Generalizability of New Standards Project 1993 Pilot Study Tasks in Mathematics

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 201-214

  Linn, Robert L ^a   Burton, Elizabeth ^a   Destefano, Lizanne ^b   Hanson, Matthew ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030514531     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame0903_1     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Brennan, R. L. (1992). Elements of generalizability theory. Iowa City, IA: American College Testing Program.
2. Brennan, R. L. (1993). Some measurement characteristics of aggregated versus individual scores (ACT Report Series No. 93-10). Iowa City, IA: American College Testing Program.
3. Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, H. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements. New York: Wiley.
4. DeStefano, L. (1993a). Summary of findings from the 1993 New Standards Project spring pilot in mathematics: Preliminary findings from Snowbird. (Draft Tech. Rep., December 21).
5. DeStefano, L. (1993b). Summary of scorer qualification rates, student demographics, scorer consistency and student performance for the 1993 New Standards spring pilot. (Draft Tech. Rep., December 21).
6. Dunbar, S. B., Koretz, D. M., & Hoover, H. D. (1991). Quality control in the development and use of performance assessments. Applied Measurement in Education. 4, 298-303.
7. Linn, R. L. (1993). Educational assessment: Expanded expectations and challenges. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 1-16.
8. Linn, R. L., & Burton, E. (1994). Performance-based assessments: Implications of task specificity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 13, (1), 5-8, 15.
9. Linn, R. L., Burton, E., DeStefano, L., & Hanson, M. (1994). Generalizability of New Standards Project 1993 pilot study tasks in mathematics (Tech. Rep. No. 394). Los Angeles: University of California Los Angeles, Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
10. Resnick, L. B., & Resnick, D. P. (1992). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B. G. Gifford & M. C O'Conner (Eds.), Changing assessments: Alternative views of aptitude, achievement and instruction (pp. 37-75). Boston: Kluwer.
11. Rogosa, D. (1994). Misclassification in student performance levels. Stanford: Stanford University, California Learning Assessment System.
12. Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Gao, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 215-232.
13. Shavelson, R. J., & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generulizability theory: A primer. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.