New Tests and New Items: Opportunities and Issues

Computer-Based Testing and the Internet: Issues and Advances

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 59-75

  Drasgow, Fritz ^a   Mattern, Krista ^a  

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

Author keywords

Capacity and functionality; Psychological testing and assessment; Rraditional multiple choice tests; Technological advances; Test medium

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889418172     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470712993.ch3     Document Type: Chapter

References (25)

1. Ackerman, T. A., Evans, J., Park, K. S., Tasmassia, C., & Turner, R. (1999). Computer assessment using visual stimuli: A test of dermatological skin disorders. In F. Drasgow & J. B. Olson-Buchanan (Eds.), Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 137-150). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Bartram, D., & Bayliss, R. (1984). Automated testing: Past, present and future. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 57:221-237.
3. Bejar, I. I. (1991). A methodology for scoring open-ended architectural design problems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76:522-532.
4. Bejar, I. I., & Braun, H. I. (1999). Architectural simulations: From research to implementation (Research Memorandum 99-2). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
5. Bennett, R. E., Morely, M., & Quardt, D. (2000). Three response types for broadening the conception of mathematical problem solving in computerized tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24:294-309.
6. Bennett, R. E., et al. (1999). Psychometric and cognitive functioning of an underdetermined computer-based response type for quantitative reasoning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36:233-252.
7. Bennett, R. E., Steffen, M., Singley, M. K., Morley, M., & Jacquemin, D. (1997). Evaluating an automatically scorable, open-ended response type for measuring mathematical reasoning in computer-adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34:162-176.
8. Chan, D., & Schmitt, N. (1997). Video-based versus paper-and-pencil method of assessment in situational judgment tests: Subgroup differences in test performance and face validity perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82:143-159.
9. Clyman, S. G., Melnick, D. E., & Clauser, B. E. (1999). Computer-based case simulations from medicine: Assessing skills in patient management. In A. Tekian, C. H. McGuire, & W. C. McGahie (Eds.), Innovative simulations for assessing professional competence (pp. 29-41). Chicago, IL: University of Illinois, Department of Medical Education.
10. Davey, T., Godwin, J., & Mittelholtz, D. (1997). Developing and scoring an innovative computerized writing assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34:21-41.
11. Drasgow, F., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (Eds.) (1999). Innovations in computerized assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Drasgow, F., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Moberg, P. J. (1999). Interactive video assessment of interpersonal skills. In F. Drasgow & J. B. Olson-Buchanan (Eds.), Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 177-196). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Ewing, T. (2002, August 6). Paper-based GRE general test returning to parts of Asia. ETS News and Media: Communication and Public Affairs. Retrieved December 3, 2003, from http://www.ets.org/news/02072301.html.
14. Jodoin, M. G. (2003). Measurement efficiency of innovative item formats in computerbased testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40:1-15.
15. Luecht, R. M., & Nungester, R. J. (1998). Some practical examples of computer-adaptive sequential testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35:229-249.
16. Luecht, R. M., & Nungester, R. J. (2000). Computer-adaptive sequential testing. In W. J. van der Linden & C. A. W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 117-128). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
17. McBride, J. R. (1997). The Marine Corps Exploratory Development Project: 1977-1982. In W. A. Sands, B. K. Waters, & J. R. McBride (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation (pp. 59-67). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
18. Mead, A. D., & Drasgow, F. (1993). Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114:449-458.
19. Olson-Buchanan, J. B., Drasgow, F., Moberg, P. J., Mead, A. D., Keenan, P. A., & Donovan, M. A. (1998). Interactive video assessment of conflict resolution skills. Personnel Psychology, 51:1-24.
20. Parshall, C. G., Davey, T., & Pashley, P. J. (2002). Innovative item types for computerized testing. In W. J. van der Linder & C. A. W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 129-148). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
21. Powers, D. E., Burstein, J. C., Chodorow, M., Fowles, M. E., & Kukich, K. (2002). Stumping e-rater: Challenging the validity of automated essay scoring. Computers in Human Behavior, 18:103-134.
22. Vispoel, W. P. (1999). Creating computerized adaptive tests of musical aptitude: Problems, solutions, and future directions. In F. Drasgow & J. B. Olson-Buchanan (Eds.), Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 151-176). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Wainer, H., Bradlow, E. T., & Du, Z. (2001). Testlet response theory: An analog for the 3PL model useful in testlet-based adaptive testing. In W. J. van der Linden & C. A.W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 245-269). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
24. Wolfe, J. H., McBride, J. R., & Sympson, J. B. (1997). Development of the experimental CAT-ASVAB system. In W. A. Sands, B. K. Waters, & J. R. McBride (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation (pp. 97-101). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25. Zenisky, A. L., & Sireci, S. G. (2002). Technological innovations in large-scale assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15:337-362.