Test construction and diagnostic testing

Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment for Education: Theory and Applications

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 173-202

  Gorin, Joanna S ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 36348986992     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511611186.007     Document Type: Chapter

References (42)

1. American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: AERA.
2. Behrens, J. T., Mislevy, R. J., Bauer, M., Williamson, D. M., & Levy, R. (2004). Introduction to evidence-centered design and lessons learned from its application in a global e-learning program. International Journal of Testing, 4, 295–302.
3. Bennett, R. E., Jenkins, F., Persky, H., & Weiss, A. (2003). Assessing complex problem solving performances. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 10(3), 347–359.
4. Briggs, D. C., Alonzo, A. C., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 33–63.
5. Champagne, A., Bergin, K., Bybee, R., Duschl, R., & Ghallager, J. (2004). NAEP 2009 science framework development: Issues and recommendations. Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board.
6. Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Assessment of reading comprehension: Matching test purposes and test properties. Educational Psychologist, 22(3/4), 313–332.
7. DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Diehl, K. A. (2004). Algorithmic item generation and problem solving strategies in matrix completion problems. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 64(8-B), 4075.
9. Embretson, S. E. (1994). Application of cognitive design systems to test development. In C. R. Reynolds (Ed.), Cognitive assessment: A multidisciplinary perspective(pp. 107–135). New York: Plenum Press.
10. Embretson, S. E. (1998). A cognitive design system approach to generating valid tests: Application to abstract reasoning. Psychological Methods, 3, 300–396.
11. Embretson, S. E. (1999). Generating items during testing: Psychometric issues and models. Psychometrika, 64(4), 407–433.
12. Embretson, S. E., & Gorin, J. S. (2001). Improving construct validity with cognitive psychology principles. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38(4), 343–368.
13. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Frederiksen, N. (1990). Introduction. In N. Frederiksen, R. Glaser, A. Lesgold, & M. G. Shafto (Eds.), Diagnostic monitoring of skill and knowledge acquisition(pp. ix–xvii). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Gertner, A., & VanLehn, K. (2000). Andes: A coached problem solving environment for physics. In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson, & K. VanLehn (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 5th International conference, ITS 2000(pp. 131–142). Berlin: Springer.
16. Gorin, J. S. (2006). Using alternative data sources to inform item difficulty modeling. Paper presented at the 2006 annual meeting of the National Council on Educational Measurement. San Francisco, CA.
17. Hartz, S. M. (2002). A Bayesian framework for the unified model for assessing cognitive abilities: Blending theory with practicality. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 63(2-B), 864.
18. Henson, R., & Douglas, J. (2005). Test construction for cognitive diagnosis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29(4), 262–277.
19. Leighton, J. P. (2004). Avoiding misconception, misuse, and missed opportunities: The collection of verbal reports in educational achievement testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 23(4), 6–15.
20. Leighton, J. P., Gierl, M. J., & Hunka, S. M. (2004). The attribute hierarchy method for cognitive assessment:Avariation on Tatsuoka’s rule-space approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 205–237.
21. Marshall, S. P. (1981). Sequential item selection: Optimal and heuristic policies. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 23, 134–152.
22. Marshall, S. P. (1990). Generating good items for diagnostic tests. In N. Frederiksen, R. Glaser, A. Lesgold, & M. Shafto (Eds.), Diagnostic monitoring of skill and knowledge acquisition(pp. 433–452). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Martin, J., & VanLehn, K. (1995). A Bayesian approach to cognitive assessment. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman, & R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessment(pp. 141–167). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement(3rd ed.; pp. 13–103). New York: American Council on Education/Macmillan.
25. Messick, S. (1995).Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749.
26. Mislevy, R. J. (1994). Evidence and inference in educational assessment. Psychometrika, 59, 439–483.
27. Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., & Almond, R. G. (2002). Design and analysis in task-based language assessment. Language Testing. Special Issue: Interpretations, intended uses, and designs in task-based language, 19(4), 477–496.
28. Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, H.R. 1 Cong. (2001).
30. Pek, P. K., & Poh, K. L. (2004). A Bayesian tutoring system for Newtonian mechanics: Can it adapt to different learners? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 281–307.
31. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 Years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.
32. Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 1290–1301.
33. Sireci, S. G., & Zenisky, A. L. (2006). Innovative item formats in computer-based testing: In pursuit of improved construct representation. In S. M. Downing & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development(pp. 329–357). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Tatsuoka, K. K. (1985). A probabilistic model for diagnosing misconceptions by the pattern classification approach. Journal of Educational Statistics, 10(1), 55–73.
35. Tatsuoka, K. K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structures and cognitive diagnosis: A statistical pattern recognition and classification approach. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman, & R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessment(pp. 327–361). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Tatsuoka, K. K., Corter, J. E., & Tatsuoka, C. (2004). Patterns of diagnosed mathematical content and process skills in TIMSS-R across a sample of 20 countries. American Educational Research Journal, 41(4), 901–926.
37. Underwood, G., Jebbett, L., & Roberts, K. (2004). Inspecting pictures for information to verify a sentence: Eye movements in general encoding and in focused search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 57A, 165–182.
38. U.S. Department of Education. (2003). NAEP validity studies: Implications of electronic technology for the NAEP assessment(Working Paper No. 2003–16). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
39. VanLehn, K. (2001). Olae: A bayesian performance assessment for complex problem solving. Paper presented at the 2001 annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Seattle.
40. Williamson, D. M., Bauer, M., Steinberg, L. S., Mislevy, R. J., Behrens, J. T., & DeMark, S. F. (2004). Design rationale for a complex performance assessment. International Journal of Testing, 4(4), 303–332.
41. Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. Wilson, M., & Sloane, K. (2000). From principles to practice: An embedded assessment system. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 181–208.