Cargando…
Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting
BACKGROUND: Standard setting is one of the most contentious topics in educational measurement. Commonly-used methods all have well reported limitations. To date, there is not conclusive evidence suggesting which standard setting method yields the highest validity. METHODS: The method described and p...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5991461/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29879954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1238-7 |
_version_ | 1783329834141745152 |
---|---|
author | Shulruf, Boaz Coombes, Lee Damodaran, Arvin Freeman, Adrian Jones, Philip Lieberman, Steve Poole, Phillippa Rhee, Joel Wilkinson, Tim Harris, Peter |
author_facet | Shulruf, Boaz Coombes, Lee Damodaran, Arvin Freeman, Adrian Jones, Philip Lieberman, Steve Poole, Phillippa Rhee, Joel Wilkinson, Tim Harris, Peter |
author_sort | Shulruf, Boaz |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Standard setting is one of the most contentious topics in educational measurement. Commonly-used methods all have well reported limitations. To date, there is not conclusive evidence suggesting which standard setting method yields the highest validity. METHODS: The method described and piloted in this study asked expert judges to estimate the scores on a real MCQ examination that they consider indicated a clear pass, clear fail, and pass mark for the examination as a whole. The mean and SD of the judges responses to these estimates, Z scores and confidence intervals were used to derive the cut-score and the confidence in it. RESULTS: In this example the new method’s cut-score was higher than the judges’ estimate. The method also yielded estimates of statistical error which determine the range of the acceptable cut-score and the estimated level of confidence one may have in the accuracy of that cut-score. CONCLUSIONS: This new standard-setting method offers some advances, and possibly advantages, in that the decisions being asked of judges are based on firmer constructs, and it takes into account variation among judges. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5991461 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59914612018-06-21 Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting Shulruf, Boaz Coombes, Lee Damodaran, Arvin Freeman, Adrian Jones, Philip Lieberman, Steve Poole, Phillippa Rhee, Joel Wilkinson, Tim Harris, Peter BMC Med Educ Technical Advance BACKGROUND: Standard setting is one of the most contentious topics in educational measurement. Commonly-used methods all have well reported limitations. To date, there is not conclusive evidence suggesting which standard setting method yields the highest validity. METHODS: The method described and piloted in this study asked expert judges to estimate the scores on a real MCQ examination that they consider indicated a clear pass, clear fail, and pass mark for the examination as a whole. The mean and SD of the judges responses to these estimates, Z scores and confidence intervals were used to derive the cut-score and the confidence in it. RESULTS: In this example the new method’s cut-score was higher than the judges’ estimate. The method also yielded estimates of statistical error which determine the range of the acceptable cut-score and the estimated level of confidence one may have in the accuracy of that cut-score. CONCLUSIONS: This new standard-setting method offers some advances, and possibly advantages, in that the decisions being asked of judges are based on firmer constructs, and it takes into account variation among judges. BioMed Central 2018-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5991461/ /pubmed/29879954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1238-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Technical Advance Shulruf, Boaz Coombes, Lee Damodaran, Arvin Freeman, Adrian Jones, Philip Lieberman, Steve Poole, Phillippa Rhee, Joel Wilkinson, Tim Harris, Peter Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting |
title | Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting |
title_full | Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting |
title_fullStr | Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting |
title_full_unstemmed | Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting |
title_short | Cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting |
title_sort | cut-scores revisited: feasibility of a new method for group standard setting |
topic | Technical Advance |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5991461/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29879954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1238-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shulrufboaz cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT coombeslee cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT damodaranarvin cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT freemanadrian cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT jonesphilip cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT liebermansteve cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT poolephillippa cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT rheejoel cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT wilkinsontim cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting AT harrispeter cutscoresrevisitedfeasibilityofanewmethodforgroupstandardsetting |