Developing a taxonomy of item model types to promote assessment engineering

Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 1-50

  Gierl, Mark J ^a,b   Zhou, Jiawen ^a   Alves, Cecilia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b Department of Educational Psychology ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 57649177951     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15402525     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bejar, I.I. (1990). A generative analysis of a three-dimensional spatial task. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 237-245.
2. Bejar, I.I. (1996). Generative response modeling: Leveraging the computer as a test delivery medium (ETS Research Report 96-13). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
3. Bejar, I.I. (2002). Generative testing: From conception to implementation. In S. H. Irvine & R C. Kyllonen (Eds.), Item generation for test development (pp.199-217). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Bejar, I.I., Lawless, R., Morley, M.E., Wagner, M.E., Bennett, & R.E., Revuelta, J. (2003). A feasibility study of on-the-fly item generation in adaptive testing. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 2(3). Available from http://www.jtla.org.
5. th ed., pp. 471-516). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
6. Embretson, S.E. (2002). Generating abstract reasoning items with cognitive theory. In S. H. Irvine & R C. Kyllonen (Eds.), Item generation for test development (pp. 219-250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Embretson, S.E., & Yang, X. (2007). Automatic item generation and cognitive psychology.. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.) Handbook of Statistics: Psychometrics, Volume 26 (pp. 747-768). North Holland, UK: Elsevier.
8. Gierl, M. J., & Zhou, J. (2008). Computer adaptive-attribute testing: A new approach to cognitive diagnostic assessment. Zeitschift für Psychologie - Journal of Psychology, 216, 29-39.
9. Gierl, M. J., Wang, C., & Zhou, J. (2008). Using the attribute hierarchy method to make diagnostic inferences about examinees' cognitive skills in algebra on the SAT©. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 6(6). Available from http://www.jtla.org.
10. Glas, C.A.W., & van der Linden, W.J. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing with item cloning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 247-261.
11. Haladyna, T., & Shindoll, R. (1989). Items shells: A method for writing effective multiple-choice test items. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 12, 97-106.
12. Hively, W., Patterson, H.L., & Page, S.H. (1968). A "universe-defined" system of arithmetic achievement tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5, 275-290.
13. LaDuca, A., Staples, W.I., Templeton, B., & Holzman, G.B. (1986). Item modeling procedures for constructing content-equivalent multiple-choice questions. Medical Education, 20, 53-56.
14. Leighton, J.P., & Gierl, M.J. (2007). Defining and evaluating models of cognition used in educational measurement to make inferences about examinees' thinking processes. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26, 3-16.
15. Leighton, J.P., Gierl, M.J., & Hunka, S. (2004). The attribute hierarchy method for cognitive assessment: A variation on Tatsuoka's rulespace approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 205-237.
16. Luecht, R.M. (2006a, May). Engineering the test: From principled item design to automated test assembly. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.
17. Luecht, R.M. (2006b, September). Assessment engineering: An emerging discipline. Paper presented in the Centre for Research in Applied Measurement and Evaluation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
18. Luecht, R.M. (April, 2007). Assessment engineering in language testing: From data models and templates to psychometrics. Invited paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago, IL.
19. Luecht, R.M., Gierl, M.J., Tan, X., & Huff, K. (2006, April). Scalability and the development of useful diagnostic scales. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco, CA.
20. Mislevy, R.J., & Riconscente, M.M. (2006). Evidence-centered assessment design. In S. M. Downing & T. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 61-90). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Mislevy, R.J., Wingersky, M.S., & Sheehan, K.M. (1994). Dealing with uncertainty about item parameters: Expected response functions (ETS Research Report 94-28-ONR). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
22. Singley, M.K., & Bennett, R.E. (2002). Item generation and beyond: Applications of schema theory to mathematics assessment. In S. H. Irvine & P. C. Kyllonen (Eds.), Item generation for test development (pp. 361-384). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Sinharay, S., Johnson, M.S., & Williamson, D.M. (2003). Calibrating item families and summarizing the results using family expected response functions. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28, 295-313.
24. Sinharay, S., & Johnson, M. (2005). Analysis of data from an admissions test with item models. (ETS Research Report 05-06). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.