Construct equivalence of PISA reading comprehension measured with paper-based and computer-based assessments.

Autor/inn/en	Kroehne, Ulf; Buerger, Sarah; Hahnel, Carolin; Goldhammer, Frank
Titel	Construct equivalence of PISA reading comprehension measured with paper-based and computer-based assessments.
Quelle	In: Educational measurement, 38 (2019) 3, S. 97-111Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Beigaben	Illustrationen
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1745-3992
DOI	10.1111/emip.12280
Schlagwörter	Korrelation; Testkonstruktion; Vergleich; Item-Response-Theory; Test; Testdurchführung; Testverfahren; Interaktion; Schülerleistung; Frage; Leseverstehen; Äquivalenz; Computerunterstütztes Verfahren; Messverfahren; Technologiebasiertes Testen; Antwort; Einflussfaktor; Leistungsmessung; PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment); Deutschland
Abstract	For many years, reading comprehension in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) was measured via paper-based assessment (PBA). In the 2015 cycle, computer-based assessment (CBA) was introduced, raising the question of whether central equivalence criteria required for a valid interpretation of the results are fulfilled. As an extension of the PISA 2012 main study in Germany, a random subsample of two intact PISA reading clusters, either computerized or paper-based, was assessed using a random group design with an additional within-subject variation. The results are in line with the hypothesis of construct equivalence. That is, the latent cross-mode correlation of PISA reading comprehension was not significantly different from the expected correlation between the two clusters. Significant mode effects on item difficulties were observed for a small number of items only. Interindividual differences found in mode effects were negatively correlated with reading comprehension, but were not predicted by basic computer skills or gender. Further differences between modes were found with respect to the number of missing values. (DIPF/Orig.).
Erfasst von	DIPF \| Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation, Frankfurt am Main
Update	2020/3