Ability estimation methods in computerized adaptive testing for assessment use

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Dec 17, 2022
https://doi.org/10.47434/JEREDA.3.3.2022.275
Download
PDF
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Vol. 3 No. 3 (2022)

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Adeola Ayodeji Famoroti
International Centre for Educational Evaluation, Institute of Education, University of Ibadan. Nigeria

Abstract

Introduction: The all the time use of linear computer-based test for ability estimation in Africa could be traced to the inadequate knowledge of the ability estimation of computerized adaptive testing to arrive at a precise ability estimate of examinee.


Purpose: The purpose of the search work was to explain method of ability estimation which is one of the grey areas in computerized adaptive testing for the researchers whose interest are on computerized adaptive testing.


Findings: This paper discussed the Maximum Likelihood Estimation method, provide its step-by-step formulae and its limitations of use in computerized adaptive testing.


Recommendations: The paper recommended the following: the use of the Maximum Likelihood Estimation method for the higher institutions of learning who wish to use computerized adaptive testing for her proficiency test or post-UTME; a wide usage of computerized adaptive testing as an alternative to the linear computer-based test or as a replacement of linear computer-based test because it estimates precise ability of the examinee; an academic seminar on ability estimation in computerized adaptive testing be organized to teach researchers and evaluators its psychometrics and applications.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Famoroti, A. A. (2022). Ability estimation methods in computerized adaptive testing for assessment use. Journal of Educational Research in Developing Areas, 3(3), 275-283. https://doi.org/10.47434/JEREDA.3.3.2022.275
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. An, X. M., & Yung, Y. F. (2014). Item response theory: What it is and how you can use the IRT procedure to apply it. SAS institute, North Carolina
  2. Barbosa, A. D., Da Silva, L. B., Morioka, S. N. & De Souza, V. F. (2021). Item response theory-based validation of an integrated management system measurement instrument. Journal of cleaner production. 328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129546
  3. Borgatto, A. F., Azevedo, C., Pinheiro, A., & Andrade, D. (2015). Comparison of ability estimation methods using IRT for tests with different degrees of difficulty. Commun. Stat. Simul. Comput. 44(2),474-488.
  4. Cisar, S. M., Radosav, D., Markoski, B., Pinter, R. & Cisar, P. (2010). Computer adaptive testing of student knowledge. Journal of Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 7(4), 139-152.
  5. Eneh, O. C. (2010). Technology transfer, adoption and integration: A review. Journal of Applied Sciences. 10(16), 1814– 1819, doi: 10.3923/jas.2010.1814.1819.
  6. Garcia, E., Aryal, S., Spence-Almaguer, E., Rohr, D., & Walters, S. T. (2018). Use of the IRT model to validate test items from a technology assisted health coaching program. Open Journal of Statistics, 8, 519-532. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojs.2018.83034.
  7. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H. & Rogers, D. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Sage publication.
  8. Han, K. C. T. (2018). Conducting simulation studies for computerized adaptive testing using SimulCAT: An instructional piece, Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 15, 20, 15 – 20. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.20.
  9. Ho, T. H. (2010). A comparison of item selection procedures using different ability estimation methods in computerized adaptive testing based on the generalized partial credit model,” Dissertation, The university of Texas, http://hdl.handle.net/2152/ETD-UT-2010-05-780.
  10. Magis, D. & Raiche, G. (2012). On the relationships between jeffreys modal and weighted likelihood estimation of ability under logistic IRT models, Psychometrika, 77(1), 163–169, doi: 10.1007/s11336-011-9233-5.
  11. Mahmud, J., Sutinko, M. & Naga, D. S. (2016). Variance difference between maximum likelihood estimation method and expected A posteriori estimation method viewed from number of test items. 11(16), 1579-1589. http://www.academicjournals.org/ERR.
  12. Meijer, R. R., & Nering, M. L., (1999). Computerized adaptive testing: overview and introduction. Journal of Applied Psychological Measurement. 23(3), 187-194. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/01466219922031310.
  13. National Council on Measurement in Education, (2017). Glossary of important assessment and measurement terms. https://www.ncme.org/ncmeresource_center/glossary/ncme/resource_center/glossary1.aspx?hkey=4bb87415-44dc-4088-9ed9-e8515326a061#anchorA
  14. Oladele, J. I., Ndlovu, M., & Spangenberg, E. D. (2022). Simulated computer adaptive testing method choices for ability estimation with empirical evidence. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education. 11 (3), 1392-1399. http://ijere.iaescore.com
  15. Ozyurt, H. & Ozyurt, O. (2015). Ability level estimation of students on probability unit via computerized adaptive testing. Eurasian journal of educational research, 58, 27-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2015.58.7.
  16. Reise, S. P. & Revicki, D. A. (2014). Handbook of item response theory modeling: Applications to typical performance assessment. Routledge.
  17. Richardson, J. W. (2011). Challenges of adopting the use of technology in less developed countries: The case of Cambodia. Comparative Education Review. 55(1), 8–29, doi: 10.1086/656430.
  18. Seo, D. G. (2017). Overview and current management of computerized adaptive testing in licensing/certification examinations. Journal Of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions. 14, 17 – 22. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2017.14.17.
  19. Surpass Community, (2019). Computer adaptive testing: Background, benefits and case study of a large-scale national testing programme. https://surpass.com/news/2019/computer-adaptive-testing-background-benefits-and-case-study-of-a-large-scale-national-testing-programme/
  20. Thiessen & Mislevy, (2000). Testing algorithms. Computerized adaptive testing. In H. Wainer, (Eds.), A Primer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  21. Tieu, B. H. & Bui, T. D. (2016). Student ability estimation based on IRT. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Binh-HoangTieu2/publication/308361140_Student_ability_estimation_based_on_IRT/links/5a39d120aca2728e69879c30/Student-ability-estimation-based-on-IRT.pdf?origin=publication_detail
  22. Thompson, N. (2019). Computerized adaptive testing: Introduction to algorithm. https://assess.com/wht-is-computerized-adaptive-testing/
  23. Thompson, N. A., & Weiss, D. A. (2011). A framework for the development of computerized adaptive tests, practical assessment, research, and evaluation, 16(1), 1 – 10. doi: 10.7275/wqzt-9427.
  24. Thompson, N. (2009). Ability estimation with item response theory – White paper. Assessment systems corporation. www.access.com