锚题比例与年级离散度对垂直等值的影响
|
摘要
采用锚题设计,选择年级1作为参照基准,通过蒙特卡洛模拟方法,考察锚题比例与年级离散度对垂直等值的影响.研究结果表明:与基准年级的距离影响垂直等值效果,越靠近基准年级,估计精度越好;从整体而言,垂直等值锚题比例设为30%,等值效果最好;垂直等值锚题比例的设定受年级离散度影响,2者存在交互作用,锚题比例设为"变"值更好.
The paper aimed at the effect of the ratio of anchor items to total test and the separation of grade distributions on the precision of vertical scaling. The paper used common-item design and chose grade 1 as base grade,by Monte Carlo simulation method simulated the different ratio of anchor items to total test and separation of grade distributions studied the influence of vertical scaling. The result shows that:( i) Selection of base grade affected the precision of vertical scaling. The closer to the base grade,the better the accuracy of the estimate is.( ii) When there is a 30% ratio of anchor items to total test,the precision of vertical scaling is best.( iii) The ratio of anchor items to total test is affect by the separation of grade distributions. There is an interaction between the two,and the ratio of anchor questions is set to " change".
The paper aimed at the effect of the ratio of anchor items to total test and the separation of grade distributions on the precision of vertical scaling. The paper used common-item design and chose grade 1 as base grade,by Monte Carlo simulation method simulated the different ratio of anchor items to total test and separation of grade distributions studied the influence of vertical scaling. The result shows that:( i) Selection of base grade affected the precision of vertical scaling. The closer to the base grade,the better the accuracy of the estimate is.( ii) When there is a 30% ratio of anchor items to total test,the precision of vertical scaling is best.( iii) The ratio of anchor items to total test is affect by the separation of grade distributions. There is an interaction between the two,and the ratio of anchor questions is set to " change".
引文
[1]漆书青,戴海崎,丁树良.现代教育与心理测量学原理[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2002.
[2]王怡,唐文清,刘晶,等. IRT与MIRT在测验垂直等值中的应用[J].心理科学进展,2014,22(5):881-888.
[3]叶萌,辛涛.测验链接中的锚题代表性研究[J].心理科学,2015,38(1):209-215.
[4] Sari A A,Keleciogˇlu H. Assessment of achievement and growth by vertical scaling:comparison of vertical scaling methods[J]. Journal of Educational Sciences Research,2016,6(2):25-38.
[5]Kolen M J,Brennan R L. Test equating,scaling,and linking:methods and practices[M]. 2nd ed. New York:Springer-Verlag,2004.
[6]Kolen M J,Brennan R L. Test equating scaling and linking:method and practices[M]. 3rd ed. New York:Springer-Verlag,2013.
[7]王烨晖,边玉芳,辛涛.垂直等值的应用及最新发展述评[J].心理学探新,2011,31(5):472-476.
[8]Duong M Q. Evaluating equating results in the non-equivalent groups with anchor test design using equipercentile and equity criteria[EB/OL]. https:∥eric. ed. gov/? id=ED529395.
[9]叶昶成.不同垂直等化设计下可能值方法估计效果值探讨[D].台湾:台中教育大学,2015.
[10]蔡艳,丁树良,涂冬波.锚题比例对等值精度的影响[J].心理学探新,2009,29(2):86-89.
[11]Martineau J A. The effects of construct shift on growth and accountability models. Unpublished doctoral dissertation[D]. Michigan:Michigan State University,2004.
[12]Martineau J A. A distorting value added,the use of longitudinal,vertically scaled student achievement data for growth-based,value-added accountability[J]. Journal of Educational&Behavioral Statistics,2006,31(1):35-62.
[13]Yen W M. The choice of scale for educational measurement:an IRT perspective[J]. Journal of Educational Measurement,1986,23(4):299-325.
[14]罗照盛.项目反应理论基础[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2012.
[15]Dorans N J,Pommerich M,Holland P W. Linking and aligning scores and scales[M]. New York:Springer Verlag,2007:253-273.
[16]郭小军.不同参照基准与年级离散程度对垂直等值的影响研究[D].南昌:江西师范大学,2014.
[17]Tong Y,Kolen M J. Comparisons of methodologies and results in vertical scaling for educational achievement tests[J]. Applied Measurement in Education,2007,20(2):227-253.
[18] Kolen M J. Equating and vertical scaling:research questions[C]. The Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education,2003.
[19]Yildirim H H. Findings from an empirical vertical scaling study with BILOG-MG[EB/OL].[2018-02-11]. https://www. researchgate. net/publication/288239514_Findings_from_an_empirical_vertical_scaling_study_with_BILOG-MG.
[20]熊建华,叶新蓉,丁树良,等.等值设计中锚题比例研究[J].第三届国际教育技术与训练大会,2010,7:197-200.
[21]叶萌,辛涛.垂直量尺化中的参数估计方法及其性能比较[J].心理科学进展,2014,22(10):1669-1678.
[2]王怡,唐文清,刘晶,等. IRT与MIRT在测验垂直等值中的应用[J].心理科学进展,2014,22(5):881-888.
[3]叶萌,辛涛.测验链接中的锚题代表性研究[J].心理科学,2015,38(1):209-215.
[4] Sari A A,Keleciogˇlu H. Assessment of achievement and growth by vertical scaling:comparison of vertical scaling methods[J]. Journal of Educational Sciences Research,2016,6(2):25-38.
[5]Kolen M J,Brennan R L. Test equating,scaling,and linking:methods and practices[M]. 2nd ed. New York:Springer-Verlag,2004.
[6]Kolen M J,Brennan R L. Test equating scaling and linking:method and practices[M]. 3rd ed. New York:Springer-Verlag,2013.
[7]王烨晖,边玉芳,辛涛.垂直等值的应用及最新发展述评[J].心理学探新,2011,31(5):472-476.
[8]Duong M Q. Evaluating equating results in the non-equivalent groups with anchor test design using equipercentile and equity criteria[EB/OL]. https:∥eric. ed. gov/? id=ED529395.
[9]叶昶成.不同垂直等化设计下可能值方法估计效果值探讨[D].台湾:台中教育大学,2015.
[10]蔡艳,丁树良,涂冬波.锚题比例对等值精度的影响[J].心理学探新,2009,29(2):86-89.
[11]Martineau J A. The effects of construct shift on growth and accountability models. Unpublished doctoral dissertation[D]. Michigan:Michigan State University,2004.
[12]Martineau J A. A distorting value added,the use of longitudinal,vertically scaled student achievement data for growth-based,value-added accountability[J]. Journal of Educational&Behavioral Statistics,2006,31(1):35-62.
[13]Yen W M. The choice of scale for educational measurement:an IRT perspective[J]. Journal of Educational Measurement,1986,23(4):299-325.
[14]罗照盛.项目反应理论基础[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2012.
[15]Dorans N J,Pommerich M,Holland P W. Linking and aligning scores and scales[M]. New York:Springer Verlag,2007:253-273.
[16]郭小军.不同参照基准与年级离散程度对垂直等值的影响研究[D].南昌:江西师范大学,2014.
[17]Tong Y,Kolen M J. Comparisons of methodologies and results in vertical scaling for educational achievement tests[J]. Applied Measurement in Education,2007,20(2):227-253.
[18] Kolen M J. Equating and vertical scaling:research questions[C]. The Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education,2003.
[19]Yildirim H H. Findings from an empirical vertical scaling study with BILOG-MG[EB/OL].[2018-02-11]. https://www. researchgate. net/publication/288239514_Findings_from_an_empirical_vertical_scaling_study_with_BILOG-MG.
[20]熊建华,叶新蓉,丁树良,等.等值设计中锚题比例研究[J].第三届国际教育技术与训练大会,2010,7:197-200.
[21]叶萌,辛涛.垂直量尺化中的参数估计方法及其性能比较[J].心理科学进展,2014,22(10):1669-1678.