RESEARCH LIBRARY

Integrating Timing Considerations to Improve Testing Practices

This book synthesizes a wealth of theory and research on time issues in assessment into actionable advice for test development, administration, and scoring. 

Integrating Timing Considerations to Improve Testing Practices

This chapter presents a historical overview of the testing literature that exemplifies the theoretical and operational evolution of test speededness.

Journal of Educational Measurement: Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages 216-229

This article presents two generalizability-theory–based analyses of the proportion of the item variance that contributes to error in the cut score. For one approach, variance components are estimated on the probability (or proportion-correct) scale of the Angoff judgments, and for the other, the judgments are transferred to the theta scale of an item response theory model before estimating the variance components.

Adv in Health Sci Educ 24, 141–150 (2019)

Research suggests that the three-option format is optimal for multiple choice questions (MCQs). This conclusion is supported by numerous studies showing that most distractors (i.e., incorrect answers) are selected by so few examinees that they are essentially nonfunctional. However, nearly all studies have defined a distractor as nonfunctional if it is selected by fewer than 5% of examinees.

Muscle Nerve, 58: 646-654

The Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)‐Specific Quality of Life instrument and its revised version (ALSSQOL and ALSSQOL‐R) have strong psychometric properties, and have demonstrated research and clinical utility. This study aimed to develop a short form (ALSSQOL‐SF) suitable for limited clinic time and patient stamina.

Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 150-152

An introduction to a special issue of Quality Assurance in Education featuring papers based on presentations at a two-day international seminar on managing the quality of data collection in large-scale assessments.

Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 2018 45:3, 381-387

This study uses item response data from the November–December 2014 and April 2015 NAVLE administrations (n =5,292), to conduct timing analyses comparing performance across several examinee subgroups. The results provide evidence that conditions were sufficient for most examinees, thereby supporting the current time limits. For the relatively few examinees who may have been impacted, results suggest the cause is not a bias with the test but rather the effect of poor pacing behavior combined with knowledge deficits.