I am not sure what you are talking about. There are several testing companies, Pearson is not the only one. And states have a selection process and technical review process done by outside psychometricians.
Yes. There are places where tests were developed by the government agencies, which are not professionals. Mostly their tests lack psychometric regorious, not comparable across years.
I'm not sure what you meant "poor content". A few flaws here and there?
I very clearly said pearson and others in the space.
If reviews can be done by psychometricians, why test building cannot ?
There are many many qualified professionals affiliated with major universities- several of them owned by the state. Is it difficult to imagine them developing the tests?
Many of these same professionals consult with testing companies for building the tests, so it is not like these companies have some magic expertise no one else has.
Using an vendor test gives that companies allied products basically an Monopoly for that test/skill.
This is a fact of this industry, and testing companies will use it to their advantage because that's their business. It is in public interest not to privatize the test itself, so there is competition amongst providers of allied products and free market can prevail.
Current setup is like government tax code is set by intuit and you can only file tax via turbo tax and nothing else
You are just imagine things as an outsider. Testing companies not only have the best psychometricians and they have many many psychometricians and stasticians work for them.
Yes. University professors do consulting works. How do they have the capacity to build a product as professional companies do? ...
I am no outsider, I have spent last 10 years partnering/ integrating with testing companies . I have seen tests built and marketed and sold.
All tests have frameworks underlying them , do you know how long it takes to establish a framework ? How many peer reviewed papers that have to published, and time it takes to shape the opinion of the ecosystem to make it acceptable? Without a established validity and equity nobody is going to buy the test, why would they risk it to get sued?
You think companies go through the full journey of years and take all the risk? in most cases they only come in the latter stages and commercialize and adapt it.
The question, then, is why not have the state university build the tests and write the textbooks? Then you fund the actual creation once and can straightforwardly fund updates and alterations as needed.
State universities are not good at doing either. There are not enough psychometricians or test writers or textbook writers in psychology or curriculum and instruction departments.
State government is not better at doing things than big companies. Hope your solution is not to ask the government to do everything.
You think testing companies keep all the psychometricians/text book writers on payroll ?
Many of the big tests are developed within an academic setting with university/public funding then licensed out. Almost every book is written by university professor then published by pearson or others.
State government does not outsource writing the tax code or the other regulations to companies why is tests any different ?
Another aspect you fail to understand is that because the accountability / rating / funding of local education agencies is involved, the state government and the state university do NOT want to and can NOT get involved in producing the test. It must be produced by an outsider.
You can't tell the difference between a prototype and product. OK. Lets go to the basics. Do you at least understand the state standardized tests are commonly given to grade 3 to grade 10 students on three subjects (English, Math, Science)? That's 24 tests (a few grades could share the same test, but that's complicate). Most state universities don't even have 12 psychometricians. Lol. Of course the reality is much more complicated than 24. You are just imagining things with no understanding of the scale of the complexity of the reality.
Yes. There are places where tests were developed by the government agencies, which are not professionals. Mostly their tests lack psychometric regorious, not comparable across years.
I'm not sure what you meant "poor content". A few flaws here and there?