Application of evidence-centered assessment design to the advanced placement redesign: A graphic restatement

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 378-391

  Bejar, Isaac I ^a  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957713023     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08957347.2010.510969     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Organization.
2. Baker, E. L., & Linn, R. L. (2004). Validity issues for accountability systems. In S. Fuhrman & R. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability (pp. 47-72). New York: Teachers College Press.
3. Bejar, I. I., Braun, H., & Tannenbaum, R. (2007). A prospective, predictive and progressive approach to standard setting. In R. W. Lissitz (Ed.), Assessing and modeling cognitive development in school: Intellectual growth and standard setting (pp. 1-30). Maple Grove, MN: Jam Press.
4. Bejar, I. I., Graf, E. A., Oranje, A., & Veldkamp, B. P. (March, 2008). Application of optimization methods to assessment design. Paper presented at meeting of the National Council of Measuremnt in Education, New York.
5. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. I., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
6. Bridgeman, B. (2009). Experiences from large-scale computer-based testing in the USA. In F. Scheuermann & J. Björnsson (Eds.), The transition to computer-based assessment: New approaches to skills assessment and implications for large-scale testing. Luxenburg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Retrieved October 30, 2009, from http://crell.jrc.it/RP/reporttransition.pdf
7. Cizek, G. J., & Bunch, M. B. (2007). Standard setting: A guide to establishing and evaluating performance standards on tests. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
9. Embretson, S. E. (1983). Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span. Psychological bulletin, 93, 179-197.
10. Ercikan, K., & Julian, M. (2002). Classification accuracy of assigning student performance to proficiency levels: Guidelines for assessment design. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), 269-294.
11. Ewing, M., Packman, S., Hamen, C., & Clark Thurber, A. (2010/this issue). Representing targets of measurement within evidence-centered design. Applied Measurement in Education.
12. Forsyth, R. A. (1997). NAEP frameworks and achivement levels. Paper presented at the Achivement Levels Workshop, Boulder, CO.
13. Frederiksen, J. R., & Collins, A. (1989). A systems approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18, 27-32.
14. Gorin, J. S., & Embretson, S. E. (2006). Item difficulty modeling of paragraph comprehension items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30(5), 394-411.
15. Green, B. F. (1995). Comparability of scores from performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 13-15.
16. Hendrickson, A., Huff, K., & Luecht, R. (2010/this issue). Claims, evidence, and achievement- level descriptors as a foundation for item design and test specifications. Applied Measurement in Education.
17. Huff, K., & Melican, G. (in press). Innovation within constraints: Revising a large-scale college placement exam. In J. A. Bovaird, K. Geisinger, & C. Buckendahl (Eds.), High stakes testing in education: Science and practice in K-12 settings. Washington, DC: APA Books.
18. Huff, K., Steinberg, L., & Matts, T. (2010/this issue). The promises and challenges of implementing evidence-centered design in large-scale assessment. Applied Measurement in Education
19. th ed., pp. 17-64). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
20. Lissitz, R., & Samuelsen, K. (2007). A suggested change in terminology and emphasis regarding validity and education. Educational Researcher, 36(8), 437-448.
21. Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 653-694.
22. Luecht, R. (2006). Designing tests for pass-fail decisions using item response theory. In S. M. Downing & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 575-596). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
23. rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: American Council on Education.
24. Mislevy, R. J. (2007). Validity by design. Educational Researcher, 36(8), 463-469.
25. Mislevy, R. J., & Haertel, G. D. (2006). Implications of evidence-centered design for educational testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(4), 6-20.
26. Moss, P. A. (2003). Reconceptualizing validity for classroom assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 13-25.
27. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. Perie, M. (2008). A guide to understanding and developing performance-level descriptors. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(4), 15-29.
29. Plake, B. S., Huff, K., & Reshetar, R. (2010/this issue). Evidence-centered assessment design as a foundation for achievement-level descriptor development and for standard setting. Applied Measurement in Education.
30. Porter, A. C., Polikoff, M. S., Zeidner, T., & Smithson, J. (2008). The quality of content analyses of state student achievement tests and content standards. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice, 27(4), 2-14.
31. Tannenbaum, R. J., Robustelli, S. L., & Baron, P. A. (2008). Evidence-centered design: A lens through which the process of job analysis may be focused to guide the development of knowledge-based test content specifications. CLEAR Exam Review (19), 26-33.
32. V-model. (2004, July 22). Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved April 6, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudoku.
33. van der Linden, W. J. (2005). Linear models of optimal test design. New York: Springer.
34. Webb, N. L. (2007). Issues related to judging the alignment of curriculum standards and assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 7-25.