Comparisons among Designs for Equating Constructed-Response Tests. Research Report. ETS RR-08-53Report as inadecuate




Comparisons among Designs for Equating Constructed-Response Tests. Research Report. ETS RR-08-53 - Download this document for free, or read online. Document in PDF available to download.



ETS Research Report Series, Oct 2008

This study examined variations of a nonequivalent groups equating design used with constructed-response (CR) tests to determine which design was most effective in producing equivalent scores across the two tests to be equated. Using data from a large-scale exam, the study investigated the use of anchor CR item rescoring in the context of classical equating methods. Four linking designs were examined: (a) an anchor set containing common CR items, (b) an anchor set incorporating common CR items rescored, (c) an external multiple-choice (MC) anchor test, and (d) an equivalent groups design incorporating CR items rescored (no anchor test). The use of CR items without rescoring or the use of an external MC anchor resulted in much larger bias than the other two designs. The use of a rescored CR anchor and the equivalent groups design led to similar levels of equating error.

Descriptors: Equated Scores, Comparative Analysis, Test Format, Responses, Test Items, Multiple Choice Tests, Difficulty Level, Design

Educational Testing Service. Rosedale Road, MS19-R Princeton, NJ 08541. Tel: 609-921-9000; Fax: 609-734-5410; e-mail: RDweb[at]ets.org; Web site: https://www.ets.org/research/policy_research_reports/ets





Author: Kim, Sooyeon; Walker, Michael E.; McHale, Frederick

Source: https://eric.ed.gov/?q=a&ft=on&ff1=dtySince_1992&pg=2866&id=EJ1111346







Related documents