Advertisement

Item Pool Evaluation and Maintenance

  • Cynthia G. Parshall
  • Judith A. Spray
  • John C. Kalohn
  • Tim Davey
Part of the Statistics for Social and Behavioral Sciences book series (SSBS)

Abstract

When testing programs indicate that they would like to move their current multiple-choice paper-and-pencil examinations to a computer-based testing program, they can consider several CBT options. These include CFT, ATA, CAT, and CCT. Ultimately, the decision to move a testing program to a CBT environment depends on many factors. These include the purpose of the test, the type of test, the status of current test specifications and classification of items, whether current exams are voluntary, current testing volumes, and the results of an item pool evaluation. This chapter focuses on the item pool evaluation process and item pool maintenance.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Davey, T., & Parshall, C. G. (1995, April). New algorithms for item selection and exposure control with computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  2. Huang, C, Kalohn, J. C, Lin, C, & Spray, J. A. (2000). Estimating Item Parameters from Classical Indices for Item Pool Development with a Computerized Classification Test (ACT Research Report) Iowa City: ACT, Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Kalohn, J. C, & Spray, J. A. (1999). The effect of model misspecification on classifications made using a computerized classification test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 46–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Nering, M. L., Davey, T., & Thompson, T. (1998). A hybrid method for controlling item exposure in computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Champaign-Urbana.Google Scholar
  5. Parshall, C. G., Davey, T., & Nering, M. L. (1998, April). Test development exposure control for adaptive testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Diego.Google Scholar
  6. Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C. (1995). A New Method of Controlling Item Exposure in Computerized Adaptive Testing. (Research Report 95-25). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  7. Stocking, M., & Swanson, L. (1993). A method for severely constrained item selection in adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 277–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sympson, J. B., & Hetter, R. D. (1985). Controlling item-exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Military Testing Association (pp. 973–977). San Diego: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.Google Scholar
  9. Thomasson, G. L. (1995). New item exposure control algorithms for computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Minneapolis.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cynthia G. Parshall
    • 1
  • Judith A. Spray
    • 2
  • John C. Kalohn
    • 2
  • Tim Davey
    • 3
  1. 1.University of South FloridaTampaUSA
  2. 2.ACT, Inc.Iowa CityUSA
  3. 3.Educational Testing ServicePrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations