Premium
Rater Comparability Scoring and Equating: Does Choice of Target Population Weights Matter in This Context?
Author(s) -
Puhan Gautam
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal of educational measurement
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.917
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1745-3984
pISSN - 0022-0655
DOI - 10.1111/jedm.12023
Subject(s) - equating , comparability , context (archaeology) , raw score , population , statistics , sample (material) , econometrics , mathematics , computer science , raw data , demography , geography , chemistry , archaeology , chromatography , combinatorics , sociology , rasch model
When a constructed‐response test form is reused, raw scores from the two administrations of the form may not be comparable. The solution to this problem requires a rescoring, at the current administration, of examinee responses from the previous administration. The scores from this “rescoring” can be used as an anchor for equating. In this equating, the choice of weights for combining the samples to define the target population can be critical. In rescored data, the anchor usually correlates very strongly with the new form but only moderately with the reference form. This difference has a predictable impact: the equating results are most accurate when the target population is the reference form sample, least accurate when the target population is the new form sample, and somewhere in the middle when the new form and reference form samples are equally weighted in forming the target population.