An Approach to Measuring the Achievement or Proficiency of an Examinee

Abstract

Various school systems are developing proficiency tests which are conceptualized as representing a variety of skills with one or more items per skill. This paper discusses how certain recent technical advances might be extended to examine these tests. In contrast to previous analyses, errors at the item level are included; and it is shown that inclusion of these errors implies that a substantially longer test might be needed. One approach to this problem is described, and directions for future research are suggested.

Criterion-referenced measurement: Its main applications, problems and findings

“…Relevant references to the literature on state model are Bergan, Cancelli, andLuiten (1980), Besel (1973), Dayton and Macready (1976), Emrick (1971, Emrick and Adams (1969), Macready and Dayton (1977, 1980a, 1980b, Reulecke (1977aReulecke ( , 1977b, van der Linden (1980c, 1981c, 1981d, 1981e), Wilcox (1979a, and Wilcox and Harris (1977).…”

A closed sequential procedure for comparing the binomial distribution to a standard

“…On the average, the number of observations will be smaller, and in some cases, by a substantial amount. Thus, it might be possible to reduce the difficulties pointed out by Wilcox (1980b), and van den Brink & , Koele (1980). Of course at least N items must be available, and any sequential procedure would seem to be inconvenient in certain situations.…”

“…When applying FhanBr's solution to achievement tests, it may be necessary to choose 6" small in order to take guessing into account (van den Brink & Koele, 1980; Wilcox, 1980b). This, in turn, might mean that a relatively large number of items OOO7-1102/81/020238-05$02.00/0 0 1981 The British Psychological Society Comparing the binomial distribution to a standard 239 will be required.…”