Making the cut: The cut score setting process in a public school district

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 289-312

  Giraud, Gerald ^a,c   Impara, James C ^b  

^a WALDEN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 23844544950     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame1803_6     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Angoff, W. (1971). Scales, norms and equivalent scores. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational Measurement (2nd ed., pp. 508-600). Washington, DC: American Council of Education.
2. Berk, R. (1996). Standard setting, the next generation. Applied Measurement in Education, 9, 215-235.
3. Buckendahl, C., Plake. B., & Impara, J. (1999). Setting minimum passing scores on high-stakes assessments that combine selected and constructed response formats. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED432604)
4. Geertz, C. (1983). From the native's point of view. In C. Geertz (Ed.), Local knowledge: Further essays in anthropology (pp. 55-70). New York: Basic Books.
5. Giraud, G., Impara, J., & Plake, B. (2000). A qualitative examination of teachers 'conception of the just competent examinee in Angoff (1971) workshops. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED445050)
6. Hurtz, G., & Hertz, G. (1999). How many raters should be used for establishing cutoff scores with the Angoff method? A generalizability theory study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 885-897.
7. Impara, J., Giraud, G., & Plake, B. (2000). The influence of providing target group descriptors when setting a passing score. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED445013)
8. Impara, J., & Plake, B. (1998). Teachers'ability to estimate item difficulty: A test of the assumptions in the Angoff standard setting method. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 69-81.
9. Kane, M. (1995). Examinee-centered vs. task-centered standard setting. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Standard Setting in Large-Scale Assessments (Vol. 2, pp. 119-139). Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board and National Center for Education Statistics.
10. Linn, R. (1978). Demands, cautions and suggestions for setting standards. Journal of Educational Measurement, 15, 301-308.
11. Livingston, S. A., & Zieky, M. J. (1982). Passing scores: A manual for setting standards of performance on educational and occupational tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
12. Mills, C. N., Melican, G. J., & Ahluwalia, N. T. (1991). Defining minimal competence. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10(2), 7-10.
13. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
14. Norcini, J., Lipner, R., Langdon, L., & Strecker, C. (1987). A comparison of three variations on a standard-setting method. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 56-64.
15. Plake, B., & Giraud, G. (1998). Effect of a modified Angoff strategy for obtaining item performance estimates in a standard setting study. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No, ED422354)
16. Plake, B., Melican, G., & Mills, C. (1991). Factors influencing intrajudge consistency during standard setting. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10(2), 15-25.
17. Reid, J. (1991) Training judges to generate standard-setting data. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10(2), 11-14.