A Comparison of Four Linear Equating Methods for the Common-Item Nonequivalent Groups Design Using Simulation Methods. ACT Research Report Series, 2013 (2)

Autor/inn/en	Topczewski, Anna; Cui, Zhongmin; Woodruff, David; Chen, Hanwei; Fang, Yu
Institution	ACT, Inc.
Titel	A Comparison of Four Linear Equating Methods for the Common-Item Nonequivalent Groups Design Using Simulation Methods. ACT Research Report Series, 2013 (2)
Quelle	(2013), (48 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Quantitative Daten; Comparative Analysis; Equated Scores; Methods; Simulation; Item Response Theory; Accuracy; Sampling; Sample Size; Mathematics Tests; Language Tests; English + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Method; Methode; Simulation program; Simulationsprogramm; Item-Response-Theorie; Language test; Sprachtest; English language; Englisch
Abstract	This paper investigates four methods of linear equating under the common item nonequivalent groups design. Three of the methods are well known: Tucker, Angoff-Levine, and Congeneric-Levine. A fourth method is presented as a variant of the Congeneric-Levine method. Using simulation data generated from the three-parameter logistic IRT model we compare the accuracy of the four methods under a variety of conditions involving group differences between the old and new groups. The sampling properties of the methods' parameter estimates are also investigated. The results indicate that the Tucker method is less accurate than the other three methods when group differences exist, especially when sample size is large (800). However, the Tucker method's gamma has the smallest sampling error, especially when sample size is small. Appended are: (1) Tables A1-A8; and (2) Figures B-1 through B-7. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	ACT, Inc. 500 ACT Drive, P.O. Box 168, Iowa City, IA 52243-0168. Tel: 319-337-1270; Web site: http://www.act.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01