Cargando…
An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
BACKGROUND: Standard setting is one of the most challenging aspects of assessment in high-stakes healthcare settings. The Angoff methodology is widely used, but poses a number of challenges, including conceptualisation of the just-passing candidate, and the time-cost of implementing the method. Cohe...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7786895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33407365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02418-5 |
_version_ | 1783632720088268800 |
---|---|
author | McLachlan, John C. Robertson, K. Alex Weller, Bridget Sawdon, Marina |
author_facet | McLachlan, John C. Robertson, K. Alex Weller, Bridget Sawdon, Marina |
author_sort | McLachlan, John C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Standard setting is one of the most challenging aspects of assessment in high-stakes healthcare settings. The Angoff methodology is widely used, but poses a number of challenges, including conceptualisation of the just-passing candidate, and the time-cost of implementing the method. Cohen methodologies are inexpensive and rapid but rely on the performance of an individual candidate. A new method of standard setting, based on the entire cohort and every item, would be valuable. METHODS: We identified Borderline candidates by reviewing their performance across all assessments in an academic year. We plotted the item scores of the Borderline candidates in comparison with Facility for the whole cohort and fitted curves to the resulting distribution. RESULTS: It is observed that for any given Item, an equation of the form y ≈ C. e(Fx) where y is the Facility of Borderline candidates on that Item, x is the observed Item Facility of the whole cohort, and C and F are constants, predicts the probable Facility for Borderline candidates over the test, in other words, the cut score for Borderline candidates. We describe ways of estimating C and F in any given circumstance, and suggest typical values arising from this particular study: that C = 12.3 and F = 0.021. CONCLUSIONS: C and F are relatively stable, and that the equation y = 12.3. e(0.021x) can rapidly be applied to the item Facility for every item. The average value represents the cut score for the assessment as a whole. This represents a novel retrospective method based on test takers. Compared to the Cohen method which draws on one score and one candidate, this method draws on all items and candidates in a test. We propose that it can be used to standard set a whole test, or a particular item where the predicted Angoff score is very different from the observed Facility. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7786895 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77868952021-01-07 An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities McLachlan, John C. Robertson, K. Alex Weller, Bridget Sawdon, Marina BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Standard setting is one of the most challenging aspects of assessment in high-stakes healthcare settings. The Angoff methodology is widely used, but poses a number of challenges, including conceptualisation of the just-passing candidate, and the time-cost of implementing the method. Cohen methodologies are inexpensive and rapid but rely on the performance of an individual candidate. A new method of standard setting, based on the entire cohort and every item, would be valuable. METHODS: We identified Borderline candidates by reviewing their performance across all assessments in an academic year. We plotted the item scores of the Borderline candidates in comparison with Facility for the whole cohort and fitted curves to the resulting distribution. RESULTS: It is observed that for any given Item, an equation of the form y ≈ C. e(Fx) where y is the Facility of Borderline candidates on that Item, x is the observed Item Facility of the whole cohort, and C and F are constants, predicts the probable Facility for Borderline candidates over the test, in other words, the cut score for Borderline candidates. We describe ways of estimating C and F in any given circumstance, and suggest typical values arising from this particular study: that C = 12.3 and F = 0.021. CONCLUSIONS: C and F are relatively stable, and that the equation y = 12.3. e(0.021x) can rapidly be applied to the item Facility for every item. The average value represents the cut score for the assessment as a whole. This represents a novel retrospective method based on test takers. Compared to the Cohen method which draws on one score and one candidate, this method draws on all items and candidates in a test. We propose that it can be used to standard set a whole test, or a particular item where the predicted Angoff score is very different from the observed Facility. BioMed Central 2021-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7786895/ /pubmed/33407365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02418-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article McLachlan, John C. Robertson, K. Alex Weller, Bridget Sawdon, Marina An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities |
title | An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities |
title_full | An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities |
title_fullStr | An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities |
title_full_unstemmed | An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities |
title_short | An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities |
title_sort | inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7786895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33407365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02418-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mclachlanjohnc aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities AT robertsonkalex aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities AT wellerbridget aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities AT sawdonmarina aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities AT mclachlanjohnc inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities AT robertsonkalex inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities AT wellerbridget inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities AT sawdonmarina inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities |