NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 8 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Wyse, Adam E.; McBride, James R. – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2021
A key consideration when giving any computerized adaptive test (CAT) is how much adaptation is present when the test is used in practice. This study introduces a new framework to measure the amount of adaptation of Rasch-based CATs based on looking at the differences between the selected item locations (Rasch item difficulty parameters) of the…
Descriptors: Item Response Theory, Computer Assisted Testing, Adaptive Testing, Test Items
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Andrich, David; Marais, Ida – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2018
Even though guessing biases difficulty estimates as a function of item difficulty in the dichotomous Rasch model, assessment programs with tests which include multiple-choice items often construct scales using this model. Research has shown that when all items are multiple-choice, this bias can largely be eliminated. However, many assessments have…
Descriptors: Multiple Choice Tests, Test Items, Guessing (Tests), Test Bias
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Kim, Sooyeon; Moses, Tim; Yoo, Hanwook – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2015
This inquiry is an investigation of item response theory (IRT) proficiency estimators' accuracy under multistage testing (MST). We chose a two-stage MST design that includes four modules (one at Stage 1, three at Stage 2) and three difficulty paths (low, middle, high). We assembled various two-stage MST panels (i.e., forms) by manipulating two…
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Item Response Theory, Computation, Accuracy
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Pohl, Steffi – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2013
This article introduces longitudinal multistage testing (lMST), a special form of multistage testing (MST), as a method for adaptive testing in longitudinal large-scale studies. In lMST designs, test forms of different difficulty levels are used, whereas the values on a pretest determine the routing to these test forms. Since lMST allows for…
Descriptors: Adaptive Testing, Longitudinal Studies, Difficulty Level, Comparative Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Zhang, Jinming; Li, Jie – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2016
An IRT-based sequential procedure is developed to monitor items for enhancing test security. The procedure uses a series of statistical hypothesis tests to examine whether the statistical characteristics of each item under inspection have changed significantly during CAT administration. This procedure is compared with a previously developed…
Descriptors: Computer Assisted Testing, Test Items, Difficulty Level, Item Response Theory
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Vispoel, Walter P.; Clough, Sara J.; Bleiler, Timothy – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2005
Recent studies have shown that restricting review and answer change opportunities on computerized adaptive tests (CATs) to items within successive blocks reduces time spent in review, satisfies most examinees' desires for review, and controls against distortion in proficiency estimates resulting from intentional incorrect answering of items prior…
Descriptors: Mathematics, Item Analysis, Adaptive Testing, Computer Assisted Testing
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Bridgeman, Brent; Cline, Frederick – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2004
Time limits on some computer-adaptive tests (CATs) are such that many examinees have difficulty finishing, and some examinees may be administered tests with more time-consuming items than others. Results from over 100,000 examinees suggested that about half of the examinees must guess on the final six questions of the analytical section of the…
Descriptors: Guessing (Tests), Timed Tests, Adaptive Testing, Computer Assisted Testing
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Wise, Steven L.; And Others – Journal of Educational Measurement, 1992
Performance of 156 undergraduate and 48 graduate students on a self-adapted test (SFAT)--students choose the difficulty level of their test items--was compared with performance on a computer-adapted test (CAT). Those taking the SFAT obtained higher ability scores and reported lower posttest state anxiety than did CAT takers. (SLD)
Descriptors: Adaptive Testing, Comparative Testing, Computer Assisted Testing, Difficulty Level