A standard setting method with the best performing students as point of reference: Practical and affordable

References

• Angoff WH. Scales, norms and equivalent scores. Educational measurement, 2nd, RL Thorndike. American Council on Education, Washington, DC 1971; 508–600
   Google Scholar
• Bandaranayake RC. Setting and maintaining standards in multiple choice examinations: AMEE Guide No. 37. Med Teach 2008; 30: 836–845
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bender W, Cohen-Schotanus J, Imbos T, Versfelt WA, Verwijnen GM, 1984. Medisch kennis bij studenten uit verschillende medische faculteiten: Van hetzelfde laken een pak? [Medical knowledge of students from various medical schools: being served with the same sauce?] Ned Tijdschr Geneesk 128:917–921
   Google Scholar
• Cohen-Schotanus J. Student assessment and examination rules. Med Teach 1999; 21: 318–321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen-Schotanus J, van der Vleuten CPM, Bender W, 1996. Een betere cesuur bij tentamens [A better standard setting method for written tests]. Onderzoek van Onderwijs September:54–55
   Google Scholar
• Cusimano MD, Rothman AI. The effect of incorporating normative data into a criterion-referenced standard setting in medical education. Acad Med 2003; 78(10 Suppl)S88–S90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing SM. The effects of violating standard item writing principles in tests and students: The consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ 2005; 10: 133–143
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing SM, Haladyna TM. Validity threats: Overcoming interference with proposed interpretations of assessment data. Med Educ 2004; 38: 327–333
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing SM, Lieska NG, Raible MD. Establishing passing standards of classroom achievement tests in medical education: A comparative study of four methods. Acad Med 2003; 78(10 Suppl)S85–S87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing SM, Tekian A, Yudkowsky R. Procedures for establishing defensible absolute passing scores on performance examinations in health professions education. Teach Learn Med 2006; 18: 50–57
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebel RL. Essentials of educational measurement, 3rd. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1979
   Google Scholar
• Friedman Ben-David, M. AMEE Guide No. 18: Standard setting in student assessment. Med Teach 2000; 22: 120–130
   Google Scholar
• Hofstee WKB. The case for compromise in educational selection and grading. On educational testing, SB Anderson, JS Helminck. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1983; 107–127
   Google Scholar
• Metz JC. “Blueprint 1994”: Common objectives of medical education in the Netherlands. Neth J Med 1999; 55: 165–167
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muijtjens AMM, Hoogenboom RJI, Verwijnen GM, van der Vleuten CPM. Relative or absolute standards in assessing medical knowledge using progress tests. Adv Health Sci Educ 1998; 3: 81–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muijtjens AMM, Schuwirth LWT, Cohen-Schotanus J, Thoben AJNM, van der Vleuten CPM. Benchmarking by cross-institutional comparison of student achievement in a progress test. Med Educ 2008; 42: 82–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norcini JJ. Setting standards on educational tests. Med Educ 2003; 37: 464–469
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norcini J, Guille R. Combining tests and setting standards. International handbook of research in medical education, GR Norman, CPM van der Vleuten, DI Newble. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 2002
   Google Scholar
• Norcini JJ, Shea JA. The credibility and comparability of standards. Appl Meas Educ 1997; 10(1)39–59
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuffic. 2006. Cijfers ontcijferd [Grades graded]. The Hague: Netherlands Organization for International Cooperation in Higher Education–Nuffic.
   Google Scholar
• Reckase MD. A conceptual framework for a psychometric theory of standard setting with examples of its use for evaluating the functioning of two standard setting methods. Educ Meas: Issues Pract 2006; 25(2)4–18
   Google Scholar
• van der Vleuten CPM, Schuwirth LWT, Muijtjens AMM, Thoben AJNM, Cohen-Schotanus J, van Boven CPA. Cross institutional collaboration in assessment: A case of progress testing. Med Teach 2004; 26: 719–725
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhoeven BH, van der Steeg AF, Scherpbier AJ, Muijtjens AM, Verwijnen GM, van der Vleuten CP. Reliability and credibility of an Angoff standard setting procedure in progress testing using recent graduates as judges. Med Educ 1999; 33: 832–837
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Verhoeven BH, Verwijnen GM, Scherpbier AJJA, Holdrinet RSG, Oeseburg B, Bulte JA, van der Vleuten CPM. An analysis of progress test results of PBL and non-PBL students. Med Teach 1998; 20: 310–316
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wijnen WHFW. Onder of boven de maat [To be or not to be up to the mark] [Dissertation]. Swets and Zeitlinger, Lisse 1971
   Google Scholar