New Meridian Corporation has developed the "Quality Testing Standards and Criteria for Comparability Claims" (QTS). The goal of the QTS is to provide guidance to states that are interested in including content from the New Meridian item bank and intend to make comparability claims with "other assessments" that include New…

New Meridian Corporation has developed the "Quality Testing Standards and Criteria for Comparability Claims" (QTS). The goal of the QTS is to provide guidance to states that are interested in including content from the New Meridian item bank and intend to make comparability claims with "other assessments" that include New…

All students deserve to attend programs and institutions that meet high quality standards. But different program goals, investments of time, and eligibility criteria make it difficult to set specific standards that will apply equally well to all types of programs and institutions. This report sets out principles for developing an accountability…

New Meridian Corporation has developed the "Quality Testing Standards and Criteria for Comparability Claims" (QTS) to provide guidance to states that are interested in including New Meridian content and would like to either keep reporting scores on the New Meridian Scale or use the New Meridian performance levels; that is, the state…

The past decade has seen an emerging interest in mapping (aligning or linking) test scores to language proficiency levels of external performance scales or frameworks, such as the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), as well as locally developed frameworks, such as China's Standards of English Language Ability (CSE). Such alignment is…

This paper aims to compare various Performance Management Systems (PMS) for business school in order to find the strengths of each standard as inputs to design new model of PMS. There are many critical aspects and gaps notified for new model to improve performance and even recognized that self evaluation performance management is not well…

Recently, there has been a significant expansion in the use of performance assessment in large scale testing programs. Although there has been significant support from curriculum and policy stakeholders, the technical feasibility of large scale performance assessments has remained a question. This report is intended to contribute to the debate by…

Forensic versus traditional accounting and auditing are compared and contrasted. Evidence gathering is detailed. Forensic science and fraud symptoms are explained. Criminalists, expert testimony and corporate governance are presented.

Using meta-analysis, this research takes a look at studies included in a meta-analysis by R. Jaeger (1989) that compared the cut score set by one standard setting method with that set by another. This meta-analysis looks beyond Jaeger's studies to select 10 from the research literature. Each compared at least two types of standard setting method.…

In recent years educators have been utilizing judgmental methods, such as the ones advocated by Ebel and Angoff, to set minimum competency standards on test items. This study was designed to investigate the reliability and validity of these two procedures in setting minimum levels of performance on 175 vocational evaluator competency statements.…

The use of item response theory models for analyzing the results of judgmental standard setting studies (the Angoff technique) for establishing minimum pass levels is discussed. A comparison of three methods indicates the traditional approach may not be best. A procedure based on generalizability theory is suggested. (GDC)

This study compares the results obtained using the Angoff, borderline group, and contrasting groups methods of determining performance standards. Congruent results were obtained from the Angoff and contrasting groups methods for several test forms. Borderline group standards were not similar to standards obtained with other methods. (Author/PN)

Results suggest that different groups of judges do set similar examination standards when using the same procedure, and that the average of individual judgments does not differ significantly from group consensus judgments. Significant differences were found, however, between the standards set by the two procedures employed. (RC)

A group-process approach to standard setting was compared to an independent approach for a medical specialty certification examination. Both approaches used the Angoff (1971) standard-setting method. In the group-process method, reviewers discussed items and their ratings during the rating process; in the independent condition, reviewers provided…

To determine if a given standard-setting procedure will yield consistent evaluation outcomes, one of three parallel certifying examinations was administered to three classes of second year medical students. The results indicated that the standard-setting procedure is a significant factor in the determination of the evaluation outcome. (Author/BW)