An Experimental Study of Standard Setting Methods for Diagnostic Profiles

Autor/in	Feldberg, Zachary R.
Titel	An Experimental Study of Standard Setting Methods for Diagnostic Profiles
Quelle	(2023), (160 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Georgia
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
ISBN	979-8-3796-8889-9
Schlagwörter	Hochschulschrift; Dissertation; Accountability; Standards; Cutting Scores; Models; Cognitive Measurement; Interrater Reliability + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Thesis; Dissertations; Academic thesis; Verantwortung; Standard; Analogiemodell; Interrater-Reliabilität
Abstract	Cognitive diagnostic models (CDMs) provide pedagogically relevant information in the form of a student profile of multiple binary categorizations of students into mastery or nonmastery statuses on latent traits called attributes. Federal educational accountability requires accountability measures to designate students into one of at least three ordinal levels of proficiency. To bridge the gap between educational accountability testing and pedagogical relevance, CDMs have been proposed for use as state accountability measures. This study examines aspects of mapping the multiple binary categorizations of the students profiles onto ordinal levels of proficiency. The setting of the ordinal levels takes place in a process called a standard setting, in which panels of experts are asked to categorize student profiles into levels of proficiency. We manipulated the number of profiles panelists viewed, the variability of the set of profiles panelists viewed, and the range of attributes mastered across the sets of profiles panelists viewed to determine if these factors impact the resulting cut point. Results indicate that the methods of standard setting are resilient to changes in the number of profiles that panelists view or the variability of profiles panelists view but are effected by the range of profiles panelists view, indicated that while standard settings produce consistent results they lack objectivity and as arbitrary distinctions are difficult to justify their continued use in educational measurement. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01