测量条件之间的联系和可比性:已建立的框架和建议的更新

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Tim Moses
{"title":"测量条件之间的联系和可比性:已建立的框架和建议的更新","authors":"Tim Moses","doi":"10.1111/jedm.12322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One result of recent changes in testing is that previously established linking frameworks may not adequately address challenges in current linking situations. Test linking through equating, concordance, vertical scaling or battery scaling may not represent linkings for the scores of tests developed to measure constructs differently for different examinees, or tests that are administered in different modes and data collection designs. This article considers how previously proposed linking frameworks might be updated to address more recent testing situations. The first section summarizes the definitions and frameworks described in previous test linking discussions. Additional sections consider some sources of more disparate approaches to test development and administrations, as well as the implications of these for test linking. Possibilities for reflecting these features in an expanded test linking framework are proposed that encourage limited comparability, such as comparability that is restricted to subgroups or to the conditions of a linking study when a linking is produced, or within, but not across tests or test forms when an empirical linking based on examinee data is not produced. The implications of an updated framework of previously established linking approaches are further described in a final discussion.</p>","PeriodicalId":47871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Measurement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Linking and Comparability across Conditions of Measurement: Established Frameworks and Proposed Updates\",\"authors\":\"Tim Moses\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jedm.12322\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>One result of recent changes in testing is that previously established linking frameworks may not adequately address challenges in current linking situations. Test linking through equating, concordance, vertical scaling or battery scaling may not represent linkings for the scores of tests developed to measure constructs differently for different examinees, or tests that are administered in different modes and data collection designs. This article considers how previously proposed linking frameworks might be updated to address more recent testing situations. The first section summarizes the definitions and frameworks described in previous test linking discussions. Additional sections consider some sources of more disparate approaches to test development and administrations, as well as the implications of these for test linking. Possibilities for reflecting these features in an expanded test linking framework are proposed that encourage limited comparability, such as comparability that is restricted to subgroups or to the conditions of a linking study when a linking is produced, or within, but not across tests or test forms when an empirical linking based on examinee data is not produced. The implications of an updated framework of previously established linking approaches are further described in a final discussion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jedm.12322\",\"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.12322","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: 4

摘要

最近测试变化的一个结果是,以前建立的链接框架可能无法充分应对当前链接情况下的挑战。通过等号法、一致性法、垂直缩放法或单元缩放法进行的考试联系,可能不代表为不同考生开发的不同构式的考试成绩之间的联系,也不代表以不同模式和数据收集设计进行的考试成绩之间的联系。本文考虑如何更新先前提出的链接框架,以解决最近的测试情况。第一部分总结了前面测试链接讨论中描述的定义和框架。另外的部分将考虑更多不同的测试开发和管理方法的一些来源,以及这些方法对测试链接的影响。建议在扩展的测试链接框架中反映这些特征的可能性,以鼓励有限的可比性,例如,当产生链接时,仅限于子组或链接研究条件的可比性,或者当没有产生基于考生数据的经验链接时,在测试或测试形式内而不是跨测试或测试形式的可比性。在最后的讨论中进一步描述了先前建立的联系方法的更新框架的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Linking and Comparability across Conditions of Measurement: Established Frameworks and Proposed Updates

One result of recent changes in testing is that previously established linking frameworks may not adequately address challenges in current linking situations. Test linking through equating, concordance, vertical scaling or battery scaling may not represent linkings for the scores of tests developed to measure constructs differently for different examinees, or tests that are administered in different modes and data collection designs. This article considers how previously proposed linking frameworks might be updated to address more recent testing situations. The first section summarizes the definitions and frameworks described in previous test linking discussions. Additional sections consider some sources of more disparate approaches to test development and administrations, as well as the implications of these for test linking. Possibilities for reflecting these features in an expanded test linking framework are proposed that encourage limited comparability, such as comparability that is restricted to subgroups or to the conditions of a linking study when a linking is produced, or within, but not across tests or test forms when an empirical linking based on examinee data is not produced. The implications of an updated framework of previously established linking approaches are further described in a final discussion.

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