What Happens When a Certification Developer is a Subject Matter Expert for the Exam Being Developed?
As a certification developer with a background in systems engineering and management, I have occasionally found myself in conflict as a subject matter expert (SME) for the very certification exam I was tasked with developing. This scenario is not uncommon in smaller organizations or niche fields with limited expertise. While this dual identity may offer some advantages, the risks far outweigh the benefits. In this article, I will explain why certification developers should not also serve as a SME for their exams. Additionally, I will outline a practical approach for navigating situations where this overlap is unavoidable, as is often the case in IT certification development roles where certification developers may have formerly been SMEs.
When it comes to high-stakes certification exams, such as those used to validate technical skills or professional competencies, the roles of the certification developer and the SME are both crucial—but they should remain separate. While it might seem advantageous for a certification developer to also serve as a SME, this dual role can introduce significant risks and undermine the very purpose of the exam.
One of the core principles of test development is fairness. Certification exams must evaluate candidates impartially, providing an equal opportunity for all test-takers to demonstrate their competence. When a developer is also a SME, their deep familiarity with the subject may unintentionally introduce bias.
For example, the certification developer might intentionally or unintentionally influence SMEs to focus on niche topics they are personally passionate about or use language and phrasing that aligns with their own experiences rather than the broader industry standard. This can lead to a skewed exam that favors candidates with similar backgrounds, ultimately compromising the test’s fairness.
Certification developers bring a highly specialized skill set to the table. Their expertise lies in psychometrics, test design, and ensuring the validity and reliability of the exam. These responsibilities are complex enough, requiring attention to detail, adherence to industry standards, and the ability to translate technical content into effective assessments.
Asking developers to also act as SMEs stretches them too thin, increasing the likelihood of errors in either test construction or content accuracy. In high stakes testing, even minor mistakes can have major consequences for candidates and the organizations that rely on these certifications.
Effective certification exams are the result of collaboration between two distinct groups: certification developers and SMEs. SMEs bring the deep technical knowledge necessary to ensure the content is accurate and up to date. Developers ensure that the exam aligns with psychometric principles and organizational goals while managing the activities of the SMEs.
By maintaining this separation of roles, developers can focus on what they do best: building a well-structured, fair, and defensible assessment. This collaborative approach also creates a system of checks and balances, with each group holding the other accountable for their respective contributions.
Recommended by LinkedIn
Subject matter expertise can lead to a phenomenon known as "the curse of knowledge," where individuals with deep expertise struggle to step into the shoes of less-experienced learners. Certification developers who are also SMEs may also suffer from this curse, inadvertently allowing the creation of exam items that are too complex or fail to reflect the knowledge level of the target audience.
By working with SMEs who understand the content from the perspective of practitioners, developers can ensure the exam strikes the right balance between difficulty and accessibility.
The process of building a high-stakes certification exam is both an art and a science. Developers must be free to focus on psychometric quality, fairness, and test validity, while SMEs ensure content accuracy and relevance. Blurring these lines not only increases risks but also dilutes the value of the certification itself.
By maintaining clear boundaries between the roles of certification developers and SMEs, organizations can produce high-quality exams that are both fair and effective, ensuring a positive impact on test-takers, and the industries they serve.
So, what should a certification developer who has the knowledge of a SME for an exam they are developing do? The answer is that, just as a doctor must maintain clinical distance from their patient, the certification developer must not allow their subject knowledge to bias the exam's development.
The certification developer must preserve objectivity at all costs. They must avoid being stretched too thin, as this could affect the quality of the exam. They must set aside their personal viewpoints and work collaboratively with SMEs, albeit from a different perspective. They must adhere to standard processes, including psychometric principles and exam development best practices, such as iterative reviews and pilot testing. By avoiding tunnel vision and committing to a balanced approach, they can ensure the exam is both fair and effective.
If you enjoyed this article, I encourage you to review the collection of my recent posts and articles found on LinkedIn:
Jim: Yet another excellent article.