This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mei Liu, Articles by Holland, Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Exploring Population Sensitivity of Linking Functions Across Three Law School Admission Test Administrations

Educational Testing Service, mliu{at}ets.org

Holland

Educational Testing Service

The simplified version of the Dorans and Holland (2000) measure of population invariance, the root mean square difference (RMSD), is used to explore the degree of dependence of linking functions on the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) subpopulations defined by examinees' gender, ethnic background, geographic region, law school application status, and law school admission status. Equating parallel measures of equal reliability shows very little evidence of population dependence of equating functions. When linking parallel measures, the actual amount of reliability does not seem to be a significant factor for tests with sufficient reliability. Linking two nonstrictly parallel tests that measure the same construct results in less population sensitivity than linking two tests that measure different constructs. The latter linkage leads to substantial population dependence. Linking functions are the least invariant across the ethnic subpopulations. Differences in constructs seem to play a bigger role in population sensitivity of linking functions than do differences in reliability.

Key Words: Index terms: equating • test linking • population invariance • RMSD • reliability • constructs

References

• Camilli, G., Wang, M.M., & Fesq, J. (1995). The effects of dimensionality on equating the Law School Admission Test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 79-96.[CrossRef][ISI]
• De Champlain, A. (1995). Assessing the effect of multidimensionality on LSAT equating for subgroups of test takers (Statistical Rep. No. 95-01). Newtown, PA: Law School Admission Council.
• Dorans, N.J. (2004). Equating, concordance and expectation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 227-246.[Abstract]
• Dorans, N.J., & Holland, P.W. (2000). Population invariance and equatability of tests: Basic theory and the linear case. Journal of Educational Measurement, 37, 281-306.[CrossRef]
• Douglas, J., Kim, H., Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (1999). LSAT dimensionality analysis for the December 1991, June 1992, and October 1992 administrations (Statistical Rep. No. 95-05). Newtown, PA: Law School Admission Council.
• Feuer, M.J., Holland, P.W., Green, B.F., Bertenthal, M.W., & Hemphill, F.C. (1999). Uncommon measures: Equivalence and linkage among educational tests. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Law School Admission Council. (2007). Preparing for the LSAT. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.lsac.org/pdfs/2007-2008/TestPrep07webrenumbered.pdf
• Leary, L.F., & Dorans, N.J. (1985). Implications for altering the context in which test items appear: A historical perspective on an immediate concern. Review of Educational Research, 55, 387-413.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Reese, L.M. (1995). A comparison of local item dependence levels for the LSAT with two other tests. Unpublished manuscript.
• Wilson, K.M., & Powers, D.E. (1994). Factors in performance on the Law School Admission Test (Statistical Rep. No. 93-04). Newtown, PA: Law School Admission Council.

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Qing Yi, H. Assessment, D. J. Harris, and Xiaohong Gao Invariance of Equating Functions Across Different Subgroups of Examinees Taking a Science Achievement Test Applied Psychological Measurement, January 1, 2008; 32(1): 62 - 80. [Abstract] [PDF]

				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]

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

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

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mei Liu, Articles by Holland, Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?