Moreover, the highest-ranked factor for choosing an assessment tool is the tool's ability to provide information for placement; 57 percent of the respondents selected this factor. Given that the respondents view determining placement as one of the primary purposes of assessment, educators and policy-makers need to ensure that the assessments they use or mandate accurately determine the student's level of proficiency.
In an ideal learning environment, assessment tools used for determining placement would meet the following criteria. They would be valid and reliable assessment tools that reflect current literacy and numeracy theories and curriculum. Moreover, they would be normed on an adult population and free of bias. Many assessments do not accurately portray the student's levels of proficiency because they fall short of this set of criteria. One respondent stated that the assessment tool used in Nunavut is "proving to be inadequate in assessment placement or insuring that the student is being placed properly. This is affecting student success in our program." Another respondent from British Columbia commented that "it is very stressful for students and instructors when someone is placed at a higher grade level than indicated by the assessment." Even though educators are aware of the limitations of the tools they use, they continue to use them for several reasons. For example, 50 respondents (13 percent) reported that they are mandated to use specific assessment tools. Out of the 50 respondents, 25 stated that the mandated tools they use are inappropriate. Other educators reported they do not have the time or funds to research and learn about the range of tools and approaches that are available.
The document Principles for Fair Student Assessment Practices for Education in Canada(1993), states that validity is enhanced when the assessment tool reflects instructional goals and objectives and is compatible with instructional approaches. Yet, many tests used for determining placement do not reflect the curriculum goals and objectives. For instance, the Canadian Achievement Survey Test (CAST) was criticized by one of the respondents because the "math portion is not reflective of the new math curriculum. The math test places students at a higher level than they should be placed, based on the new pure math curriculum."