Comparison Between Dichotomous and Polytomous Scoring of Innovative Items in a Large-Scale Computerized Adaptive Test

被引:13
|
作者
Jiao, Hong [1 ]
Liu, Junhui
Haynie, Kathleen [2 ]
Woo, Ada [3 ]
Gorham, Jerry [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Maryland, Dept Measurement Stat & Evaluat, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
[2] Haynie Res & Evaluat, Skillman, NJ USA
[3] Natl Council State Boards Nursing, Chicago, IL USA
[4] Pearson, Cerrillos, NM USA
关键词
polytomous scoring; innovative items; computerized adaptive test; Rasch model; partial credit model;
D O I
10.1177/0013164411422903
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
This study explored the impact of partial credit scoring of one type of innovative items (multiple-response items) in a computerized adaptive version of a large-scale licensure pretest and operational test settings. The impacts of partial credit scoring on the estimation of the ability parameters and classification decisions in operational test settings were explored in one real data analysis and two simulation studies when two different polytomous scoring algorithms, automated polytomous scoring and rater-generated polytomous scoring, were applied. For the real data analyses, the ability estimates from dichotomous and polytomous scoring were highly correlated; the classification consistency between different scoring algorithms was nearly perfect. Information distribution changed slightly in the operational item bank. In the two simulation studies comparing each polytomous scoring with dichotomous scoring, the ability estimates resulting from polytomous scoring had slightly higher measurement precision than those resulting from dichotomous scoring. The practical impact related to classification decision was minor because of the extremely small number of items that could be scored polytomously in this current study.
引用
收藏
页码:493 / 509
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Computerized adaptive testing for polytomous motivation items: Administration mode effects and a comparison with short forms
    Hol, A. Michiel
    Vorst, Harrie C. M.
    Mellenbergh, Gideon J.
    [J]. APPLIED PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 2007, 31 (05) : 412 - 429
  • [2] Practical issues in large-scale computerized adaptive testing
    Mills, CN
    Stocking, ML
    [J]. APPLIED MEASUREMENT IN EDUCATION, 1996, 9 (04) : 287 - 304
  • [3] An Approach to Scoring and Equating Tests With Binary Items: Piloting With Large-Scale Assessments
    Dimitrov, Dimiter M.
    [J]. EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 2016, 76 (06) : 954 - 975
  • [4] A Heuristic Method for Large-Scale Cognitive-Diagnostic Computerized Adaptive Testing
    Vie, Jill-Jenn
    Popineau, Fabrice
    Tort, Francoise
    Marteau, Benjamin
    Denos, Nathalie
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FOURTH (2017) ACM CONFERENCE ON LEARNING @ SCALE (L@S'17), 2017, : 323 - 326
  • [5] Multivariate generalizability analysis of automated scoring for short answer items of social studies in large-scale assessment
    Kyung Hee Sung
    Eun Hee Noh
    Kyong Hee Chon
    [J]. Asia Pacific Education Review, 2017, 18 : 425 - 437
  • [6] Multivariate generalizability analysis of automated scoring for short answer items of social studies in large-scale assessment
    Sung, Kyung Hee
    Noh, Eun Hee
    Chon, Kyong Hee
    [J]. ASIA PACIFIC EDUCATION REVIEW, 2017, 18 (03) : 425 - 437
  • [7] Eliminating the Third Distractor from Large-Scale Multiple-Choice Test Items
    Ortega Torres, Laura
    Chavaz Alvarez, Cesar Antonio
    [J]. REVISTA DE EDUCACION, 2020, (388): : 131 - 162
  • [8] Item Selection Algorithms in Computerized Adaptive Test Comparison Using Items Modeled with Nonparametric Isotonic Model
    Luzardo, Mario
    [J]. QUANTITATIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2019, 265 : 95 - 105
  • [9] LARGE-SCALE GAP TEST - COMPARISON OF TETRYL AND PENTOLITE DONORS
    TOSCANO, J
    JAFFE, I
    ROBERSON, G
    [J]. AIAA JOURNAL, 1963, 1 (04) : 964 - 966
  • [10] A comparison and evaluation of innovative parabolic trough collector concepts for large-scale application
    Fredriksson, Jose
    Eickhoff, Martin
    Giese, Lutz
    Herzog, Michael
    [J]. SOLAR ENERGY, 2021, 215 (215) : 266 - 310