Establishing score comparability for tests given in different languages

Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 139-169

  Cook, Linda L ^a   Schmitt Cascallar, Alicia P ^b  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

^b Assessment Group International   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84916947460     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410611758     Document Type: Chapter

References (33)

1. Alderman, D.L. (1981). Language proficiency as a moderator variable in testing academic aptitude (TOEFL Research Rep. No. 10, RR81-41). Princeton, NJ:Educational Testing Service.
2. Angoff, W.H. (1984). Scales, norms, and equivalent scores. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
3. Angoff, W.H., & Cook, L.L. (1988). Equating the scores of the Prueba de Aptitud Academica and the Scholastic Aptitude Test (College Board Rep. No. 88-2). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
4. Angoff, W.H., & Ford, S.F. (1973). Item-race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 95-106.
5. Angoff, W.H., & Modu, C.C. (1973). Equating the scales of the Prueba de Aptitud Academica and the Scholastic Aptitude Test (Research Rep. No. 3). New York:College Entrance Examination Board.
6. Boldt, R. (1969). Concurrent validity of the PAA and SAT for bilingual Dade County high school volunteers (Statistical Rep. No. 69-31). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
7. The College Board. (1995). Cambiod en el examen de admision del College Board: La nueva PAA [Changes in the College Board admissions tests: The new PAA]. San Juan: Oficina de Puerto Rico y de Actividades Latinamericanas.
8. Cook, L.L. (1995, April). Lessons learned: Implementing change in the SAT. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Educational Measurement, San Francisco.
9. Cook, L.L., & Eignor, D.R. (1983). Practical considerations regarding the use of item response theory to equate tests. In R.K.Hambleton (Ed.), Applications of item response theory (pp. 175-195). Vancouver: Educational Research Institute of British Columbia.
10. Cook, L.L., Eignor, D.R., & Schmitt, A.P. (1989, April). Equating achievement tests using samples matched on ability. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
11. Eignor, D.R., Stocking, M.L., & Cook, L.L. (1990). Simulation results of the effects on linear and curvilinear observed- and true-score equating procedures of matching on a fallible criterion. Applied Measurement in Education, 3, 37-55.
12. Geisinger, K.F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Transition and adaption issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6, 304-312.
13. Hambleton, R.K. (1993). Adapting achievement tests for use in cross-national studies. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 9, 57-68.
14. Hambleton, R.K. (1996, April). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Educational Measurement, New York.
15. Kolen, M.J. (1990). Does matching in an equating work? A discussion. Applied Measurement in Education, 3, 97-104.
16. Levine, R.S. (1955). Equating the score scales of alternate forms administered to samples of different ability (Research Bulletin No. 23). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
17. Linn, R.L. (1993). Linking results of distinct assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 83-102.
18. Livingston, S.A., Dorans, N.J., & Wright, N.K. (1990). What combination of sampling and equating methods works best? Applied Measurement in Education, 3, 73-95.
19. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Muniz, J., Hambleton, R.K., & Xing, D. (2001). Small sample studies to detect flaws in test translation. International Journal of Testing, 1, 115-135.
21. Olmedo, E.L. (1981). Testing linguistic minorities. American Psychologist, 36, 1078-1085.
22. Pennock-Román, M. (1995). Measuring developed academic abilities using Spanish vs English-langauge tests: PAEG/GRE relationships for Puerto Ricans who are more proficient in Spanish than in English (GRE Research Rep. No. 89-01). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
23. Petersen, N.S., Cook, L.L., & Stocking, M.L. (1983). IRT versus conventional equating methods: A comparative study of scale stability. Journal of Educational Statistics, 8, 137-156.
24. Poortinga, Y.H. (1989). Equivalence of cross-cultural data: An overview of basic issues. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 737-756.
25. Prieto, A. (1992). A method for translation of instruments to other languages. Adult Education Quarterly, 43, 1-14.
26. Rosenbaum, P.R., & Rubin, D.B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41-55.
27. Schmitt, A.P., Dorans, N.J., Magrina, A. & Cook, L.L. (1998). Predicting scores on the English Language SAT from the Spanish Language PAA and the Spanish Language English as a Second Language Achievement Test. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
28. Sireci, S.G. (1997). Technical issues in linking tests across languages. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16, 12-19.
29. Sireci, S.G., & Allalouf, A. (2003). Appraising item equivalence across multiple languages and cultures. Language Testing, 20(2), 147-165.
30. Skaggs, G. (1990). To match or not to match samples on ability for equating: A discussion of five articles. Applied Measurement in Education, 3, 105-113.
31. Stocking, M.L., & Lord, F.M. (1983). Developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 201-210.
32. Terman, L.M. (1916). The measurement of intelligence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
33. van de Vijver, F.J. R. & Poortinga, Y.H. (1991). Testing across cultures. In R.K. Hambleton & J. Zaal (Eds.), Advances in educational and psychological testing (pp. 277-308). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.