STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

WILLIAM D. HARRISON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 86-0332

)

DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL )

REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION )

INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

For Petitioner: William D. Harrison, pro se

Lantana, Florida

For Respondent: H. Reynolds Sampson, Esquire

Department of Professional Regulation Tallahassee, Florida

This matter was heard on April 15, 1986 in Tallahassee, Florida by William

1. Dorsey, Jr., the hearing officer designated by the Division of Administrative Hearings. No transcript of the hearing was filed, and neither party filed a proposed recommended order.

   
   

   ISSUE

   
   

   The issue is whether Mr. Harrison's response to question 8 on the General Contractor's Examination given on October 3, 1985 was incorrectly graded. If Mr. Harrison were given credit for his answer to that question, he would pass the examination. The examination was correctly graded, however, and the petition filed by Mr. Harrison should be dismissed.

   
   

   FINDINGS OF FACT

   
   

   1. Mr. William D. Harrison took the Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board's General Contractor's Examination on October 3, 1985.

      According to his grade report his grade was 68.65. A total grade of 69.01 is necessary to pass the examination. Rule 21E-16.05, Florida Administrative Code. If he were given credit for the answer he gave to question number 8 on the portion of the examination given the afternoon of October 3, 1985, he would pass the examination.

      
      

   2. The question at issue sought an estimate of the amount of concrete necessary to construct entrance steps for a hypothetical building. The Department of Professional Regulation, Office of Examination Services had prepared drawings for a building consisting of 14 different sheets showing various elevations, aspects or other details of the building. These drawings were used in answering the examination questions. Question 8 read:

      The total volume of concrete to place the concrete entrance steps (only) is cubic yards. Select the closest answer.

      
      

      (A) 4.7

      (B) 5.9

      (C) 6.5

      (D) 7.0

      
      

      Mr. Harrison chose answer (A). The correct answer is answer (D).

      
      

   3. Sheet 4 of 14 of the drawings shows the first floor plan for the building. There are a total of four 11'6" spans of concrete entrance steps to the covered entry on the north and south sides of the building. The detail of the steps on sheet 4 of 14 shows that they generally have a 6" rise and are 1' in depth. According to the same sheet of the drawings, there are also other concrete steps to be constructed on the east and west sides of the building of 11' spans.

      
      

   4. In the northwest and southeast corners of the building there are enclosed stairwells serving the four floors of the building. The steps in these stairwells also contain concrete as an element in their construction.

      
      

   5. Mr. Harrison contends that the question is phrased in a misleading manner. In his view only the north and south entrance steps should be included in the calculation of the amount of concrete needed for "entrance steps (only)

      ." According to his calculations, placing those entrance steps would require 4.889 cubic yards of concrete. The closest answer available is 4.7, answer (A), which he gave.

      
      

   6. By reference to a dictionary of construction terms, Mr. Harrison argues that a building's area excludes uncovered entrances, terraces and steps. He believes he correctly excluded the covered steps on the east and west sides of the building from the calculation of "entrance steps," treating them as part of the building area, not entrances.

      
      

   7. The Departments contends that the question is specifically constructed to test the level of detail with which examinees read the drawings. On sheet 4 of 14 the symbol "A/4" appears, with a line cutting perpendicularly through the western steps. That symbol points out to examinees that a detailed drawing for the construction of the concrete entrance steps appears on that sheet. That perpendicular line through the western steps demonstrates that the eastern and western steps are "entrance steps" in the plans, and must be included in the calculation required in question 8. Answer (A), chosen by Mr. Harrison, is a distractor specifically designed to determine whether examinees have included the east and west steps in their calculation. If excluded, the calculation yields an answer of exactly 4.7 cubic yards of concrete (Mr. Harrison's calculation of 4.889 is slightly off). If all four spans of entrance steps are included, the correct answer of 7.0 cubic yards is obtained.

      
      

   8. The phrase "entrance steps (only)" appears in question 8 to make clear to examinees that the concrete allocable to the steps of the enclosed northwest and southeast stairwells is not part of the calculation.

      
      

   9. After an examination is graded, but before the grade reports are distributed, the Department does a statistical analysis of the patterns of

      responses to all examination questions to determine whether those patterns reveal a problem such as a general misreading of any questions. If a question performs badly, it can be deleted from the grading process before the grade reports are distributed to examinees.

      
      

   10. The analysis done on the answers to question 8 shows that of the 887 examinees, 180 of those who ultimately scored in the upper 27 percent of the examination overall answered the question correctly with answer (D); of those scoring in the middle 46 percent on the overall examination, 148 gave the correct answer; of those examinees scoring in the lower 27 percent overall, only

       69 gave the correct answer.

       
       

   11. Among those choosing answer (A), as Mr. Harrison did, 36 of those who scored in the upper 27 percent overall gave that answer, 116 of those in the middle 46 percent chose the answer, and 102 of those scoring in the lower 27 percent chose that answer. Statistically, the question performed well. The evidence shows that answer (A) acts as the distractor which it was designed to be. Those who do not read the drawings carefully select the answer which would be correct if only the north and south steps are included in the calculation. Given the specificity of the drawing showing the east and west steps as entrance steps, however, Mr. Harrison's objection to the grading of his answer to question 8 is not well founded.

       
       

   12. Mr. Harrison had also raised, in his letter challenging his grade, an objection to another test question. At the hearing, however, he abandoned that challenge.

       
       

       CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

       
       

   13. As an applicant for licensure under Rule 21E-16.01, Florida Administrative Code, Petitioner has the burden of showing by the greater weight of the evidence that the grade he received was improper. Rule 28-6.08(3), Florida Administrative Code. He has not met that burden.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the petition for regrading of the General Contractor's Examination given in October 1985 by the Construction Industry Licensing Board be DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of April 1986 in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

WILLIAM R. DORSEY, JR.

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building

2009 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of April, 1986.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Mr. Fred Seely Executive Director

Construction Industry Licensing Board Post Office Box 2

Jacksonville, Florida 32201

Mr. Fred Roche Secretary

Department of Professional Regulation

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Salvatore A. Carpino, Esquire General Counsel

Department of Professional Regulation

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

H. Reynolds Sampson, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Mr. William D. Harrison 3490 Artesian Drive

Lantana, Florida 33462

Docket for Case No: 86-000332

Orders for Case No: 86-000332