RESEARCH LIBRARY

Journal of Educational Measurement: Volume 55, Issue 4, Pages 582-594

This article proposes and evaluates a new method that implements computerized adaptive testing (CAT) without any restriction on item review. In particular, it evaluates the new method in terms of the accuracy on ability estimates and the robustness against test‐manipulation strategies. This study shows that the newly proposed method is promising in a win‐win situation: examinees have full freedom to review and change answers, and the impacts of test‐manipulation strategies are undermined.

Medical Teacher: Volume 40 - Issue 8 - p 838-841

Adaptive learning requires frequent and valid assessments for learners to track progress against their goals. This study determined if multiple-choice questions (MCQs) “crowdsourced” from medical learners could meet the standards of many large-scale testing programs.

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.

Psychometrika 83, 847–857 (2018)

Utilizing algorithms to generate items in educational and psychological testing is an active area of research for obvious reasons: Test items are predominantly written by humans, in most cases by content experts who represent a limited and potentially costly resource. Using algorithms instead has the appeal to provide an unlimited resource for this crucial part of assessment development.

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.