期刊文献+
任意字段
题名或关键词
题名
关键词
文摘
作者
第一作者
机构
刊名
分类号
参考文献
作者简介
基金资助
栏目信息

关于两种Angoff法比较的模拟实验研究 被引量：3

A Simulation Experimental Study on the Comparison of Two Angoff Methods
原文传递
导出
摘要 采用模拟实验法比较研究了两种Angoff法——"概率法"和"对错法"——设定分数线的准确性和稳定性,结果表明:(1)当真能力低于测验的平均难度时,"概率法"高估分数线,而"对错法"低估分数线;反之,当真能力高于测验平均难度时,"概率法"低估,而"对错法"高估;(2)当真能力接近测验平均难度时,"概率法"比"对错法"更准确;反之,当真能力远高于或低于测验平均难度时,"对错法"更准确;(3)无论在何种实验条件下,"概率法"均比"对错法"更稳定。 In order to compare both the accuracy and stability of two Angoff methods： probability method and yes/no method, a simulation research was conducted. The research found that 1. When the true ability was less than the average test difficulty, the probability method would overestimate the passing score, while yes/no method would underestimate it; and when the true ability was greater than the average test difficulty, the probability method would underestimate the passing score, while the yes/no method would overestimate it; 3. When the true ability was close to the average test difficulty, the probability method was more accurate than yes/ no method; but when the true ability was far from the average test difficulty, yes/no method was more accurate; 3. In any case, the probability method was more stable than the yes/no method.
作者 汪存友 余嘉元
机构地区 南京师范大学心理系
出处 《心理科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2010年第1期159-161,共3页 Journal of Psychological Science
关键词 Angoff法 标准设定 模拟研究 分数线 Angoff method standard setting simulation research passing score
分类号 B841 [哲学宗教—基础心理学]
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1Brandon P R. Conclusions About Frequently Studied Modified Angoff Standard - Setting Topics. Applied Measurement in Education, 2004, 17(1): 59-88.
  • 2Hurtz G M, Auerbach M A. A Meta - Analysis of the Effects of Modifications to the Angoff Method on Cutoff Scores and Judgment Consensus. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2003, 63 (4): 584-601.
  • 3Thomdike R L. Educational Measurement (2nd). Washington, D.C. : American Council on Education 1971 : 508 - 600.
  • 4Reekase M D. What If There Were a "True Standard Theory" for Standard Setting Like the "True Score Theory" for Tests? Measurement, 2004, 2(2): 114-119.
  • 5Impara J C, Plake B S. Standard Setting: An Alternative Approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1997, 34 ( 4 ) : 353 - 366.
  • 6Chinn R N, Hertz N R. Altemative Approaches to Standard Setting for Licensing and Certification Examinations. Applied Measurement in Education, 2002, 15(1) : 1 - 14.
  • 7Harwell M, Stone C A, Hsu T C, et al. Monte Carlo Studies in Item Response Theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1996, 20(2): 101 - 125.
  • 8Reckase M D. A Conceptual Framework for a Psychometric Theory for Standard Setting with Examples of Its Use for Evaluating the Functioning of Two Standard Setting Methods. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 2006, 25(2):4-18.
  • 9Schulz E M. Commentary: A Response to Reckase's Conceptual Framework and Examples for Evaluating Standard Setting Methods. Educational Measurement: Is,sues and Practice, 2006, 25(3): 4-13.
  • 10Reckase M D. Rejoinder: Evaluating Standard Setting Methods Using Error Models Proposed by Sehulz. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice, 2006, 25(3): 14-17.

同被引文献16

  • 1何惧,何佳,安滔,高靖.Angoff法及其衍生方法在资格考试合格线设定中的比较研究[J].中国考试,2007(6):23-26. 被引量：11
  • 2Angoff, W. H. ( 1971 ). Scales, norms, and equivalent scores. In R. L. Thorndike ( Ed. ) , Educational measurement ( 2nd ed. , pp. 508 - 600 ). Washington, DC : American Council on Edu- cation.
  • 3Brandon, P. R. (2004). Conclusions about frequently studiedmodified Angoff standard setting topics. Applied Measurement in Education,17,59 - 88.
  • 4Clauser, B. E. , Swanson, D. B. , & Harik, P. (2002). A multiva- riate generalizability analysis of the impact of training and ex- aminee performance information on judgments made in an An- goff - style standard - setting procedure. Journal of Educa- tional Measurement,39,269 - 290.
  • 5Clauser, B. E. , Harik, P. , Margolis, M. J. , MeManus, I. C. , Mol- lon, J. , Chis, L. , & Williams, S. ( 2009 a). Empirical evidence for the evaluation of performance standards estimated using the Angoff procedure. Applied Measurement in Education,22, 1 -21.
  • 6Clanser, B. E. , Mee, J. , Baldwin, S. G. , Margolis, M. G. , & Dil- lon, G. F. (2009b). Judges' use of examinee performance da- ta in an Angoff standard - setting exercise for a medical licen- sing examination: An experimental study. Journal of Educa- tional Measuremen ,46,390 - 407.
  • 7Dillon, G. F. , & Walsh, W. P. ( 2000 ). Using performance data to set standards : Practical impact and the perception of jud- ges. CLEAR Exam Review,11 (1) ,15 -18.
  • 8Hambleton,R. K. , Swaminathan, H. , & Rogers, H. J. ( 1991 ). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • 9Hambleton, R. K. , & Pitoniak, M. J. (2006). Setting perform- ance standards. In R. L. Brennan ( Ed. ): Educational meas- urement (4th ed. , pp. 433 - 470). Westport, CT: American Council on Education/Praeger.
  • 10Hambleton, R. K. ( 2001 ). Setting performance standards on ed- ucational assessments and criteria for evaluating the process. In G. Cizek ( Ed. ): Standard setting: Concepts, methods and perspectives( pp. 89 - 116). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum Associates.

引证文献3

二级引证文献9

心理科学
2010年 第1期

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部