Open AccessA STUDY OF ALTERNATIVE METHODS FOR EQUATING RIGHTS SCORES TO FORMULA SCORES
Author(s) -
Angoff William H.,
Schrader William B.
Publication year - 1981
Publication title -
ets research report series
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.235
H-Index - 5
ISSN - 2330-8516
DOI - 10.1002/j.2333-8504.1981.tb01241.x
Subject(s) - equating , citation , educational testing , service (business) , psychology , mathematics education , computer science , library science , law , standardized test , political science , economics , economy , reading (process)
The principal purpose of this study was to determine whether it would be possible to eqtate Rights-scored tests to Formula-scored tests without causing a discontinuity in the meaning of the score scale. Several other subsidiary studies -of the characteristics of the two scoring methods, of nonresponse and guessing, and of reliability and pardilelism--were also indertaken. The study was conducted in two phases: 1) of two forms of the SAT-verbal and one form of the College Board Chemistry Achievement Test, based on data from a specia:t experimental test administration; and 2) of operational and experimental subtests of the Graduate Management Admission Test, based on data from the (regular) October 1980 administration of the GMAT to applicants for business school. Several outzomes of the study were observed that will be useful for the understanding of some of the issues of Rights and Formula scoring. In addition, it was found that the data of this study support the hypothesis that Formula scores for tests administered with Rig!its directions are directly comparable to Formula scores for the fme tests administered with Formula directions. Thus, the directions under which a test is administered can be,changed without serious concern that a discontinuity in the score scale will result.