NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Audience
Practitioners2
Location
Nebraska1
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
National Assessment of…2
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Showing 1 to 15 of 19 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Tia M. Fechter; Heeyeon Yoon – Language Testing, 2024
This study evaluated the efficacy of two proposed methods in an operational standard-setting study conducted for a high-stakes language proficiency test of the U.S. government. The goal was to seek low-cost modifications to the existing Yes/No Angoff method to increase the validity and reliability of the recommended cut scores using a convergent…
Descriptors: Standard Setting, Language Proficiency, Language Tests, Evaluation Methods
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Lewis, Jennifer; Lim, Hwanggyu; Padellaro, Frank; Sireci, Stephen G.; Zenisky, April L. – Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 2022
Setting cut scores on (MSTs) is difficult, particularly when the test spans several grade levels, and the selection of items from MST panels must reflect the operational test specifications. In this study, we describe, illustrate, and evaluate three methods for mapping panelists' Angoff ratings into cut scores on the scale underlying an MST. The…
Descriptors: Cutting Scores, Adaptive Testing, Test Items, Item Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Wyse, Adam E.; Babcock, Ben – Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 2020
A common belief is that the Bookmark method is a cognitively simpler standard-setting method than the modified Angoff method. However, a limited amount of research has investigated panelist's ability to perform well the Bookmark method, and whether some of the challenges panelists face with the Angoff method may also be present in the Bookmark…
Descriptors: Standard Setting (Scoring), Evaluation Methods, Testing Problems, Test Items
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Lewis, Daniel; Cook, Robert – Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 2020
In this paper we assert that the practice of principled assessment design renders traditional standard-setting methodology redundant at best and contradictory at worst. We describe the rationale for, and methodological details of, Embedded Standard Setting (ESS; previously, Engineered Cut Scores. Lewis, 2016), an approach to establish performance…
Descriptors: Standard Setting, Evaluation, Cutting Scores, Performance Based Assessment
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Clauser, Brian E.; Baldwin, Peter; Margolis, Melissa J.; Mee, Janet; Winward, Marcia – Journal of Educational Measurement, 2017
Validating performance standards is challenging and complex. Because of the difficulties associated with collecting evidence related to external criteria, validity arguments rely heavily on evidence related to internal criteria--especially evidence that expert judgments are internally consistent. Given its importance, it is somewhat surprising…
Descriptors: Evaluation Methods, Standard Setting, Cutting Scores, Expertise
Nebraska Department of Education, 2024
The Nebraska Student-Centered Assessment System (NSCAS) is a statewide assessment system that embodies Nebraska's holistic view of students and helps them prepare for success in postsecondary education, career, and civic life. It uses multiple measures throughout the year to provide educators and decision-makers at all levels with the insights…
Descriptors: Student Evaluation, Evaluation Methods, Elementary School Students, Middle School Students
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Smith, Russell W.; Davis-Becker, Susan L.; O'Leary, Lisa S. – Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 2014
This article describes a hybrid standard setting method that combines characteristics of the Angoff (1971) and Bookmark (Mitzel, Lewis, Patz & Green, 2001) methods. The proposed approach utilizes strengths of each method while addressing weaknesses. An ordered item booklet, with items sorted based on item difficulty, is used in combination…
Descriptors: Standard Setting, Difficulty Level, Test Items, Rating Scales
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Swail, Watson Scott – College and University, 2011
College rankings create much talk and discussion in the higher education arena. This love/hate relationship has not necessarily resulted in better rankings, but rather, more rankings. This paper looks at some of the measures and pitfalls of the current rankings systems, and proposes areas for improvement through a better focus on teaching and…
Descriptors: Higher Education, Measurement Objectives, Measurement Techniques, Classification
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Reckase, Mark D. – Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 2006
Schulz (2006) provides a different perspective on standard setting than that provided in Reckase (2006). He also suggests a modification to the bookmark procedure and some alternative models for errors in panelists' judgments than those provided by Reckase. This article provides a response to some of the points made by Schulz and reports some…
Descriptors: Evaluation Methods, Standard Setting, Reader Response, Regression (Statistics)
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Lin, Jie – Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 2006
The Bookmark standard-setting procedure was developed to address the perceived problems with the most popular method for setting cut-scores: the Angoff procedure (Angoff, 1971). The purposes of this article are to review the Bookmark procedure and evaluate it in terms of Berk's (1986) criteria for evaluating cut-score setting methods. The…
Descriptors: Standard Setting (Scoring), Cutting Scores, Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Research
Yang, Wen-Ling – 2000
The Achievement-Levels Setting (ALS) process for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) resulted in numerical cutscores on the NAEP score scale representing the performance standards for three achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. This paper focuses on an important, but less researched, aspect of the standard setting…
Descriptors: Academic Achievement, Academic Standards, Civics, Evaluation Methods
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Beretvas, S. Natasha – Applied Psychological Measurement, 2004
In the bookmark standard-setting procedure, judges place "bookmarks" in a reordered test booklet containing items presented in order of increasing difficulty. Traditionally, the bookmark difficulty location (BDL) is on the trait continuum where, for dichotomous items, there is a two-thirds probability of a correct response and, for a score of "k"…
Descriptors: Probability, Standard Setting, Item Response Theory, Test Items
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Hambleton, Ronald K.; Powell, Sally – Evaluation and the Health Professions, 1983
To address the issues associated with testing standards, sets of context-setting variables and technical matters associated with standard-setting are presented to assist groups or committees desiring to set standards in a systematic way. (Author/CM)
Descriptors: Certification, Criterion Referenced Tests, Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Methods
Sykes, Robert C.; Fitzpatrick, Anne R. – 1990
The results of classifying test items on the basis of their Mantel-Haenszel (MH) alpha estimates were compared to the results of classifying these items using an item response theory (IRT) based procedure involving the comparison of item difficulties in the interest of identifying the alpha value that maximized the decision concordance between the…
Descriptors: Classification, Cutting Scores, Difficulty Level, Ethnic Groups
McGinty, Dixie; Neel, John H. – 1996
A new standard setting approach is introduced, called the cognitive components approach. Like the Angoff method, the cognitive components method generates minimum pass levels (MPLs) for each item. In both approaches, the item MPLs are summed for each judge, then averaged across judges to yield the standard. In the cognitive components approach,…
Descriptors: Cognitive Processes, Criterion Referenced Tests, Evaluation Methods, Grade 3
Previous Page | Next Page ยป
Pages: 1  |  2