Applied Psychological Measurement

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Click here for more information

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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Muraki, E.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, Y.-W.
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. 24, No. 4, 325-337 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/01466210022031787

Equating and Linking of Performance Assessments

Eiji Muraki

emuraki{at}ets.org

Catherine M. Hombo

Yong-Won Lee

Educational Testing Service

Performance assessments (PA) are used in various contexts of large-scale educational assessment. It is often desirable to compare examinee performance on different forms of an assessment or on the same forms administered at different times. An overview of linking methods applied to PA is presented: major issues and recent developments in linking PAs are discussed, three common linking designs (single group, randomly equivalent groups, and nonequivalent groups with anchor items) are compared, and two major linking methodologies [classical and item response theory (IRT)] are evaluated from the PA perspective. Also described are two classical equating methods (linear and equipercentile) and several IRT equating methods (item response function, vertical, common population, and multiple-group). Areas for future research are identified.


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?