Applying Bayesian item selection approaches to adaptive tests using polytomous items

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-20

  Penfield, Randall D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 32644449069     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame1901_1     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Bennet, R. E., Steffen, M., Singley, M. K., Morley, M., & Jacquemin, D. (1997). Evaluating an automatically scorable, open-ended response type for measuring mathematical reasoning in computer-adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 162-176.
2. Davey, T., Godwin, J., & Mittleholtz, D. (1997). Developing and scoring an innovative computerized writing assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 21-41.
3. De Ayala, R. J. (1989). A comparison of the nominal response model and the three-parameter logistic model in computerized adaptive testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 789-905.
4. De Ayala, R. J. (1992). The nominal response model in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 327-343.
5. De Ayala, R. J. (1993). An introduction to polytomous item response theory models. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 25, 172-189.
6. De Ayala, R. J., Dodd, B. G., & Koch, W. R. (1992). A comparison of the partial credit and graded response models in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 5, 17-34.
7. Dodd, B. G., De Ayala, R. J., & Koch, W. R. (1995). Computerized adaptive testing with polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 5-22.
8. Dodd, B. G., & Fitzpatrick, S. J. (2002). Alternatives for scoring CBTs. In C. N. Mills, M. T. Potenza, J. J. Fremer, & W. C. Ward (Eds.), Computer-based testing: Building the foundations for future assessments (pp. 215-235). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Dodd, B. G., Koch, W. R., & De Ayala, R. J. (1989). Operational characteristics of adaptive testing procedures using the graded response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 129-143.
10. Dodd, B. G., Koch, W. R., & De Ayala, R. J. (1993). Computerized adaptive testing using the partial credit model: Effects of item pool characteristics and different stopping rules. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 61-77.
11. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
12. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13. Jodoin, M. G. (2003). Measurement efficiency of innovative item formats in computer-based testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 1-15.
14. Koch, W. R., & Dodd, B. G. (1989). An investigation of procedures for computerized adaptive testing using partial credit scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 335-357.
15. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
16. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
17. Masters, G. N., & Wright, B. D. (1997). The partial credit model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 101-121). New York: Springer.
18. Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 159-176.
19. Muraki, E. (1993). Information functions of the generalized partial credit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 351-363.
20. Muraki, E. (1997). A generalized partial credit model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 153-164). New York: Springer.
21. Parshall, C. G., Spray, J. A., Kalohn, J. C., & Davey, T. (2002). Practical considerations in computer-based testing. New York: Springer.
22. Pastor, D. A., Dodd, B. G., & Chang, H. H. (2002). A comparison of item selection techniques and exposure control mechanisms in CATs using the generalized partial credit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 147-163.
23. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using response patterns of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph, 17.
24. Samejima, F. (1997). Graded response model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 85-100). New York: Springer.
25. Thissen, D., & Mislevy, R. J. (1990). Testing algorithms. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 103-135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
26. van der Linden, W. J. (1998). Bayesian item-selection criteria for adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 62, 201-216.
27. van der Linden, W. J., & Pashley, P. J. (2000). Item selection and ability estimation in adaptive testing. In W. J. van der Linden & C. A.W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 1-25). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
28. Wainer, H. (1990). Introduction and history. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 1-21). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
29. Wainer, H., Dorans, N., Green, B. F., Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., & Thissen, D. (1990). Future challenges. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 233-271). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
30. Wainer, H., & Kiely, G. L. (1987). Item clusters and computerized adaptive testing: A case for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 185-201.
31. Weiss, D. J. ( 1982). Improving measurement quality and efficiency with adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 473-492.