Publication Date
| In 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2024 | 0 |
| Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
| Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 0 |
| Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
| Comparative Analysis | 2 |
| Judges | 2 |
| Standard Setting (Scoring) | 2 |
| Benchmarking | 1 |
| Computation | 1 |
| Cutting Scores | 1 |
| Foreign Countries | 1 |
| Grade 7 | 1 |
| Graduate Students | 1 |
| Graduate Study | 1 |
| Higher Education | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
| Applied Measurement in… | 2 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Research | 2 |
Education Level
| Elementary Education | 1 |
| Grade 7 | 1 |
| Junior High Schools | 1 |
| Middle Schools | 1 |
| Secondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
| Australia | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Direct linkHumphry, Stephen; Heldsinger, Sandra; Andrich, David – Applied Measurement in Education, 2014
One of the best-known methods for setting a benchmark standard on a test is that of Angoff and its modifications. When scored dichotomously, judges estimate the probability that a benchmark student has of answering each item correctly. As in most methods of standard setting, it is assumed implicitly that the unit of the latent scale of the…
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Standard Setting (Scoring), Judges, Item Response Theory
Peer reviewedChang, Lei – Applied Measurement in Education, 1999
Compared the Nedelsky (L. Nedelsky, 1954) and Angoff (W. Angoff, 1971) standard-setting methods in three studies involving 80 graduate students as judges. Nedelsky cutscores were significantly lower than Angoff cutscores. Suggests that combining the strong features of both methods would make a better standard-setting procedure. (SLD)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Cutting Scores, Graduate Students, Graduate Study
