Estimating Conditional Standard Errors of Measurement for Tests Composed of Testlets

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 161-180

  Lee, Guemin ^a  

^a CTB MCGRAW HILL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034419653     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S15324818AME1302_3     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Agresti, A., & Coull, B. A. (1998). Approximate is better than "exact" for interval estimation of binominal proportions. The American Statistician, 52, 119-126.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
3. Bock, R. D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29-51.
4. Brennan, R. L. (1998). Raw-score conditional standard errors of measurement in generalizability theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 307-331.
5. Chen, W.-H., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 265-289.
6. Cliff, N. (1988). The eigenvalues-greater-than-one rule and the reliability of components. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 276-279.
7. Feldt, L. S. (1984). Some relationships between the binomial error model and classical test theory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44, 883-891.
8. Hoover, H. D., Hieronymus, A.N., Frisbie, D. A., & Dunbar, S. B. (1994). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills : Interpretive guide for school administrators. Chicago: Riverside.
9. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). PRELIS2 user's reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software.
10. Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second generation little jiffy. Psychometrika, 35, 401-415.
11. Lee, G. (1999, April). Conditional standard errors of measurement for tests composed of testlets. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, Can7 ada.
12. Lee, G., & Frisbie, D. A. (1999). Estimating reliability under a generalizability theory model for test scores composed of testlets. Applied Measurement in Education, 12, 237-255.
13. Lee, G., Kolen, M. J., Frisbie, D. A., & Ankenmann, R. D. (in press). A comparison of the performance of dichotomous and polytomous IRT models in equating scores from tests composed of testlets. Applied Psychological Measurement.
14. Lord, F. M. (1955). Estimating test reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 15, 325-336.
15. Lord, F. M. (1957). Do tests of the same length have the same standard error of measurement? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 17, 510-521.
16. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
17. Lord, F. M., & Wingersky, M. S. (1984). Comparison of IRT true-score and equipercentile observed-score "equating." Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 453-461.
18. McDonald, R. P. (1982). Linear versus nonlinear models in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 379-396.
19. Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1990). BILOG 3. Item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models (2nd ed.). Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
20. Mollenkopf, W. G. (1949). Variation of the standard error of measurement. Psychometrika, 14, 189-229.
21. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of a latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometric Monograph Supplement, No. 17.
22. Sireci, S. G., Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (1991). On the reliability of testlet-based tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 237-247.
23. Stout, W. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589-617.
24. Stout, W., Douglas, J., Junker, B., & Roussos, L. (1993). DIMTEST manual. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois.
25. Thissen, D. (1991). MULTELOG Mutiple categorical item analysis and test scoring using item response theory (Version 6.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: Scientific Software.
26. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Mooney, J. A. (1989). Trace lines for testlets: A use of multiple-categorical models. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 247-260.
27. Thorndike, R. L. (1951). Reliability. In E. F. Lindquist (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 560-620). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
28. Wainer, H. (1995). Precision and differential item functioning on a testlet-based test: The 1991 Law School Admissions Test as an example. Applied Measurement in Education, 8, 157-186.
29. Wainer, H., & Kiely, G. L. (1987). Item clusters and computerized adaptive testing: A case for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 185-201.
30. Wainer, H., & Lewis, C. (1990). Toward a psychometrics for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 1-14.
31. Wainer, H., & Thissen, D. (1996). How is reliability related to the quality of test scores? What is the effect of local dependence on reliability? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 15(1), 22-29.
32. Wang, T., Kolen, M. J., & Harris, D. J. (1996, April). Conditional standard errors, reliability and decision consistency ofperformance levels usingpolytomous IRT. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
33. Yen, W. M. (1984). Effects of local item dependence on the fit and equating performance of the three-parameter logistic model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 125-145.
34. Yen, W. M. (1993). Scaling performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 187-213.