Assessing equating results on different equating criteria

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 418-432

  Tong, Ye ^a,c   Kolen, Michael J ^b  

^a Pearson Educational Measurement ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^c PEARSON   (United States)

Author keywords

Equating criteria; Equipercentile equating; IRT equating

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744464113     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146621606280071     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bolt, D. M. (1999). Evaluating the effects of multidimensionality on IRT true-score equating. Applied Measurement in Education, 12, 383-408.
2. Conover, W. J. (1999). Practical nonparametric statistics (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
3. Hanson, B. A. (1989). Scaling the P-ACT+. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Methodology used in scaling the ACT Assessment and P-ACT+ (pp. 57-73). Iowa City, IA: American College Testing.
4. Hanson, B. A. (1994). RG Equate [Computer program]. Iowa City, Iowa: American College Testing.
5. Hanson, B. A. (2001). IRT command language. Monterey, CA: Author.
6. Harris, D. J. (1991). A Comparison of Angoff's Design I and Design II for vertical equating using traditional and IRT methodology. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 221-235.
7. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1987). Notes on the use of log-linear models for fitting discrete probability distributions (Tech. Rep. 87-79). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
8. Hoover, H. D., Dunbar, S. D., & Frisbie, D. A. (2001). The Iowa Tests of Basic Skills: Interpretive guide for teachers and counselors: Forms K and L: Levels 9-14. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
9. Kim, D. I. (2005). A comparison of IRT equating and beta 4 equating. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42(1), 77-99.
10. Kolen, M. J. (1981). Comparison of traditional and item response theory methods for equating tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 18, 1-11.
11. Kolen, M. J. (2003). POLYEQUATE [Computer program]. Iowa City: University of Iowa.
12. Kolen, M. J., & Brennan, R. L. (2004). Test equating: Methods and practices (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag.
13. Kolen, M. J., Zeng, L., & Hanson, B. A. (1996). Conditional standard errors of measurement for scale scores using IRT. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33(2), 129-140.
14. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Lord, F. M., & Wingersky, M. S. (1984). Comparison of IRT true-score and equipercentile observed-score "equatings." Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 452-461.
16. Morris, C. N. (1982). On the foundations of test equating. In P. W. Holland & D. B. Rubin (Eds.), Test equating (pp. 169-191). New York: Academic Press.
17. Stout, W. (1993). DIMTEST manual. Urbana-Champaign: Department of Statistics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
18. Tong, Y. (2002). Assessing equating results with respect to different properties. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
19. Yen, W. M. (1986). The choice of scale for educational measurement: An IRT perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23(4), 299-325.