Commonly used machine learning applications seem to relate to big data. This article provides a gentle review of machine learning and shows why machine learning can be applied to small data too. An example of applying machine learning to screen irregularity reports is presented. In the example, the support vector machine and multinomial naïve…

This article is a commentary on McGill et al.'s (2020) article "Use of Translated and Adapted Versions of the WISC-V: Caveat Emptor." McGill et al. use caveat emptor in their title to indicate that the buyer of an assessment must be careful about the product being purchased, presumably because the seller of the assessment is not being…

van der Linden (this issue) uses words differently than Holland and Dorans. This difference in language usage is a source of some confusion in van der Linden's critique of what he calls equipercentile equating. I address these differences in language. van der Linden maintains that there are only two requirements for score equating. I maintain…

Michael Kane writes in this article that he is in more or less complete agreement with Professor Koretz's characterization of the problem outlined in the paper published in this issue of "Measurement." Kane agrees that current testing practices are not adequate for test-based accountability (TBA) systems, but he writes that he is far…

While agreeing with van der Linden (this issue) that test equating needs better theoretical underpinnings, my comments criticize several aspects of his article. His examples are, for the most part, worthless; he does not use well-established terminology correctly; his view of 100 years of attempts to give a theoretical basis for equating is…

The van der Linden article (this issue) provides a roadmap for future research in equating. My belief is that the roadmap begins and ends with collecting auxiliary data that can be utilized to provide improved equating, especially when data are sparse or equating beyond simple moments is desired.

Koretz, in his article published in this issue, provides compelling arguments that the high stakes currently associated with accountability testing lead to behavioral changes in students, teachers, and other stakeholders that often have negative consequences, such as inflated scores. Koretz goes on to argue that these negative consequences require…

In his thoughtful focus article, Haertel (this issue) pushes testing experts to broaden the scope of their validation efforts and to invite scholars from other disciplines to join them. He credits existing validation frameworks for helping the measurement community to identify incomplete or nonexistent validity arguments. However, he notes his…

This article presents the author's observations on Neil Dorans's NCME Career Award Address: "The Contestant Perspective on Taking Tests: Emanations from the Statue within." He calls attention to some points that Dr. Dorans made in his address, and offers his thoughts in response.

This excellent set of papers is comprehensive and very well written. The Kane et al. paper lays out the theory for linear equating with the NEAT design using a clever but simple framework. The Suh et al. paper is an excellent empirical study of the various methods. The Mroch et al. paper provides an insightful evaluation of the methods as…

This article presents the authors' rejoinder to commentaries on linear equating and the NEAT design. The authors appreciate the insightful work of the commentary writers. Each has made a number of interesting points, many of which the authors had not considered at all. Before responding to some of those points, the authors reiterate what they see…

Kane, Mroch, Suh, and Ripkey (2009) describe what they call five linear equating methods for the nonequivalent groups with anchor test (NEAT) design. The authors embed these methods within a two-dimensional framework. The first dimension contrasts what the authors call a parameter substitution (PS) approach what they call a chained linear…

Paul Newton (2010), with his characteristic concern about theory, has set out two different ways of thinking about the basis upon which equivalences of one sort or another are established between test score scales. His reason for doing this is a desire to establish "the defensibility of linkages lower on the continuum than concordance."…

This article presents the author's rejoinder to thinking about linking from issue 8(1). Particularly within the more embracing linking frameworks, e.g., Holland & Dorans (2006) and Holland (2007), there appears to be a major disjunction between (1) classification discourse: the supposed basis for classification, that is, the underlying theory…

"Linking" is a term given to a general class of procedures by which one represents scores X on one test or measure in terms of scores Y on another test or measure. A recent taxonomy by Holland and Dorans (2006; Holland, 2007) organizes the various types of links into three broad categories: prediction, scale aligning, and equating. In…