Applied Psychological Measurement

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Qing Yi,
Right arrow Articles by Xiaohong Gao,
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 32, No. 1, 62-80 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0146621607311579

Invariance of Equating Functions Across Different Subgroups of Examinees Taking a Science Achievement Test

Qing Yi

19500 Bulverde Road, San Antonio, TX 78259, Qing_Yi{at}harcourt.com

Harcourt Assessment

ACT

Deborah J. Harris

ACT

Xiaohong Gao

ACT

This study investigated the group invariance of equating results using a science achievement test. Examinees were divided into different subgroups based on the average composite score for test centers, whether they had taken a physics course, and self-reported science grade point average. The reason for dividing examinees into subgroups using such variables is that those variables are more related to performance on a science achievement test than, say, gender. Results indicated that the conversions obtained from different subgroups were similar to the conversions obtained by using the total group, except when the groups were divided based on whether a student had taken a physics course. Where there were differences, the differences were generally 1 equated raw score point.

Key Words: Index terms: group invariance • score equating • equating conversions • IRT true score • observed-score equating methods


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
N. J. Dorans, Jinghua Liu, and S. Hammond
Anchor Test Type and Population Invariance: An Exploration Across Subpopulations and Test Administrations
Applied Psychological Measurement, January 1, 2008; 32(1): 81 - 97.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
N. S. Petersen
A Discussion of Population Invariance of Equating
Applied Psychological Measurement, January 1, 2008; 32(1): 98 - 101.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
R. L. Brennan
A Discussion of Population Invariance
Applied Psychological Measurement, January 1, 2008; 32(1): 102 - 114.
[PDF]