Using Out-of-Level Items in Computerized Adaptive Testing

REFERENCES

• Allen, T.E. (1984, April). Out-of-level testing with the Stanford achievement test (7th ed.): A procedure for assigning students to the correct battery level. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
   Google Scholar
• Ayrer, J.E., & McNamara, T.C. (1973). Survey testing on an out-of-level basis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10(2), 79–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bock, R.D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46, 443–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chien, Y., & Shin, C.D. (2010). CAT simulation program [Software]. Iowa City, IA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Flaugher, R. (1990). Item pools. In H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 41–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Gu, L., & Reckase, M.D. (2007). Designing optimal item pools for computerized adaptive tests with Sympson-Hetter exposure control. In D.J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing. Retrieved from http://publicdocs.iacat.org/cat2010/cat07gu-reckase.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jarosewich, T., & Stocking, V.B. (2003). Talent search: Student and parent perceptions of out-of-level testing. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14(3), 137–150.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, E.D., Barnette, J.J., & Callahan, C.M. (1983, April). Out-of-level testing for special education students with mild learning handicaps. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, J.K., & Nicewander, W.A. (1993). Ability estimation for conventional tests. Psychometrika, 58, 587–599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingsbury, G.G., & Zara, A.R. (1989). Procedures for selecting items for computerized adaptive tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(4), 359–375.
   Google Scholar
• Long, J.V., Schaffran, J.A., & Kellogg, T.M. (1977). Effects of out-of-level survey testing on reading achievement scores of Title I ESEA students. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14(3), 203–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Looney, J.W. (2011). Integrating formative and summative assessment: Progress toward a seamless system? (OECD Education Working Papers, No. 58). OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kghx3kbl734-en
   Google Scholar
• Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Masters, G.N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyers, C.E., MacMillan, D.L., & Yoshida, R.K. (1975, February). Evaluation of special education programs. Paper presented at the annual Conference and Exhibition on Measurement and Evaluation of Los Angeles County Schools, Los Angeles, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Minnema, J., Thurlow, M., Bielinski, J., & Scott, J. (2001). Past and current research on out-of-level testing of students with disabilities. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 26, 49–55.
   Google Scholar
• Minnema, J., Thurlow, M., & Scott, J. (2001). Testing students out of level in large-scale assessments: What states perceive and believe (Out-of-Level Testing Project Report 5). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. . Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/Onlinepubs/OOLT5.html
   Google Scholar
• Powers, S., & Gallas, E.J. (1978, March). Implications of out-of-level testing for ESEA Title I students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1960)
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, A. (1976). Out-of-level testing. ESEA Title I evaluation and reporting system (Technical Paper No. 6). Mountain View, CA: RMC Research Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Samejima, F. (1993a). An approximation for the bias function of the maximum likelihood estimate of a latent variable for the general case where the item responses are discrete. Psychometrika, 58, 119–138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samejima, F. (1993b). The bias function of the maximum likelihood estimate of ability for the dichotomous response level. Psychometrika, 58, 195–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, C., Chien, Y., Way, W.D., & Swanson, L. (2009). Weighted penalty model for content balancing in CATS. Retrieved from http://www.pearsonassessments.com/NR/rdonlyres/99A4327B-5968–4AB2-A8CD-8D502D22C2DE/0/WeightedPenaltyModel.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Slaughter, H.B., & Gallas, E.J. (1978, March). Will out-of-level norm-referenced testing improve the selection of program participants and the diagnosis of reading comprehension in ESEA Title I programs? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, L.L., & Johns, J.L. (1984). A study of the effects of out-of-level testing with poor readers in the intermediate grades. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 5, 139–143.
   Google Scholar
• Stanley, J.C. (1977–1978). The predictive value of the SAT for brilliant seventh- and eighth-graders. The College Board Review, 106, 31–37.
   Google Scholar
• Thurlow, M., Elliott, J., & Ysseldyke, J. (1999). Out-of-level testing: Pros and cons (Policy Directions No. 9). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/nceo/onlinepubs/policy9.htm
   Google Scholar
• Thurlow, M., & Minnema, J. (2001). States’ out-of-level testing policies (Out-of-Level Testing Project Report 4). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/Onlinepubs/OOLT4.html
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Education. (2013). Race to the top assessment: Smarter balanced assessment consortium year two report. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-assessment/reports/sbac-year-2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Veldkamp, B.P., & van der Linden, W.J. (2002). Multidimensional adaptive testing with constraints on test content. Psychometrika, 67, 575–588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C., Chang, H., & Douglas, J. (2012). Combining CAT with cognitive diagnosis: A weighted item selection approach. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 95–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warm, T.A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in the item response theory. Psychometrika, 54, 427–450.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Way, W.D., Twing, J.S., Camara, W., Sweeney, K., Lazer, S., & Mazzeo, J. (2010). Some considerations related to the use of adaptive testing for the common core assessments. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/s/commonassessments/pdf/AdaptiveTesting.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wendler, C., Ninneman, A., & Feigenbaum, M. (2000). Evaluating the appropriateness of the SAT I for 7th and 8th graders. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.
   Google Scholar
• Wise, S.L. (1997, July). An evaluation of the item pools used for computerized adaptive test versions of the Maryland Functional Tests. Report prepared for the Assessment Branch of the Maryland State Department of Education, Annapolis, MD. Retrieved from http://www.marces.org/mdarch/pdf/M032045.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Yoshida, R.K. (1976). Out-of-level testing of special education students with a standardized achievement batter. Journal of Educational Measurement, 13(3), 215–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, D., & Fan, M. (1999). Adjusting computer adaptive test starting points to conserve item pool. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
   Google Scholar