Two studies of medical certification examinations were undertaken to assess standard setting using Angoff's Method. Results indicate that (1) specialization within broad content areas does not affect an expert's estimates of the performance of the borderline group; and (2) performance data should be provided during the standard-setting process.…

Multiple matrix sampling is applied to a variation of Angoff's standard setting method. Thirty-six experts (internists) and 190 items were divided into five groups, and borderline examinee performance was estimated. There was some variability in the cutting scores produced by the individual groups, but various components were well estimated. (SLD)

The major forms of evidence that support a standard's credibility are reviewed, and what can be done over time and for different forms of an examination to enhance its comparability in a credentialing setting is outlined. Pass-fail decisions must be consistent to ensure a standard's credibility. (SLD)

Scores from four samples each of 250 and 1,000 physicians demonstrated that a linear procedure for equating scores and rescaling judges' standards for a certification test could be applied to individual item data gathered through the Angoff standard-setting method. Equated and rescaled values were close to those actually assigned. (SLD)

An agenda for research on standards for professional licensure and certification examinations is outlined. The relationship between scores and standards is explored, and major classes of standards are described. Topics for future research are discussed in the areas of judgment basis, process efficiency, group effects, and content and expertise…

This study examined whether two variations on the typical Angoff group standard-setting process would produce sufficiently consistent results to recommend their use. The results imply that judgments gathered after an initial traditional group-process session can provide an efficient alternative mechanism for setting cutting scores using the Angoff…

The continuous method of scoring a performance test composed of standardized patients was compared with a derivative method that assigned each of the 131 examinees (medical residents) a dichotomous score, and use of Angoff's method with these scoring methods was studied. Both methods produce reasonable means and distributions of scores. (SLD)

Whether cutting score equivalents (CSEs) based on examinee performance are the same as CSEs based on expert judgment was examined using data from 3,262 examinees taking an internal medicine certification examination. CSEs produced by 40 physicians/experts were closer to the criteria than were standards derived from examinee performance. (SLD)