This study examines test fairness from the perspective of test administration, taking the Vocational English Test System (VETS) as an example. After analyzing questionnaire completed by 2046 VEST takers and 40 test takers’ interviews, it was found that VETS was perceived to be well administered. To be specific, test takers were satisfied with the administration in their testing sites, that they strongly believed in the the same condition across different test sites, and that they strongly believed in absence of cheating during test administration. However, some problems raised by a small number of test takers are also worth noticing, including unsteady equipment, seat arrangements in test rooms across different test sites, and the potential cheating in the speaking section of VETS. On the whole, the current research showed that examining test fairness from the perspective of administration is a necessity. No matter how good the quality of test items are, without good administration, the fairness of the test is undermined. 

Weilie Lu. Examining test fairness from the perspective of administration—A case of VETS. Frontiers in Educational Research (2025), Vol. 8, Issue 12: 35-43. https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2025.081206.

[1] Bridgeman, B. & Schmitt, A. (1997). Fairness issues in test development and administration. In W. Willingham & N.S.Cole (Eds.), Gender and fair assessment (pp.185-225). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

[2] Chen, Xiangming. (2000). Qualitative research in social sciences. Education Science Press.

[3] Cheng, L., & DeLuca. (2011). Voices from test-takers: Further evidence fro language assessment validation and use. Educational assessment, 16:2, 104-122. 

[4] Fan, J. & Ji, P. (2014). Test candidates’ attitudes and their test performance: the case of the Fudan English Test. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 9, 1-35.

[5] Fox, J. & Cheng, L. (2007). Did we take the same test? Differing accounts of the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test by first and second language test-takers.  Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14:1, 9-26. 

[6] Haladyna, T.M., & Downing, S.M. (2004). Construct-irrelevant variance in high-stakes testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and and Practice, 23, 17-27.

[7] Jang, E. (2002). Folk fairness in language testing. Paper presented at the Southern California Association for Language Assessment Research conference (SCALAR 5). 

[8] Karami, H. (2013). The quest for fairness in language testing. Educational Research and Evaluation. 19 (2-3): 158-169. 

[9] Kunnan, A. J. (2004). Test fairness. In M. Milanovic & C. Weir (Eds.), European language testing in a global context: Proceedings of the ALTE Barcelona Conference (pp.27-48). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press

[10] McCabe, D.L., Trevino, L.K., & Kenneth, D.B. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 219-232.

[11] Song, X. (2014). Test fairness in a large-scale high-stakes language test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Canada: Queen’s University.