Linking Cut-Scores Given Changes in the Decision-Making Process, Administration Time, and Proportions of Item Types Between Successive Administrations of a Test for a Large-Scale Assessment Program

There is a continuing tension in testing programs to equate forms and maintain score scales and at the same time allow for changing conditions in the educational system, such as curriculum shifts or practical limits on testing time. When such changes occur, psychometric staff members are challenged to develop linking methods that allow for comparable reporting but meet requirements for psychometric rigor. This article describes a method addressing such shifts in testing programs. The application of the method is demonstrated on a large-scale educational testing program that had changes in test length, content distribution, and decision-making process. The method used to accomplish the linkage was to develop a pseudo test from the items included in the longer test before the change that was designed to mimic the test after the change. The linking of the tests using the pseudo test process resulted in a percentage of successful students that was similar to the percentages obtained prior to the changes. The linked scores were treated as comparable rather than equated scores.

[1]  R. Brennan,et al.  Test Equating, Scaling, and Linking: Methods and Practices , 2004 .

[2]  R. Brennan,et al.  Test Equating, Scaling, and Linking , 2004 .

[3]  Deborah J. Harris,et al.  Issues in Conducting Linkages between Distinct Tests , 2004 .

[4]  N. Dorans Equating, Concordance, and Expectation , 2004 .

[5]  Alija Kulenović,et al.  Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing , 1999 .

[6]  Michael E. Walker,et al.  Score Linking Issues Related to Test Content Changes , 2007 .

[7]  R. Mislevy Linking Educational Assessments: Concepts, Issues, Methods, and Prospects. , 1992 .

[8]  D. Eignor The standards for educational and psychological testing. , 2013 .

[9]  N. Dorans Using Subpopulation Invariance to Assess Test Score Equity , 2004 .

[10]  M. J. Kolen Linking Assessments: Concept and History , 2004 .

[11]  J. Miller,et al.  The Nation's Report Card[TM]: Writing 2007. National Assessment of Educational Progress at Grades 8 and 12. National, State, and Trial Urban District Results. NCES 2008-468. , 2008 .

[12]  An Application of Score Equity Assessment: Invariance of Linkage of New SAT® to Old SAT Across Gender Groups , 2006 .

[13]  G. Masters A rasch model for partial credit scoring , 1982 .

[14]  R. L. Lim Linking Results of Distinct Assessments , 1993 .

[15]  Meryl W. Bertenthal,et al.  Uncommon Measures: Equivalence and Linkage among Educational Tests. , 1999 .

[16]  Hunter M. Breland,et al.  Performance Versus Objective Testing and Gender: An Exploratory Study of an Advanced Placement History Examination , 1994 .

[17]  N. Cole,et al.  Gender and fair assessment , 1997 .

[18]  Samuel A. Livingston Constructed-Response Test Questions: Why We Use Them; How We Score Them. R&D Connections. Number 11. , 2009 .

[19]  M. Daane,et al.  The Nation's Report Card: Writing, 2002. , 2003 .

[20]  J. Mazzeo,et al.  Sex-Related Performance Differences on Constructed-Response and Multiple-Choice Sections of Advanced Placement Examinations. College Board Report No. 92-7. , 1993 .

[21]  PERFORMANCE OF MEN AND WOMEN ON MULTIPLE‐CHOICE AND CONSTRUCTED‐RESPONSE TESTS FOR BEGINNING TEACHERS , 2004 .