期刊文献+

允许CAT题目检查的区块题目袋方法 被引量:3

The Block Item Pocket Method to Allow Item Review in CAT
下载PDF
导出
摘要 允许题目检查能够促进计算机化自适应测验(CAT)在实际中的应用。在不影响能力估计精度和测验公平性的前提下,允许CAT题目检查能够缓解考生考试焦虑,减少无关因素引起的测量误差。区块题目袋方法是连续区块方法与题目袋方法的结合,不仅能允许CAT题目检查,还能够弥补题目袋方法的不足。研究结果表明:(1)合理作答策略下,区块题目袋方法的估计精度在低能力水平上要优于题目袋方法;(2)在应对类似Wainer作答策略时,区块题目袋方法的估计精度在所有能力水平上均优于题目袋方法。(3)随着区块数的增加,区块题目袋方法的能力估计精度越接近无修改的基线水平。 Most computerized adaptive testing (CAT) do not allow examinees to review items because it will drastically decrease measurement precision and bring about extra cheating strategies (Wainer, 1993; Wise, 1996) Allowing item review is essential to make CAT comparable with traditional tests. It also matters in application. Item review enables examinees to correct mistakes due to carelessness, which can further improve the precision of ability estimation. No such option may cause some negative consequences for their overall performance especially in high-stake examinations, such as tension or anxiety (Vispoel, Henderickson, & Bleiler, 2000). Therefore, it is worth trying if allowing item review could alleviate problems mentioned at the beginning (Wise, 1996; Vispoel, 2000, 2005). Several methods have been proposed, including the successive block method (Stocking, 1997) and the item pocket (IP) method (Han, 2013). However, both methods are limited in some ways. Stocking's method does not allow examinees to skip items and requires a large number of blocks which may bring about some extra adverse effects because of frequent decision to go to next block. Han's method can avoid limitations of Stocking's. But it requires an appropriate IP size and may result in high bias in large IP size situation. The present study proposed the block item pocket (BIP) method which sets fewer but larger blocks with a proper total IP size. This method keeps advantages of Stocking's and Han's and overcomes their disadvantages. Two simulation studies of two response strategies were conducted to evaluate validity of the BIP method. Item parameters were randomly drawn from uniform distribution (b - U (-3, 3)) and (a - U (0, 2)). Each examinee was administered a fixed-length CAT with 30 items. The initial item for each examinee was randomly drawn from 0 - U (-0.5, 0.5). For the CAT administration, the Maximum Fisher Information method was adopted to select items. The interim and final scores were estimated using MLE method in most conditions. When responses were less than 5 or when all answers were correct or wrong, EAP method was adopted. Each study contained five conditions: non-review, 1 blocks IP method, 2 blocks, 3 blocks and 6 blocks BIP method. Statistics like BIAS, MAE, and RMSE were used as evaluation criteria. Results indicated that: (1) BIP method had better estimate precision than IP method at low ability level under normal strategy; (2) When dealing with Wainer-like strategy, BIP method was far more precise than item pocket method at all ability levels; (3) As the number of blocks increased, estimate precision got closer to non-review condition. Advantages of this new method and future directions were discussed.
出处 《心理学报》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2015年第9期1188-1198,共11页 Acta Psychologica Sinica
基金 国家自然科学基金面上项目(31371047) 国家自然科学基金青年科学基金项目(31300862) 高等学校博士学科点专项科研基金项目(20130003120002) 中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助(2013YB26)
关键词 计算机化自适应测验 题目检查 题目袋 题目修改 区块题目袋 computerized adaptive testing item review item pocket method answer change block item pocket method
  • 相关文献

参考文献25

  • 1Benjamin, L. T., Cavell, T. A., & Shallenberger, W. R. (1987). Staying with initial answers on objective tests: Is it a myth? In M. E. Ware & R. J. Millard (Eds.), Handbook on student development: Advising, career development, and field placement (pp. 45-53).
  • 2Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bowles, R., & Pommerich, M. (2001, April). An examination of item review on a CAT using the specific information item selection algorithm. In The annual meeting of the National Council of Measurement in Education. Seattle, WA.
  • 3Chang, H. H., & Ying, Z. L. (2008). To weight or not to weight? Balancing influence of initial items in adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 73(3), 441450.
  • 4陈平,丁树良.允许检查并修改答案的计算机化自适应测验[J].心理学报,2008,40(6):737-747. 被引量:6
  • 5陈平,张佳慧,辛涛.在线标定技术在计算机化自适应测验中的应用[J].心理科学进展,2013,21(10):1883-1892. 被引量:9
  • 6Han, K. T. (2013). Item pocket method to allow response review and change in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(4), 259-275.
  • 7Kingsbury, G. G. (1996). Item review and adaptive testing. In Annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New York.
  • 8Lord, F. M. (1983). Unbiased estimators of ability parameters, of their variance, and of their parallel-forms reliability. Psychometrika, 48(2), 233-245.
  • 9Lunz, M. E., Bergstrom, B. A., & Wright, B. D. (1992). The effect of review on student ability and test efficiency for computerized adaptive tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16(1), 33-40.
  • 10McMorris, R. F. (1991). Why do young students change answers on tests?. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, EL, 342803.

二级参考文献43

  • 1陈平,丁树良,林海菁,周婕.等级反应模型下计算机化自适应测验选题策略[J].心理学报,2006,38(3):461-467. 被引量:38
  • 2Gershon R, Bergstrom B. Does cheating on CAT pay: Not. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April, 1995
  • 3Olea J, Revuelta J, Ximenez M C, et al. Psychometric and psychological effects of review on computerized fixed and adaptive tests. Psicologica, 2000, 21 : 157 - 173
  • 4Wise S L. A critical analysis of the arguments for and against itern review in computerized adaptive testing, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurernent in Education, New York City, April, 1996
  • 5Wainer H. Some practical considerations when converting a linearly administered test to an adaptive format. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 1993, 12(1): 15 -20
  • 6Stocking M L. Revising item responses in computerized adaptive tests: A comparison of three models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1997, 21(2): 129 - 142
  • 7Papanastasiou E C. A ‘ rearrangement procedure' for scoring adaptive tests with review options. Paper presented at the National Council of Measurement in Education, New Orleans April, 2002
  • 8Vispoel W P, Rocklin T R, Wang T, et al. Can examinees use a review option to obtain positively biased ability estimates on a computerized adaptive test? Journal of Educational Measurement, 1999, 36(2): 141 - 157
  • 9Revuelta J, Ximenez M C, Olea J. Psychometric and psychological effects of item selection and review on computerized testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2003, 63(5): 791 - 808
  • 10Lord F M. Estimation of latent ability and item parameters when there are omitted responses. Psychometrika, 1974, 39:247 -264

共引文献13

同被引文献21

引证文献3

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部