从历史的角度看考试创新引起的分数可比性问题

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Peter Baldwin, Brian E. Clauser
{"title":"从历史的角度看考试创新引起的分数可比性问题","authors":"Peter Baldwin,&nbsp;Brian E. Clauser","doi":"10.1111/jedm.12318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>While score comparability across test forms typically relies on common (or randomly equivalent) examinees or items, innovations in item formats, test delivery, and efforts to extend the range of score interpretation may require a special data collection before examinees or items can be used in this way—or may be incompatible with common examinee or item designs altogether. When comparisons are necessary under these nonroutine conditions, forms still must be connected by <i>something</i> and this article focuses on these form-invariant connective <i>somethings</i>. A conceptual framework for thinking about the problem of score comparability in this way is given followed by a description of three classes of connectives. Examples from the history of innovations in testing are given for each class.</p>","PeriodicalId":47871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Measurement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Historical Perspectives on Score Comparability Issues Raised by Innovations in Testing\",\"authors\":\"Peter Baldwin,&nbsp;Brian E. Clauser\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jedm.12318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>While score comparability across test forms typically relies on common (or randomly equivalent) examinees or items, innovations in item formats, test delivery, and efforts to extend the range of score interpretation may require a special data collection before examinees or items can be used in this way—or may be incompatible with common examinee or item designs altogether. When comparisons are necessary under these nonroutine conditions, forms still must be connected by <i>something</i> and this article focuses on these form-invariant connective <i>somethings</i>. A conceptual framework for thinking about the problem of score comparability in this way is given followed by a description of three classes of connectives. Examples from the history of innovations in testing are given for each class.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jedm.12318\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jedm.12318","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

虽然考试形式之间的分数可比性通常依赖于共同的(或随机相等的)考生或项目,但在以这种方式使用考生或项目之前,项目格式的创新、考试交付和扩大分数解释范围的努力可能需要特殊的数据收集,或者可能与共同的考生或项目设计完全不兼容。当在这些非常规条件下需要比较时,形式仍然必须通过某些东西连接起来,本文主要讨论这些形式不变的连接物。以这种方式给出了思考分数可比性问题的概念框架,然后描述了三类连接词。每个班级都给出了测试创新历史上的例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Historical Perspectives on Score Comparability Issues Raised by Innovations in Testing

While score comparability across test forms typically relies on common (or randomly equivalent) examinees or items, innovations in item formats, test delivery, and efforts to extend the range of score interpretation may require a special data collection before examinees or items can be used in this way—or may be incompatible with common examinee or item designs altogether. When comparisons are necessary under these nonroutine conditions, forms still must be connected by something and this article focuses on these form-invariant connective somethings. A conceptual framework for thinking about the problem of score comparability in this way is given followed by a description of three classes of connectives. Examples from the history of innovations in testing are given for each class.

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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: The Journal of Educational Measurement (JEM) publishes original measurement research, provides reviews of measurement publications, and reports on innovative measurement applications. The topics addressed will interest those concerned with the practice of measurement in field settings, as well as be of interest to measurement theorists. In addition to presenting new contributions to measurement theory and practice, JEM also serves as a vehicle for improving educational measurement applications in a variety of settings.
×
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