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.
Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 37: 40-45
This simulation study demonstrates that the strength of item dependencies and the location of an examination systems’ cut‐points both influence the accuracy (i.e., the sensitivity and specificity) of examinee classifications. Practical implications of these results are discussed in terms of false positive and false negative classifications of test takers.
CLEAR Exam Review 2018 27(2): 21-27
The purpose of this paper is to suggest an approach to job analysis that addresses broad competencies while maintaining the rigor of traditional job analysis and the specificity of good test blueprints.