用修改后的nedelsky程序通过公共项目测试等效验证标准设置。

Journal of outcome measurement Pub Date : 1997-01-01
R M Smith, L J Gross
{"title":"用修改后的nedelsky程序通过公共项目测试等效验证标准设置。","authors":"R M Smith,&nbsp;L J Gross","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is often impossible to validate cut scores set using judged item review methods due to the fact that many high stakes testing programs attempt to limit the number of common items across consecutively administered forms. However, over time, with a stable item pool, secondary links through other test administrations allow the use of common item equating to test the stability of the judged cut scores. In this study five forms of a basic science examination administered over a three year period in a national board testing program were analyzed to determine the stability of judged cut scores. The stability was determined by comparison of the judged cut scores with the equated cut scores derived by the Rasch common item equating technique. The results indicate cut scores derived from the modified Nedelsky procedure were within equating error of the Rasch equated cut scores over five administrations.</p>","PeriodicalId":79673,"journal":{"name":"Journal of outcome measurement","volume":"1 2","pages":"164-72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validating standard setting with a modified nedelsky procedure through common item test equating.\",\"authors\":\"R M Smith,&nbsp;L J Gross\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>It is often impossible to validate cut scores set using judged item review methods due to the fact that many high stakes testing programs attempt to limit the number of common items across consecutively administered forms. However, over time, with a stable item pool, secondary links through other test administrations allow the use of common item equating to test the stability of the judged cut scores. In this study five forms of a basic science examination administered over a three year period in a national board testing program were analyzed to determine the stability of judged cut scores. The stability was determined by comparison of the judged cut scores with the equated cut scores derived by the Rasch common item equating technique. The results indicate cut scores derived from the modified Nedelsky procedure were within equating error of the Rasch equated cut scores over five administrations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of outcome measurement\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"164-72\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of outcome measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of outcome measurement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于许多高风险的测试项目试图限制连续管理表格中常见项目的数量,因此通常不可能使用评判项目审查方法来验证切割分数集。然而,随着时间的推移,有了一个稳定的题库,通过其他考试管理部门的二级链接允许使用公共项目等价物来测试判定分数的稳定性。在这项研究中,五种形式的基础科学考试管理超过三年的国家委员会测试计划进行了分析,以确定判定削减分数的稳定性。通过比较判定切分与由拉赫共同项目等值法得到的相等切分来确定其稳定性。结果表明,由改进的Nedelsky程序获得的切割分数在五次管理期间的Rasch等分切割分数的相等误差范围内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validating standard setting with a modified nedelsky procedure through common item test equating.

It is often impossible to validate cut scores set using judged item review methods due to the fact that many high stakes testing programs attempt to limit the number of common items across consecutively administered forms. However, over time, with a stable item pool, secondary links through other test administrations allow the use of common item equating to test the stability of the judged cut scores. In this study five forms of a basic science examination administered over a three year period in a national board testing program were analyzed to determine the stability of judged cut scores. The stability was determined by comparison of the judged cut scores with the equated cut scores derived by the Rasch common item equating technique. The results indicate cut scores derived from the modified Nedelsky procedure were within equating error of the Rasch equated cut scores over five administrations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信