A Comment on Early Student Blunders on Computer-Based Adaptive Tests
Saved in:
| Title: | A Comment on Early Student Blunders on Computer-Based Adaptive Tests |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Green, Bert F. |
| Source: | Applied Psychological Measurement. Mar 2011 35(2):165-174. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Physical Description: | |
| Page Count: | 10 |
| Publication Date: | 2011 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Evaluative |
| Descriptors: | Adaptive Testing, Computer Assisted Testing, Test Bias, Item Response Theory, Test Items, Scores, Data Analysis, Academic Ability, Students |
| DOI: | 10.1177/0146621610377080 |
| ISSN: | 0146-6216 |
| Abstract: | This article refutes a recent claim that computer-based tests produce biased scores for very proficient test takers who make mistakes on one or two initial items and that the "bias" can be reduced by using a four-parameter IRT model. Because the same effect occurs with pattern scores on nonadaptive tests, the effect results from IRT scoring, not from adaptive testing. Because very proficient test takers rarely err on items of middle difficulty, the so-called bias is one of selective data analysis. Furthermore, the apparently large score penalty for one error on an otherwise perfect response pattern is shown to result from the relative stretching of the IRT scale at very high and very low proficiencies. The recommended use of a four-parameter IRT model is shown to have drawbacks. (Contains 6 figures.) |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 8 |
| Entry Date: | 2011 |
| Accession Number: | EJ916025 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | This article refutes a recent claim that computer-based tests produce biased scores for very proficient test takers who make mistakes on one or two initial items and that the "bias" can be reduced by using a four-parameter IRT model. Because the same effect occurs with pattern scores on nonadaptive tests, the effect results from IRT scoring, not from adaptive testing. Because very proficient test takers rarely err on items of middle difficulty, the so-called bias is one of selective data analysis. Furthermore, the apparently large score penalty for one error on an otherwise perfect response pattern is shown to result from the relative stretching of the IRT scale at very high and very low proficiencies. The recommended use of a four-parameter IRT model is shown to have drawbacks. (Contains 6 figures.) |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0146-6216 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/0146621610377080 |
