Protecting the Integrity of Computerized Testing Item Pools

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 17-27

  Way, Walter D ^a  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865620921     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1998.tb00632.x     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bergstrom, B. A., Lunz, M. E., & Gershon, R. C. (1992). Altering the level of difficulty in computer adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 5, 137–149.
2. Candell, G. L., & Levine, M. V. (1990, April). Detecting aberrant responses to initial items on computerized adaptive tests: An application of appropriateness measurement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
3. Davey, T. (1994, April). Scoring an innovative writing assessment: Option weighting, data meiosis and the SPRT Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans.
4. Davey, T., & Parshall, C. G. (1995, April). New algorithms for item selection and exposure control with computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
5. Eignor, D. R., Stocking, M. L., Way, W. D., & Steffen, M. (1993). Case studies in computer adaptive test design through simulation (ETS Research Report No. 93-56). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
6. Hale, G. A., Angelis, P. J., & Thibodeau, L. A. (1983). Effects of item disclosure on performance on the Test of English as a Foreign Language. Language Learning, 33,449464.
7. Haynie, K. A., & Way, W. D. (1994, April). The effects of item pool depth on the accuracy of pass lfail decisions for the NCLEX using CAT Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans.
8. Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., & Parsons, C. K. (1983). Item response theory: Applications to psychological measurement. New York Dow Jones-Irvin.
9. Kingsbury, G. C., & Zara, A. R. (1989). Procedures for selecting items for computerized adaptive tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 359–375.
10. Lewis, C., & Sheehan, K. (1990). Using Bayesian decision theory to design a computer mastery test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 367–386.
11. Lewis, C., & Smith, R. (1995, April). Using a new computerized mastery testing model. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco.
12. Lissitz, R. (1997). The New York standardized testing legislation. NCME Quarterly Newsletter, 5(1), p. 2.
13. Lord, F. M. (1971). A theoretical study of two-stage testing. Psychometrika, 36, 227–242.
14. Lord, F. M. (1977). A broad-range tailored test of verbal ability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 95–100.
15. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, N J Erlbaum.
16. Luecht, R. M. (1997, November). Computer adaptive sequential testing: A framework for mass producing high quality computer adaptive and mastery tests. Paper presented at the Sylvan Prometric Results 1997 Conference, San Antonio, TX.
17. McBride, J. R., & Martin, J. T. (1983). Reliability and validity of adaptive ability tests in a military setting. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing (pp. 223–236). New York Academic Press.
18. Mills, C., & Stocking, M. L. (1996). Practical issues in large-scale computerized adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 9, 287–304.
19. Nering, M. L. (1997). The distribution of indexes of person fit within the computerized adaptive testing environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 115–127.
20. Potenza, M., & Stocking, M. L. (1994). Flawed items in computerized adaptive testing (ETS Research Report No. 94-6). Princeton, N J Educational Testing Service.
21. Reckase, M. D. (1983). A procedure for decision making using tailored testing. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing pp. 237–2551, New York Academic Press.
22. Schaeffer, G., Steffen, M., Golub-Smith, M., Mills, C., & Durso, R. (1995). The introduction and comparability of the computer adaptive GRE general test (GRE Board Professional Report No. 88-08aP; ETS Research Report No. 95-20). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
23. Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1994, April). The selection of test items for decision making with a computer adaptive test. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of NCME, New Orleans.
24. Stahl, J. A., & Lunz, M. E. (1993, April). Assessing the extent of overlap of items among computerized adaptive tests. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Atlanta.
25. Stocking, M. L. (1987). Two simulated feasibility studies in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 36, 263–277.
26. Stocking, M. L. (1993). Controlling item exposure rates in a realistic adaptive testing paradigm (ETS Research Report No. 93-2). Princeton, N J Educational Testing Service.
27. Stocking, M. L. (1994). Three practical issues for modern adaptive testing item pools (ETS Research Report No. 94-5). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
28. Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C. (1995a) A new method of controlling item exposure in computerized adaptive testing (ETS Research Report No. 95-25). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
29. Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C. (1995b) Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing (ETS Research Report No. 95-24). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
30. Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L. (1993). A method for severely constrained item selection in adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement 17, 277–292.
31. Stocking, M. L., Ward, W. C., & Potenza, M. T. (1998). Simulating the use of disclosed items in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 48–68.
32. Swanson, L., & Stocking, M. L. (1993). A model and heuristic for solving very large item selection problems. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 277–292. 151–166.
33. 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.
34. Wainer, H. (1993). Some practical considerations when converting a linearly administered test to an adaptive format. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(1), 15–20.
35. Wainer, H., & Kiely, G.L. (1987). Item clusters and computerized adaptive testing: A case for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 185–201.
36. Wainer, H., & Lewis, C. (1990). Toward a psychometrics for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 1–14.
37. Wainer, H., Lewis, C., Kaplan, B., & Braswell, J. (1991). Building algebra testlets: A comparison of hierarchical and linear structures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 311–323.
38. Wald, A. (1947). Sequential analysis. New York Wiley.
39. Wang, M., & Wingersky, M. (1992, April). Incorporating post-administration item response revision into a CAT. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
40. Ward, W. C. (1988). The College Board computerized placement tests: An application of computerized adaptive testing. Machine-Mediated Learning, Way, W. (1991) An exploratory study of preliminary item analysis for a computer adaptive test (Alternative Service Delivery Report). Princeton, N J.
41. Educational Testing Service. Way, W. (1994, April). Psychometric results of the NCLEXTM beta test. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
42. Way, W., & Steffen, M. (1998, April). Strategies for managing item pools to maximize item security. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Diego.
43. Way, W., Zara, A., & Leahy, J. (1996, April). Modifying the NCLEXTM CAT item selection algorithm to improve item exposure. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
44. Weiss, D. J. (Ed.). (1978). Proceedings of the 1977 Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.