A clarification on the response probability criterion RP67 for standard settings based on bookmark and item mapping

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 19-20

  Huynh, Huynh ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bookmark standard setting; Item mapping; Response probability criterion; RP value; Scale anchoring

Indexed keywords

EID: 33747228537     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2006.00053.x     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Beaton, A. E., & Allen, N. L. (1992). Interpreting scales through scale anchoring. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17, 191-204.
2. Cizek, G. J., Bunch, M. B., & Koons, H. (2004). Setting performance standards: Contemporary methods. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 23(4), 31-50.
3. Ferrara, S., Perie, M., & Johnson, E. (2002, April). Matching the judgmental task with standard setting panelists expertise: The item-descriptor (ID) matching procedure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans.
4. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
5. Huynh, H. (1994, October). Some technical aspects in standard setting. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Standard Setting for Large Scale Assessment Programs (co-sponsored by National Assessment Governing Board and National Center for Education Statistics), Washington, DC, October 5-7, 1994, pp. 75-91.
6. Huynh, H. (1995, June). On score locations of binary and partial credit items and their applications to scale anchoring or criterion-referenced interpretation. Paper presented at the meeting of the Design and Analysis Committee of National Assessment of Educational Progress, Washington, DC.
7. Huynh, H. (1998). On score locations of binary and partial credit items and their applications to item mapping and criterion-referenced interpretation. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 35-56.
8. Huynh, H. (2000a, April). On Bayesian rules for selecting 3PL binary items for criterion-referenced interpretation and creating ordered item booklets for bookmark standard setting. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
9. Huynh, H. (2000b, April). On item mapping and statistical rules for selecting binary items for criterion-referenced interpretation and bookmark standard setting. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans.
10. Karantonis, A., & Sireci, S. G. (2006). The bookmark standard setting-method: A literature review. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(1), 4-12.
11. Kolstad, A., Cohen, J., Baldi, S., Chan, T., De-Fur, E., & Angeles, J. (1998, May). The response probability convention used in reporting data from IRT assessment scales: Should NCES adopt a standard? Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
12. Lewis, D. M., Mitzel, H. C., Green, D. R., & Patz, R. J. (1999). The bookmark standard setting procedure. Monterey, CA: McGraw-Hill.
13. National Academies of Sciences (2005). Measuring literacy: Performance levels for adults, interim report. Retrieved May 2, 2006 from http://www.nap.edu/books/0309096529/html/.
14. Wang, N. (2003). Use of the Rasch IRT model in standard setting: An item mapping method. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 231-252.