Dawn Grant, CSC Docket No. 2023-566

BackgroundDawn Grant appeals the administration of the examination for Family Service Supervisor (PC4847C), Essex County.

The subject examination was administered to the appellant on September 8, 2022. There were multiple titles tested with this examination booklet, and candidates were required to answer different questions. Candidates for the subject examination were required to answer questions 31 through 110. The appellant answered questions 1 through 110, and her score for questions 31 through 110 was below the passing point. As such, she did not pass the examination.

Appellant's argumentIn an appeal filed at the test center, the appellant stated that it was not made clear at the test center which questions she was to answer, and she started with question 1. In a supplement to her appeal, the appellant argues that the monitor read the instructions in a low voice, another monitor did not provide any instructions, and no one said to answer the questions on the answer sheet stub. She states that she properly answered the questions from 1 to 86 and then guessed from questions 87 to 110. She maintains that she did not have enough time to complete the examination, and she wants to be graded from questions 1 through 86. The appellant adds that a monitor said that the test questions are normally printed on the test answer sheet and not written in by a test monitor, so she believes that normal procedures were not followed. Therefore, she requests an opportunity to be retested. It is noted that the appellant does not provide a copy of her answer sheet stub which she would have taken with her from the test center.

CONCLUSION

At the outset, it is noted that there is no provision in the rules for a retest, which is not the same as a make-up examination. Once the examination is taken, a score is based on the given responses. Therefore, the appellant has been exposed to the test questions. At this point, the administration of the examination is complete, and the appellant has been provided an opportunity for review. In fairness to other candidates, the appellant cannot be given the examination again.

Additionally, the appellant provided answers for each assigned question, 31 through 110, and it cannot be established whether or not the appellant thought her answers through or guessed at responses. The appellant completed her responses to each question and was scored accordingly. The appellant contends that having the required questions handwritten on the answer sheet stub was not a normal procedure. However, the appellant provides no evidence of how this affected her performance on the examination. The questions to be answered, the time allotted for the examination, and the symbol are written on the examination stub, which candidates were told to keep for their records, and the monitors read from a script which tells candidates to answer the questions on their answer sheet stub. If the appellant had questions about this procedure, she needed to raise such questions prior to the administration of the examination.

A thorough review of the record indicates that the administration of the subject examination was proper and consistent with Civil Service Commission regulations, and that the appellant has not met her burden of proof in this matter. See N.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.4(c).

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be denied.

ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.