Poll: Standardized External Tests decrease corruption in admissions process to Universities

Kyiv, April 9, 2008.

Today, the ACTION project and the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology presented the results of its survey on corruption in the higher education sector, focusing in particular on the admissions process of 2007. The report concludes that standardized testing is substantially less corrupt than other knowledge evaluation processes during the university admissions process. Trust in the testing method depends substantially on having knowledge about it. Finally, citizens remain undecided about the effectiveness of the government’s actions to reduce corruption in the education sector.

The research included large nationwide representative surveys, conducted between December 2007 and February 2008, among stakeholders in the admissions process: 2007 secondary school graduates, parents of graduates, recent University students, and school administrators and teachers. A follow-up survey is scheduled following the conclusion of this year’s admission process to assess changes after the national rollout of government-mandated standardized testing for high school graduates that replaces both secondary school graduation and university entrance examinations.  

Corruption is viewed as less widespread in standardized testing: The majority of respondents in all groups view the University admissions exam process as very or somewhat corrupted (between 48-65%). Much smaller, but still significant, numbers of respondents view the graduation exams as very corrupted (8-29%). On the other hand, very few respondents see the standardized external testing approach as corrupted.

There are fewer attempts to actually use corruption in standardized testing: Respondents in all stakeholder groups admit to partaking in some corrupt practices.  Corruption occurrences during the university admissions exams are the greatest -- mostly manifested as the use of favoritism, nepotism and personal connections (19% of students and 13% of graduates). Corruption during graduation exams is in second place, mostly exemplified by the offering of bribes and gifts to school administrators and teachers (8-10%). Corruption during standardized testing is much less, but instances are reported by 4-7% of respondents during the 2007 testing cycle.

Cheating during testing remains high: Students report that they experienced very similar patterns of cheating violations during the standardized testing and university admissions exams. This suggests that more controls and enforcement of procedures are required in the testing rooms.

Does corruption pay off?: Do corrupt practices reliably ensure admission to higher educational establishments? Almost all graduates that apply are accepted: 46% in budget (free) programs and 49% in contract (paid) programs. In our sample, only 5% were not accepted for admission. The survey indicates that the use of corrupt practices makes no apparent difference in the rate of acceptance into higher educational institutions: of those who used corruption in the admissions process, approximately the same percentage was accepted as was rejected from admission. Thus, using corruption to gain admission appears to be inconsequential. Factors that do seem to make a difference on acceptance or rejection include participation in the official preparatory classes.

Awareness of testing approach produces trust: Information about the testing approach is fairly well received among the stakeholder groups surveyed.  By far, school administrators and teachers are the best informed about this new approach.  More than half of recent graduates, students and parents who had just taken part in the tests feel they are well informed about it.

Across all four stakeholder groups, the more informed the respondent, the more likely they will trust the testing approach entirely. Information campaigns about the standardized testing and experience taking the test appear to be key factors in building trust.

Citizens remain undecided about impact of government anti-corruption efforts: Many respondents (between 31-46%) believe that corruption levels in the admissions process have remained about the same over the past two admissions cycles. This means that anti-corruption efforts initiated by the government are seen as not having had a substantial impact so far.

Survey methodology and sample size: Respondents were surveyed through face-to-face interviews; 3249 participants, older than 18 and living in rural areas, towns or cities from all regions of Ukraine, as well as ARC and Kyiv, responded to the survey.

SET background information

Corruption is a serious problem for Ukraine. According to the 2007 “Corruption in Ukraine” survey report,[1] corruption is viewed as one of the four most serious problems in the country, along with low standards of living, crime, and high cost-low quality health care. Corruption is perceived to be widespread in the higher education sector in general and in the HEE admissions process in particular. According to the abovementioned survey, 46.3% of the respondents think corruption is highly widespread among higher educational establishment (HEE) authorities and 34.5% think it is somewhat widespread. Almost 38% of the respondents who gave bribes in HEEs said it was related to the admissions process.

By definition, corrupt practices in the admissions process to higher education establishments generate inequalities among applicants. As such, they represent violations of the constitutional guarantee of the right to education on an equal basis (Article 53).

Thus, to fight corruption in the higher education admissions process, standardized external testing (SET) was introduced in 2003.  It was aimed at testing the knowledge of secondary school graduates in particular subjects. Such test results are documented in a Certificate.

The standardized external testing (SET) approach is viewed as a way to make the admissions process more transparent, accountable, less susceptible to corruption, and thus more equitable. In April 2008, the SET is being rolled out nationwide with the assistance of the Millennium Challenge Corporation Threshold Program in Ukraine.

In 2008, it becomes obligatory for every entrant to use their SET results when applying to any establishment of higher education. It should be noted that one’s SET results can be applied as his/her State Summary Attestation results if one wishes so.

The SET testing is organized by the Ukrainian Center for Educational Quality Assessment (UCEQA) - a separate budgetary organization not affiliated with either general secondary education establishments or establishments of higher education. The tests are developed and kept secret and are transmitted to the testing locations using special communication means. Answer sheets completed by graduates are coded and sent for checking using the same communication means.

Overall, a goal of standardized external evaluation is to make the knowledge assessment of graduates applying to establishments of higher education considerably more objective and unbiased, thus decreasing the opportunities for corruption in the admissions process. 

The admission requirements of establishments of higher education have been modified accordingly.[2] UCEQA certificates for the corresponding subjects must be used instead of the establishment’s own oral and written exams. However, foreign language exams remain in place (SET modules for foreign languages have not been developed yet) and special forms of entry examinations may be used (for example, creative competitions) for admission to some specialties.  At the same time, special entry conditions that existed previously have been preserved in a modified form.