A Monte Carlo approach for adaptive testing with content constraints

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 32, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 431-446

  Belov, Dmitry I ^a,d   Armstrong, Ronald D ^b   Weissman, Alexander ^c  

^a Law School Admission Council

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

^d Law School Admission Council   (United States)

Author keywords

Automated test assembly; Computerized adaptive testing; Item response theory; Monte Carlo methods; Shadow test assembly; Test assembly

Indexed keywords

EID: 49249101543     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: 15523497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146621607309081     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Barrada, J.R., Veldkamp, B.P., & Olea, J. (2006, July). Multiple maximum exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the SMABS-EAM Conference, Budapest, Hungary.
2. Belov, D.I. (in press). Uniform test assembly. Psychometrika.
3. Belov, D.I., & Armstrong, R.D. (2005). Monte Carlo test assembly for item pool analysis and extension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 239-261.
4. Chang, H.H., Qian, J., & Ying, Z. (2001). a-stratified CAT design with b blocking. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 333-341.
5. Chang, H.H., & Ying, Z. (1999). a-stratified multistage computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 211-222.
6. Chen, S.Y., & Ankenmann, R.D. (1999, April). Effects of practical constraints on item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
7. Chen, S.Y., & Lei, P.W. (2005). Controlling item exposure and test overlap in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 204-217.
8. Cheng, P.E., & Liou, M. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing using the nearest-neighbors criterion. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 204-216.
9. Cheng, Y., Chang, H.H., & Wang, X.B. (2006, April). Constraints-weighted information method for item selection of severely constrained computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco.
10. Hau, K.T., & Chang, H.H. (2001). Item selection in computerized adaptive testing: Should more discriminating items be used first? Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 249-266.
11. ILOG, Inc. (2003). CPLEX 9.0 [Computer software and manual]. Mountain View, CA: Author. Available from http://www.ilog.com
12. Kingsbury, G.G., & Zara, A. (1991). A comparison of procedures for content-sensitive item selection in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 4, 241-261.
13. Leung, C.K., Chang, H.H., & Hau, K.T. (2000, April). Content balancing in stratified computerized adaptive testing designs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
14. Leung, C.K., Chang, H.H., & Hau, K.T. (2002). Item selection in computerized adaptive testing: Improving the a-stratified design with the Sympson-Hetter algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 376-392.
15. Leung, C.K., Chang, H.H., & Hau, K.T. (2003). Incorporation of content balancing requirements in stratification designs for computerized adaptive testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 257-270.
16. Lord, F. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Schrage, L. (2002). Optimization modeling with LINGO (4 th ed.). Chicago: LINDO Systems, Inc.
18. Stocking, M.L., & Lewis, C. (1998). Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 57-75.
19. Stocking, M.L., & Swanson, L. (1993). A method for severely constrained item selection in adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 277-292.
20. Sympson, J.B., & Hetter, R.D. (1985, October). Controlling item-exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. Proceedings of the 27th annual meeting of the Military Testing Association (pp. 973-977). San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.
21. van der Linden, W.J. (2005 a). A comparison of item-selection methods for adaptive tests with content constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 283-302.
22. van der Linden, W.J. (2005 b). Linear models for optimal test design. New York: Springer-Verlag.
23. van der Linden, W.J., Ariel, A., & Veldkamp, B.P. (2006). Assembling a CAT item pool as a set of linear tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 81-99.
24. van der Linden, W.J., & Reese, L.M. (1998). A model for optimal constrained adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 259-270.
25. van der Linden, W.J., & Veldkamp, B.P. (2004). Constraining item exposure in computerized adaptive testing with shadow tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29, 273-291.