Open AccessCOMPARISON OF SUBSCORES BASED ON CLASSICAL TEST THEORY METHODS
Author(s) -
Puhan Gautam,
Sinharay Sandip,
Haberman Shelby,
Larkin Kevin
Publication year - 2008
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.2333-8504.2008.tb02140.x
Subject(s) - trustworthiness , statistics , test (biology) , certification , psychology , item response theory , classical test theory , mathematics , psychometrics , social psychology , political science , paleontology , law , biology
Will reporting subscores provide any additional information than the total score? Is there a method that can be used to provide more trustworthy subscores than observed subscores? These 2 questions are addressed in this study. To answer the 2nd question, 2 subscore estimation methods (i.e., subscore estimated from the observed total score or subscore estimated using both the observed subscore and observed total score) are compared. Analyses conducted on 8 certification tests indicated that reporting subscores at the examinee level may not be necessary as they do not provide much additional information than the total score. However, at the institutional level (for institution size greater than 30), reporting subscores may not be harmful, although it may be redundant. Finally, results indicated that subscores estimated using both the observed subscore and observed total score were the most trustworthy and may be used if subscores were to be reported.