren't increasing until January 1st, we are trying to give examinees the opportunity and as much time as possible to apply now before the increase for members ($30) becomes effective. The increase between member and the nonmember fee is to encourage people to join as members.

I am sure you will agree that the ASQ Certifications are still a great value for the relatively modest fee charged.

I hope this information helps put to rest at least some of the myths people have about Cert. Please let me know if you have any other questions!

Thanks again for your help.

Sally"

I don't really buy the part about increased costs. I wonder if they would publish those costs? Is there "fat" in the cost? Most of the tests I'm aware of are administered by volunteers. I note the GMAT is now administered via computer rather than pen and pencil plus paper. Is there a possibility the same places which administer GMAT could do ASQ tests for a reduced fee? (they are just "service centers" after all)

I wonder if just their psychometrician holds that view or if it is a prevailing view among most in that profession.
psychometrics:
The branch of psychology that deals with the design, administration, and interpretation of quantitative tests for the measurement of psychological variables such as intelligence, aptitude, and personality traits. Also called psychometry. Question:
Is an ASQ certification test a test of aptitude? or a test of comprehension? In my view it is more of a comprehension test than anything else. Any views on this?

Whose tests were they using as benchmarks? It seems to me when we talk about benchmarks, it becomes a question of "what the market will bear" rather than "true cost." What do some others think?

I
Question:
Is an ASQ certification test a test of aptitude? or a test of comprehension? In my view it is more of a comprehension test than anything else. Any views on this?



Wes:

Because of the breadth of the BoK, especially for the CQE and CQMgr, I think that the test has to be one of comprehension. Once that comprehension is achieved, the true value of that knowledge is the application of the tools and ideas contained within the BoK. In the cases of Q pros, that application is often equivalent to aptitude, agreed?

So, it would be difficult, IMO, to test aptitude in any meaningful way, unless we limited the scope of the test (automotive only for one?). Maybe the closest to aptitude testing on the CQx's are the essay questions on the CQMgr, which I thought had some nice, big, holes for unsuspecting test takers to fall into. When I detected some tricks (which I will admit may have been paranoia), my approach suddenly became one of "simple is best". Hardly a good mindset to have while my aptitude is measured.

As far as the cost issue goes, I do think that the market plays a role. I sure would like to see some effort expended on ASQ's part to promote the certifications outside of the quality cloister, including small business, as our colleague Ms. Kirley has discussed. Demand for CQx's would then increase the value of the certification, negating resistance to the cost.

A comparison of the expected pay differential of a CQx/non CQx versus the benchmark differentials of other certification schemes would be useful. Then, using that ratio, a comparison of the cost of the exams could be made. Hmmm, maybe that would be an interesting article for the Cove?

1. Do you think this cost will affect exam takers?
2. If ASQ has no other option but to increase, what additional value added service you think could be provided by ASQ?

I just submit my ASQ membership & CQE/CQA fees as expenses. Amazingly, this has never been questioned and the fees are always paid. I consider it a non cash benefit. I assumed everyone did this?

I feel that the CQA is now much devalued in TS automotive world due to the Ford specific auditor requirements. Ford has basically said my CQA is not as good as a 3 day course. I disagree, but am powerless. One thing ASQ could do is to try to resolve this with Ford to re-value my CQA.

I just submit my ASQ membership & CQE/CQA fees as expenses. Amazingly, this has never been questioned and the fees are always paid. I consider it a non cash benefit. I assumed everyone did this?

I feel that the CQA is now much devalued in TS automotive world due to the Ford specific auditor requirements. Ford has basically said my CQA is not as good as a 3 day course. I disagree, but am powerless. One thing ASQ could do is to try to resolve this with Ford to re-value my CQA.

Caster,
Thanks for that feedback.
Certification Fee:
Iam very concerned even with the current certification fee when it comes to exam takers from developing countries. This increase makes it even worse.
Will this result in decline of international exam takers? We have to wait and see.
ASQ Certification is certainly an advantage while the employer is screening applications. If an exam taker did study the BOK thoroughly, not just prepare for passing the exam, then the knowledge obtained is a life long asset.

Your concern on CQA value:
I have completed 5 day lead assessor courses for ISO9001:1994, later 2 days for ISO9001:2000, 5 day courses for ISO14001, TL9000, QS9000, 3 day for SW-CMM before taking my CQA exam. All these courses put up to 80% emphasize on standards and interpretation. These courses prepare the auditor to interpret the standards properly.
CQA Body of Knowledge (BOK) is standard independent. Obtaining CQA will not replace a 3 day auditor course for ISO9001 or TS or TL9000. CQA provides the knowledge for Audit Management (any standard). I have to admit, after studying for CQA, I got a better clarity on audit management and protocol.
Regards,
Govind.

I don't really buy the part about increased costs. I wonder if they would publish those costs? Is there "fat" in the cost? Most of the tests I'm aware of are administered by volunteers. I note the GMAT is now administered via computer rather than pen and pencil plus paper. Is there a possibility the same places which administer GMAT could do ASQ tests for a reduced fee? Wes,

Administering and scoring the exams every three months is only part of the cost. For example, every exam that is given has to be reviewed before it is printed. Most weekends you will find one or two teams of people in Milwaukee doing that job. All are volunteers who hold that particular certification, but ASQ does pay their travel expenses. The exam reviews that I have been part of are usually a dozen or more volunteers who are there for two days. Some of those hidden costs include air fares and hotel rooms for those people.

Every certification exam also has a review and maintenance cycle for the test questions. ("Items", in case SC, MM or MR are reading.:D ) The questions in the pool for each exam are regularly reviewed for correctness, applicability to the body of knowledge, and traceability to a specific reference listed in the BOK study guide. Also, new questions are developed and have to go though a review before they get into the pool. Again, this is all done by teams of volunteers who hold that certification. You can probably guess that this causes major work at two times - when the BOK is refreshed after its review cycle, and in the case of a new certification.

Question:
Is an ASQ certification test a test of aptitude? or a test of comprehension? In my view it is more of a comprehension test than anything else. Any views on this?
For each certification, the Body of Knowledge on the web and in the brochure lists the expected level of understanding -- knowledge, comprehension, application and so on. The applicable levels are determined by the volunteer committees who review (or develop) the BOK. In the case of the CCT that I have been involved in, since that was a new certification there was major input to this aspect of it from surveys of the industry, and of ASQ members and other people who could be identified as working in applicable areas.

Whose tests were they using as benchmarks? It seems to me when we talk about benchmarks, it becomes a question of "what the market will bear" rather than "true cost." What do some others think?
Now that's a question I can't answer - not enough data or experience!
--------------------------------
I guess the bottom line is this - the certifications with their bodies of knowledge and test questions are developed and maintained by volunteer ASQ members with input from business and industry. The staff at headquarters does the very difficult job of managing all of this, pulling everything together, performing the statistical analyses required to ensure that this cycle's test is equivalent to the previous ones, and spending half of many weekends with the volunteers doing what can be best described as attempting to herd a room full of cats.

Every certification has to be sponsored by one or more ASQ Divisions and approved by the Board of Directors.
Every certification has to fill a business/industry need.
The body of knowledge of every certification is regularly reviewed by teams of ASQ volunteers.
Every question on every exam has been written by a certified ASQ member and has been reviewed by several teams of ASQ volunteers. (In the ones I have been involved in, each question has been reviewed at least 5 or 6 times before a candidate sees it on an exam. And we kill many that are never seen.)
All of the volunteers in these processes are certified in the applicable area. In the case of a new certification, they have to be qualified as subject matter experts by the sponsoring Division. And the only thing the volunteers get from it is a couple of recertification points and the satisfaction of a job well done.
Incidentally, there is always a need for volunteers ... so if anyone wants to spend one or two weekends (Friday-Saturday) in Milwaukee just let the folks in the Certification Department know - or the Certification Chair of your division.

I just submit my ASQ membership & CQE/CQA fees as expenses. Amazingly, this has never been questioned and the fees are always paid. I consider it a non cash benefit. I assumed everyone did this?

Caster,

Just one voice speaking here ... I have been an ASQ member since early 1991 and I now have three certifications. I have yet to work for an organization that will pay for anything to do with ASQ.

I pay for the annual dues, division memberships and extra journals.
I pay for my certifications and recertifications.
I pay for the annual convention including all of the travel costs. (Which is why I am always griping to them about the $$$200 per night hotel rooms!!! That is NOT low-cost. This year I found an under-$100 hotel and walked the half-mile to the convention center every day.)
I am in the process of starting my own company, and IF I make enough money then that will pay for everything ... finally!

Graeme
---------------------

Wes's remarks in blue.

QUOTE Originally posted by Graeme
Wes,

Administering and scoring the exams every three months is only part of the cost. For example, every exam that is given has to be reviewed before it is printed. Most weekends you will find one or two teams of people in Milwaukee doing that job. All are volunteers who hold that particular certification, but ASQ does pay their travel expenses. The exam reviews that I have been part of are usually a dozen or more volunteers who are there for two days. Some of those hidden costs include air fares and hotel rooms for those people.

Every certification exam also has a review and maintenance cycle for the test questions. ("Items", in case SC, MM or MR are reading.:D ) The questions in the pool for each exam are regularly reviewed for correctness, applicability to the body of knowledge, and traceability to a specific reference listed in the BOK study guide. Also, new questions are developed and have to go though a review before they get into the pool. Again, this is all done by teams of volunteers who hold that certification. You can probably guess that this causes major work at two times - when the BOK is refreshed after its review cycle, and in the case of a new certification.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Right! I expect all that and more. As a member, I'd like to know the following at a minimum:

What is the itemized cost of all that for each exam? (hard and soft costs)
What is the gross income from each exam?
Is ASQ breaking even, making money, or subsidizing exams?
Does income from any exam subsidize other exams?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

For each certification, the Body of Knowledge on the web and in the brochure lists the expected level of understanding -- knowledge, comprehension, application and so on. The applicable levels are determined by the volunteer committees who review (or develop) the BOK. In the case of the CCT that I have been involved in, since that was a new certification there was major input to this aspect of it from surveys of the industry, and of ASQ members and other people who could be identified as working in applicable areas.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Quote: (Originally Posted by Wes Bucey) Whose tests were they using as benchmarks? It seems to me when we talk about benchmarks, it becomes a question of "what the market will bear" rather than "true cost." What do some others think?

What I meant was "were benchmarks compared for price in relation to complexity of test, cost of preparation, and number of test takers?"
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Now that's a question I can't answer - not enough data or experience!
--------------------------------
I guess the bottom line is this - the certifications with their bodies of knowledge and test questions are developed and maintained by volunteer ASQ members with input from business and industry. The staff at headquarters does the very difficult job of managing all of this, pulling everything together, performing the statistical analyses required to ensure that this cycle's test is equivalent to the previous ones, and spending half of many weekends with the volunteers doing what can be best described as attempting to herd a room full of cats.

Every certification has to be sponsored by one or more ASQ Divisions and approved by the Board of Directors.
Every certification has to fill a business/industry need.
The body of knowledge of every certification is regularly reviewed by teams of ASQ volunteers.
Every question on every exam has been written by a certified ASQ member and has been reviewed by several teams of ASQ volunteers. (In the ones I have been involved in, each question has been reviewed at least 5 or 6 times before a candidate sees it on an exam. And we kill many that are never seen.)
All of the volunteers in these processes are certified in the applicable area. In the case of a new certification, they have to be qualified as subject matter experts by the sponsoring Division. And the only thing the volunteers get from it is a couple of recertification points and the satisfaction of a job well done.
Incidentally, there is always a need for volunteers ... so if anyone wants to spend one or two weekends (Friday-Saturday) in Milwaukee just let the folks in the Certification Department know - or the Certification Chair of your division.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
To my knowledge, I have never publicly or privately faulted any ASQ certification test regarding whether it adequately reflected the Body of Knowledge, not have I heard anyone else do so.

I do not even fault the prices charged. I merely want to know the details of how the pricing is derived. From time to time I have had folks say, "What right do you have to that information?" My reply is that:

I am a member of the organization.
I pay my own dues.
As a member, I am affected by any scandal which may arise in the ASQ, just as medical doctors were affected by the AMA scandal when AMA staffers cut a financial deal with "Chainsaw Al" Dunlap when he was CEO of Sunbeam.
Certainly, if ASQ is gouging prices or unnecessarily subsidizing the costs of creating and adminstering certification tests, not only I, but every other member could be affected in some way, whether by how much we paid or whether our dues are going to subsidize programs without our knowledge and consent. It is not enough to say, "we have expenses." We members should know what they are, EXACTLY.

ASQ certification rates are going up for some examinations and no changes for some exams.
The increase is about 30 to 35 dollars.
It is possible to save about 100 dollars in 2005 if you plan to register for 3 tests just before cut off date of 31st Dec 04. Once you pay fees at current rates before the rate increase, you can protect for a short term.

Arvind

From the ASQ's response:

With regard to providing "strengths & weaknesses" reports to passers, we have considered a number of different ideas in this area, but the Standards for Psychological and Educational Testing which we use as our basis for the ASQ examination programs has many cautions about reporting such information, as it can contribute to test misuse. One example of test misuse would be when 2 employees from a company take the CQx test. One of them passes with a score of 88 and the other passes with a score of 90. The "misuse" comes in when someone uses the information from that test result and decides that the candidate who scored 90 is more qualified - is a "better" CQx" - than the employee who scored 88. The fact that both of them passed the exam is all the employer needs to know. Both of them have been successful in the CQx body of knowledge, and both are certified accordingly.

Another aspect of this example is that no one knows whether the person who scored 88 got five very difficult questions right, while the person who scored 90 didn't get any of those hard questions right but did score well on a series of "easy" questions, and scored well enough on those relatively easy questions to get 2 more right than the person who scored 88. Convoluted reasoning. Can you imagine if in school people did not get their results back because some students might be neighbors? All they need to know is if they passed a test or not?

I'm very happy the Standards for Psychological and Educational Testing people the ASQ uses aren't involved in school systems. No one would have any idea what their strengths and weaknesses are.

Yep there seems to be a lot of "common sense" missing from the ASQ operational patterns. I absolutely oppose the ASQ point of view on disclosure of test results, which means I think the full-time professional "psychometricians" hired by ASQ are pure "muda."

Please don't think they can decrease the cost by getting rid of the volunteers. Sections,which provide the volunteers, receive $3/per test given at their site. What ASQ HQ's costs I don't know but the test site guys lose money if they don't find a free site. The Sections' pay for giving the test has not increased in the last 5 years. I doubt you could find a computer test group that would give the test that cheaply.


I don't really buy the part about increased costs. I wonder if they would publish those costs? Is there "fat" in the cost? Most of the tests I'm aware of are administered by volunteers. I note the GMAT is now administered via computer rather than pen and pencil plus paper. Is there a possibility the same places which administer GMAT could do ASQ tests for a reduced fee? (they are just "service centers" after all)

I wonder if just their psychometrician holds that view or if it is a prevailing view among most in that profession.
Question:
Is an ASQ certification test a test of aptitude? or a test of comprehension? In my view it is more of a comprehension test than anything else. Any views on this?

Whose tests were they using as benchmarks? It seems to me when we talk about benchmarks, it becomes a question of "what the market will bear" rather than "true cost." What do some others think?