The equivalence of paper-and-pencil and computer-based testing

Journal of Research on Computing in Education

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 282-299

  Bugbee, Alan C ^a  

^a THE AMERICAN COLLEGE   (India)

Author keywords

Measurement; Testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 85007880212     PISSN: 08886504     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08886504.1996.10782166     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Allen, M.J., & Yen, W.M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
2. American Psychological Association. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
3. American Psychological Association. (1986). Guidelines for computer-based tests and interpretations. Washington, DC: Author.
4. Baird, W.E., & Silvern, S.B. (1992). Computer learning and appropriate testing: A first step in validity assessment. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(1), 18-27.
5. Bejar, I.I. (1984). Speculations on the future of test design (Tech. Rep. No. RR-84-13-ONR). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
6. Bernt, F.M., Bugbee, A.C., & Arceo, R.D. (1990). Factors influencing student resistance to computer administered testing. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 22(3), 265-275.
7. Bugbee, A.C. (1989). The satellite testing experiment. (Examination on Demand Research Report 7). Bryn Mawr, PA: The American College.
8. Bugbee, A.C. (1992). Examination on demand: Findings in ten years of testing by computer 1982-1991. Edina, MN: TRO Learning.
9. Bugbee, A.C., & Bernt, F.M. (1990). Testing by computer: Findings in six years of use 1982-1988. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(1), 87-100.
10. Bugbee, A.C., & Bernt, F.M. (1992). Time’s up! The effects of time constraints and mode of administration on test performance and perception. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(2), 243-253.
11. Bunderson, C.V., Inouye, D.K., & Olsen, J.B. (1989). The four generations of computerized educational measurement. In R.L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed.), (pp. 367-407). New York: American Council on Education-Macmillan.
12. Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
13. Computer illiteracy doesn’t penalize test takers, ETS says. (1993, March 17). Report on Education Research, 25(6), 3.
14. English, R.A., Reckase, M.D., & Patience, W.M. (1977). Application of tailored testing to achievement measurement. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 9, 158-161.
15. Farrell, A.D. (1989). Impact of standards for computer-based tests on practice: Consequences of the information gap. Computers in Human Behavior, 5, 1-11.
16. Federico, P.A. (1991). Measuring recognition performance using computer- based and paper-based methods. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 23(3), 341-347.
17. Green, B.F. (1988). Construct validity of computer-based tests. In H. Wainer & H.I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 77-86). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Green, B.F., Bock, R.D., Humphreys, L.G., Linn, R.L., & Reckase, M.D. (1984). Technical guidelines for assessing computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21(4), 347-360.
19. Grist, S., Rudner, L., & Wise, L. (1989). Computer adaptive tests. ERIC Clear-inghouse on Tests, Measurement, and Evaluation (Vol. 107). Washington, DC: American Institute for Research. (ERIC ED 315 425)
20. Gulliksen, H. (1950). Theory of mental tests. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
21. Hambleton, R.K., Zaal, J.N., & Pieters, J.P.M. (1991). Computerized adaptive tests: Theory, applications, and standards. In R.K. Hambleton & J.N. Zaal (Eds.), Advances in educational and psychological testing (pp. 341-366). Boston: Kluwer.
22. Hsu, T.C., & Saddock, S.F. (1985). Computer-assisted test construction: A state of the art. (ERIC/TM Rep. No. 88). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
23. Jacobson, R.L. (1994, August 3). Computerized testing runs into trouble. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A16-A17.
24. Kerlinger, F.N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
25. Kruk, R.S., & Muter, P. (1984). Reading continuous text on video screens. Human Factors, 26, 339-345.
26. Kyllonen, P.C. (1991). Principles for creating a computerized test battery. Intelligence, 75(1), 1-15.
27. Lautenschlager, G.J., & Flaherty, V.L. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more socially desirable? Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(3), 310-314.
28. Lord, F.M., & Novick, M.R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29. Mazzeo, J., & Harvey, A.L. (1988). The equivalence of scores from automated and conventional educational and psychological tests (College Board Report No. 88-8). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
30. National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest). (1992). Computerized testing: More questions than answers (Fact Sheet). Boston: Author.
31. National Council of State Boards of Nursing. (1991). Collected works on the legal aspects of computerized adaptive testing. Chicago: Author.
32. National testing standards to be revised. (1993). Educational Researcher, 22(1), 30.
33. Olsen, B., & Krendl, K.A. (1990). At-risk students and microcomputers: What do we know and how do we know it? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 19(2), 165-175.
34. Olsen, J.B., Maynes, D.D., Slawson, D & Ho, K. (1986, April). Comparison and equating of paper-administered, computer-administered and computerized adaptive tests of achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
35. Olsen, J.B., Cox, A., Price, C., Strozeski, M & Vela, I. (1990). Development, implementation, and validation of a computerized test for statewide assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9(2), 7-10, 32.
36. Reckase, M.D., Carlson, J.E., & Ackerman, T.A. (1986, August). The effect of computer presentation on the difficulty of test items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
37. Sutton, R.E. (1991). Equity and computers in the schools: A decade of research. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), 475-503.
38. Sykes, R.C., Heydeman, H., Whitaker, M., Lownsberg, D., Kelly, R., & Haynes, B. (1991, April). Assessing the effects of computer administration on scores and parameter estimates using IRT models. Paper presented at the an-nual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
39. Wainer, H., Dorans, N.J., Green, B.F., Mislevy, R.J., Steinberg, L., & Thissen, D. (1990). Future challenges. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 233-272). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
40. Ward, T.J., Jr., Hooper, S.R., & Hannafin, K.M. (1989). The effect of computerized tests on the performance and attitudes of college students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(3), 327-333.
41. Weldon, L.J., Mills, C.B., Koved, L., & Schneiderman, B. (1985). The structure of information in outline and paper technical manuals. In R.W. Sweeney (Ed.), Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 29th Annual Meeting, Vol. 2 (pp. 1110-1113). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
42. Wilson, F.R., Genco, K.T., & Yager, G.G. (1985). Assessing the equivalence of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized tests: Demonstration of a promising methodology. Computers in Human Behavior, 1, 265-275.
43. Wise, S.L., & Plake, B.S. (1989). Research on the effects of administering tests via computers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 8(3), 5-10.
44. Wright, P., & Lickorish, A. (1983). Proofreading texts on screen and paper. Behavior and Information Technology, 2, 227-235.