首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 781 毫秒
1.
The nonequivalent groups with anchor test (NEAT) design involves missing data that are missing by design. Three equating methods that can be used with a NEAT design are the frequency estimation equipercentile equating method, the chain equipercentile equating method, and the item-response-theory observed-score-equating method. We suggest an approach to perform a fair comparison of the three methods. The approach is then applied to compare the three equating methods using three data sets from operational tests. For each data set, we examine how the three equating methods perform when the missing data satisfy the assumptions made by only one of these equating methods. The chain equipercentile equating method is somewhat more satisfactory overall than the other methods.  相似文献   

2.
The Non-Equivalent-groups Anchor Test (NEAT) design has been in wide use since at least the early 1940s. It involves two populations of test takers, P and Q, and makes use of an anchor test to link them. Two linking methods used for NEAT designs are those (a) based on chain equating and (b) that use the anchor test to post-stratify the distributions of the two operational test scores to a common population (i.e., Tucker equating and frequency estimation). We show that, under different sets of assumptions, both methods are observed score equating methods and we give conditions under which the methods give identical results. In addition, we develop analogues of the Dorans and Holland (2000) RMSD measures of population invariance of equating methods for the NEAT design for both chain and post-stratification equating methods.  相似文献   

3.
4.
This study applied kernel equating (KE) in two scenarios: equating to a very similar population and equating to a very different population, referred to as a distant population, using SAT® data. The KE results were compared to the results obtained from analogous traditional equating methods in both scenarios. The results indicate that KE results are comparable to the results of other methods. Further, the results show that when the two populations taking the two tests are similar on the anchor score distributions, different equating methods yield the same or very similar results, even though they have different assumptions.  相似文献   

5.
This article presents a method for evaluating equating results. Within the kernel equating framework, the percent relative error (PRE) for chained equipercentile equating was computed under the nonequivalent groups with anchor test (NEAT) design. The method was applied to two data sets to obtain the PRE, which can be used to measure equating effectiveness. The study compared the PRE results for chained and poststratification equating. The results indicated that the chained method transformed the new form score distribution to the reference form scale more effectively than the poststratification method. In addition, the study found that in chained equating, the population weight had impact on score distributions over the target population but not on the equating and PRE results.  相似文献   

6.
This study addressed the sampling error and linking bias that occur with small samples in a nonequivalent groups anchor test design. We proposed a linking method called the synthetic function, which is a weighted average of the identity function and a traditional equating function (in this case, the chained linear equating function). Specifically, we compared the synthetic, identity, and chained linear functions for various‐sized samples from two types of national assessments. One design used a highly reliable test and an external anchor, and the other used a relatively low‐reliability test and an internal anchor. The results from each of these methods were compared to the criterion equating function derived from the total samples with respect to linking bias and error. The study indicated that the synthetic functions might be a better choice than the chained linear equating method when samples are not large and, as a result, unrepresentative.  相似文献   

7.
In this study I compared results of chained linear, Tucker, and Levine-observed score equatings under conditions where the new and old forms samples were similar in ability and also when they were different in ability. The length of the anchor test was also varied to examine its effect on the three different equating methods. The three equating methods were compared to a criterion equating to obtain estimates of random equating error, bias, and root mean squared error (RMSE). Results showed that, for most studied conditions, chained linear equating produced fairly good equating results in terms of low bias and RMSE. Levine equating also produced low bias and RMSE in some conditions. Although the Tucker method always produced the lowest random equating error, it produced a larger bias and RMSE than either of the other equating methods. As noted in the literature, these results also suggest that either chained linear or Levine equating be used when new and old form samples differ on ability and/or when the anchor-to-total correlation is not very high. Finally, by testing the missing data assumptions of the three equating methods, this study also shows empirically why an equating method is more or less accurate under certain conditions .  相似文献   

8.
In this article, linear item response theory (IRT) observed‐score equating is compared under a generalized kernel equating framework with Levine observed‐score equating for nonequivalent groups with anchor test design. Interestingly, these two equating methods are closely related despite being based on different methodologies. Specifically, when using data from IRT models, linear IRT observed‐score equating is virtually identical to Levine observed‐score equating. This leads to the conclusion that poststratification equating based on true anchor scores can be viewed as the curvilinear Levine observed‐score equating.  相似文献   

9.
This study investigated differences between two approaches to chained equipercentile (CE) equating (one‐ and bi‐direction CE equating) in nearly equal groups and relatively unequal groups. In one‐direction CE equating, the new form is linked to the anchor in one sample of examinees and the anchor is linked to the reference form in the other sample. In bi‐direction CE equating, the anchor is linked to the new form in one sample of examinees and to the reference form in the other sample. The two approaches were evaluated in comparison to a criterion equating function (i.e., equivalent groups equating) using indexes such as root expected squared difference, bias, standard error of equating, root mean squared error, and number of gaps and bumps. The overall results across the equating situations suggested that the two CE equating approaches produced very similar results, whereas the bi‐direction results were slightly less erratic, smoother (i.e., fewer gaps and bumps), usually closer to the criterion function, and also less variable.  相似文献   

10.
In this study, eight statistical strategies were evaluated for selecting the parameterizations of loglinear models for smoothing the bivariate test score distributions used in nonequivalent groups with anchor test (NEAT) equating. Four of the strategies were based on significance tests of chi-square statistics (Likelihood Ratio, Pearson, Freeman-Tukey, and Cressie-Read) and four additional strategies were based on different evaluations of the Likelihood Ratio Chi-Square statistic (Akaike Information Criterion, Bayesian Information Criterion, Consistent Akaike Information Criterion, and an index traced to Goodman). The focus was the implications of the selection strategies' selection tendencies for the accuracy of chained and poststratification equating functions. The results differentiated the strategies in terms of their tendencies to select models with particular bivariate parameterizations and the implications of these tendencies for equating bias and variability .  相似文献   

11.
Using data from a large-scale exam, in this study we compared various designs for equating constructed-response (CR) tests to determine which design was most effective in producing equivalent scores across the two tests to be equated. In the context of classical equating methods, four linking designs were examined: (a) an anchor set containing common CR items, (b) an anchor set incorporating common CR items rescored, (c) an external multiple-choice (MC) anchor test, and (d) an equivalent groups design incorporating rescored CR items (no anchor test). The use of CR items without rescoring resulted in much larger bias than the other designs. The use of an external MC anchor resulted in the next largest bias. The use of a rescored CR anchor and the equivalent groups design led to similar levels of equating error.  相似文献   

12.
In the nonequivalent groups with anchor test (NEAT) design, the standard error of linear observed‐score equating is commonly estimated by an estimator derived assuming multivariate normality. However, real data are seldom normally distributed, causing this normal estimator to be inconsistent. A general estimator, which does not rely on the normality assumption, would be preferred, because it is asymptotically accurate regardless of the distribution of the data. In this article, an analytical formula for the standard error of linear observed‐score equating, which characterizes the effect of nonnormality, is obtained under elliptical distributions. Using three large‐scale real data sets as the populations, resampling studies are conducted to empirically evaluate the normal and general estimators of the standard error of linear observed‐score equating. The effect of sample size (50, 100, 250, or 500) and equating method (chained linear, Tucker, or Levine observed‐score equating) are examined. Results suggest that the general estimator has smaller bias than the normal estimator in all 36 conditions; it has larger standard error when the sample size is at least 100; and it has smaller root mean squared error in all but one condition. An R program is also provided to facilitate the use of the general estimator.  相似文献   

13.
This study examined the appropriateness of the anchor composition in a mixed-format test, which includes both multiple-choice (MC) and constructed-response (CR) items, using subpopulation invariance indices. Linking functions were derived in the nonequivalent groups with anchor test (NEAT) design using two types of anchor sets: (a) MC only and (b) a mix of MC and CR. In each anchor condition, the linking functions were also derived separately for males and females, and those subpopulation functions were compared to the total group function. In the MC-only condition, the difference between the subpopulation functions and the total group function was not trivial in a score region that included cut scores, leading to inconsistent pass/fail decisions for low-performing examinees in particular. Overall, the mixed anchor was a better choice than the MC-only anchor to achieve subpopulation invariance between males and females. The research reinforces subpopulation invariance indices as a means of determining the adequacy of the anchor.  相似文献   

14.
为探讨全测验与锚测验不同的客观题与主观题分值比对等值误差造成的影响,本文设计两种全测验与锚测验题型分值比,以等值标准误为因变量,构建2X2的两因素完全随机化设计进行等值误差的方差分析。结果表明,全测验题型分值比与锚测验题型分值比两因素的主效应显著(P〈0.001),交互作用显著(P〈0.01),简单效应检验表明两因素在各水平上差异显著(P〈0.01)。全测验题型分值比与锚测验题型分值比对等值误差产生一定的影响,在等值过程中应该考虑这两个影响因素,为了减小等值过程的误差,锚测验题型分值比应该尽量与全测验题型分值比相一致。  相似文献   

15.
In this study we examined variations of the nonequivalent groups equating design for tests containing both multiple-choice (MC) and constructed-response (CR) items to determine which design was most effective in producing equivalent scores across the two tests to be equated. Using data from a large-scale exam, this study investigated the use of anchor CR item rescoring (known as trend scoring) in the context of classical equating methods. Four linking designs were examined: an anchor with only MC items, a mixed-format anchor test containing both MC and CR items; a mixed-format anchor test incorporating common CR item rescoring; and an equivalent groups (EG) design with CR item rescoring, thereby avoiding the need for an anchor test. Designs using either MC items alone or a mixed anchor without CR item rescoring resulted in much larger bias than the other two designs. The EG design with trend scoring resulted in the smallest bias, leading to the smallest root mean squared error value.  相似文献   

16.
Two methods of local linear observed‐score equating for use with anchor‐test and single‐group designs are introduced. In an empirical study, the two methods were compared with the current traditional linear methods for observed‐score equating. As a criterion, the bias in the equated scores relative to true equating based on Lord's (1980) definition of equity was used. The local method for the anchor‐test design yielded minimum bias, even for considerable variation of the relative difficulties of the two test forms and the length of the anchor test. Among the traditional methods, the method of chain equating performed best. The local method for single‐group designs yielded equated scores with bias comparable to the traditional methods. This method, however, appears to be of theoretical interest because it forces us to rethink the relationship between score equating and regression.  相似文献   

17.
The equating performance of two internal anchor test structures—miditests and minitests—is studied for four IRT equating methods using simulated data. Originally proposed by Sinharay and Holland, miditests are anchors that have the same mean difficulty as the overall test but less variance in item difficulties. Four popular IRT equating methods were tested, and both the means and SDs of the true ability of the group to be equated were varied. We evaluate equating accuracy marginally and conditional on true ability. Our results suggest miditests perform about as well as traditional minitests for most conditions. Findings are discussed in terms of comparability to the typical minitest design and the trade‐off between accuracy and flexibility in test construction.  相似文献   

18.
曹文娟  白俊梅 《考试研究》2013,(3):79-85,33
本文使用R-2.15.2软件模拟研究锚测验难度参数方差特征对测验等值误差的影响,采用三种等值方法(链百分位等值法、Levine等值法和Tucker等值法)对锚测验不同类型的难度方差进行比较研究。结果显示,当锚测验难度方差小于全测验难度方差时,其等值的随机误差和系统误差与锚测验难度方差和全测验难度方差一致时(即锚测验为全测验的平行缩减版minitest时)的表现基本相同。因此,对锚测验而言,要求其与全测验具有相同的统计规格可能过于严格。  相似文献   

19.
Three local observed‐score kernel equating methods that integrate methods from the local equating and kernel equating frameworks are proposed. The new methods were compared with their earlier counterparts with respect to such measures as bias—as defined by Lord's criterion of equity—and percent relative error. The local kernel item response theory observed‐score equating method, which can be used for any of the common equating designs, had a small amount of bias, a low percent relative error, and a relatively low kernel standard error of equating, even when the accuracy of the test was reduced. The local kernel equating methods for the nonequivalent groups with anchor test generally had low bias and were quite stable against changes in the accuracy or length of the anchor test. Although all proposed methods showed small percent relative errors, the local kernel equating methods for the nonequivalent groups with anchor test design had somewhat larger standard error of equating than their kernel method counterparts.  相似文献   

20.
One of the most widely used methods for equating multiple parallel forms of a test is to incorporate a common set of anchor items in all its operational forms. Under appropriate assumptions it is possible to derive a linear equation for converting raw scores from one operational form to the others. The present note points out that the single most important determinant of the efficiency of the equating process is the magnitude of the correlation between the anchor test and the unique components of each form. It is suggested to use some monotonic function of this correlation as a measure of the equating efficiency, and a simple model relating the relative length of the anchor test and the test reliability to this measure of efficiency is presented.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号