Online Calibration Methods for the DINA Model with Independent Attributes in CD-CAT

Psychometrika

Volumn 77, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 201-222

  Chen, Ping ^a   Xin, Tao ^a   Wang, Chun ^b   Chang, Hua Hua ^b  

^a BEIJING NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

cognitive diagnostic computerized adaptive testing; DINA model; independent attribute; new item; online calibration

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862791298     PISSN: 00333123     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11336-012-9255-7     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Ban, J.-C., Hanson, B. H., Wang, T., Yi, Q., & Harris, D. J. (2001). A comparative study of on-line pretest item-calibration/scaling methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 191-212.
2. Ban, J.-C., Hanson, B. H., Yi, Q., & Harris, D. J. (2002). Data sparseness and online pretest item calibration/scaling methods in CAT (ACT Research Report 02-01). Iowa City, IA, ACT, Inc. Available at http://www. eric. ed. gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/19/da/e9. pdf.
3. Chang, Y.-C. I., & Lu, H. (2010). Online calibration via variable length computerized adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 75, 140-157.
4. Cheng, Y. (2009). When cognitive diagnosis meets computerized adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 74, 619-632.
5. Cheng, Y., & Chang, H. (2007). The modified maximum global discrimination index method for cognitive diagnostic computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing, McLean, USA, June.
6. Dibello, L. V., Stout, W. F., & Roussos, L. A. (1995). Unified cognitive/psychometric diagnostic assessment likelihood-based classification techniques. In P. Nichols, S. Chipman, & R. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessments (pp. 361-389). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
7. de la Torre, J. (2009). DINA model and parameter estimation: a didactic. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 34, 115-130.
8. de la Torre, J., & Douglas, J. A. (2004). Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis. Psychometrika, 69, 333-353.
9. Doignon, J. P., & Falmagne, J. C. (1999). Knowledge spaces. New York: Springer.
10. Embretson, S. (1984). A general latent trait model for response processes. Psychometrika, 49, 175-186.
11. Embretson, S., & Reise, S. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
12. Fedorov, V. V. (1972). Theory of optimal design. New York: Academic Press.
13. Haertel, E. H. (1989). Using restricted latent class models to map the skill structure of achievement items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 333-352.
14. Hartz, S. M. (2002). A Bayesian framework for the unified model for assessing cognitive abilities: Blending theory with practicality (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign, IL.
15. Junker, B. W., & Sijtsma, K. (2001). Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 258-272.
16. Leighton, J. P., Gierl, M. J., & Hunka, S. M. (2004). The attribute hierarchy method for cognitive assessment: a variation on Tatsuoka's rule-space approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 205-237.
17. Liu, H., You, X., Wang, W., Ding, S., & Chang, H. (2010). Large-scale applications of cognitive diagnostic computerized adaptive testing in China. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Measurement in Education, Denver, CO, April.
18. Macready, G. B., & Dayton, C. M. (1977). The use of probabilistic models in the assessment of mastery. Journal of Educational Statistics, 33, 379-416.
19. Makransky, G. (2009). An automatic online calibration design in adaptive testing. Paper presented at the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing, McLean, USA, June.
20. Maris, E. (1999). Estimating multiple classification latent class models. Psychometrika, 64, 187-212.
21. McGlohen, M. K. (2004). The application of cognitive diagnosis and computerized adaptive testing to a large-scale assessment. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Texas at Austin.
22. McGlohen, M. K., & Chang, H. (2008). Combining computer adaptive testing technology with cognitively diagnostic assessment. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 808-821.
23. Rupp, A., & Templin, J. (2008). The effects of Q-matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 78-96.
24. Silvey, S. D. (1980). Optimal design. London: Chapman and Hall.
25. Stocking, M. L. (1988). Scale drift in on-line calibration (Research Rep. 88-28). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
26. Tatsuoka, K. K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structures and cognitive diagnosis: a statistical pattern classification approach. In P. Nichols, S. Chipman, & R. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessments (pp. 327-359). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
27. Tatsuoka, C. (2002). Data analytic methods for latent partially ordered classification models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied Statistics, 51, 337-350.
28. Tatsuoka, K. K., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1997). Computerized cognitive diagnostic adaptive testing: effect on remedial instruction as empirical validation. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 3-20.
29. Templin, J., & Henson, R. (2006). Measurement of psychological disorders using cognitive diagnosis models. Psychological Methods, 11, 287-305.
30. Wainer, H. (1990). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
31. Wainer, H., & Mislevy, R. J. (1990). Item response theory, item calibration, and proficiency estimation. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 65-102). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
32. Weiss, D. J. (1982). Improving measurement quality and efficiency with adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 473-492.
33. Xu, X., Chang, H., & Douglas, J. (2003). A simulation study to compare CAT strategies for cognitive diagnosis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago, IL, April.