Methods for utilizing Item response theory with Coupled, Multiple-Response assessments

Bethany R. Wilcox, Katherine Rainey, M. Vignal
{"title":"Methods for utilizing Item response theory with Coupled, Multiple-Response assessments","authors":"Bethany R. Wilcox, Katherine Rainey, M. Vignal","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.wilcox","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent years have seen a movement within the research-based assessment development community towards item formats that go beyond simple multiple-choice formats. Some have moved towards free-response questions, particularly at the upper-division level; however, free-response items have the constraint that they must be scored by hand. To avoid this limitation, some assessment developers have moved toward formats that maintain the closed-response format, while still providing more nuanced insight into student reasoning. One such format is known as coupled, multiple response (CMR). This format pairs multiple-choice and multiple-response formats to allow students to both commit to an answer in addition to selecting options that correspond with their reasoning. In addition to being machine-scorable, this format allows for more nuanced scoring than simple right or wrong. However, such nuanced scoring presents a potential challenge with respect to utilizing certain testing theories to construct validity arguments for the assessment. In particular, Item Response Theory (IRT) models often assume dichotomously scored items. While polytomous IRT models do exist, each brings with it certain constraints and limitations. Here, we will explore multiple IRT models and scoring schema using data from an existing CMR test, with the goal of providing guidance and insight for possible methods for simultaneously leveraging the affordances of both the CMR format and IRT models in the context of constructing validity arguments for research-based assessments.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.wilcox","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent years have seen a movement within the research-based assessment development community towards item formats that go beyond simple multiple-choice formats. Some have moved towards free-response questions, particularly at the upper-division level; however, free-response items have the constraint that they must be scored by hand. To avoid this limitation, some assessment developers have moved toward formats that maintain the closed-response format, while still providing more nuanced insight into student reasoning. One such format is known as coupled, multiple response (CMR). This format pairs multiple-choice and multiple-response formats to allow students to both commit to an answer in addition to selecting options that correspond with their reasoning. In addition to being machine-scorable, this format allows for more nuanced scoring than simple right or wrong. However, such nuanced scoring presents a potential challenge with respect to utilizing certain testing theories to construct validity arguments for the assessment. In particular, Item Response Theory (IRT) models often assume dichotomously scored items. While polytomous IRT models do exist, each brings with it certain constraints and limitations. Here, we will explore multiple IRT models and scoring schema using data from an existing CMR test, with the goal of providing guidance and insight for possible methods for simultaneously leveraging the affordances of both the CMR format and IRT models in the context of constructing validity arguments for research-based assessments.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将项目反应理论应用于耦合、多重反应评估的方法
近年来,在以研究为基础的评估发展社区内,出现了一种超越简单选择题格式的项目形式。有些人已经转向自由回答问题,特别是在高年级;然而,自由回答项目有一个限制,那就是必须手工打分。为了避免这种限制,一些评估开发人员已经转向保持封闭响应格式的格式,同时仍然提供对学生推理的更细致入微的洞察。其中一种格式称为耦合多响应(CMR)。这种形式将多项选择题和多项回答题结合起来,让学生除了选择符合他们推理的选项外,还可以选择一个答案。除了可以由机器评分之外,这种格式允许比简单的对或错更细微的评分。然而,这种细致入微的评分提出了一个潜在的挑战,即利用某些测试理论来构建评估的有效性论点。特别是,项目反应理论(IRT)模型经常假设二分类得分的项目。虽然多同构IRT模型确实存在,但每种模型都有一定的约束和局限性。在这里,我们将使用来自现有CMR测试的数据探索多个IRT模型和评分模式,目的是为在构建基于研究的评估的有效性论证的背景下同时利用CMR格式和IRT模型的可视性的可能方法提供指导和见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Synthesizing disabled physics students' pathways to access: a call for more access talk Analyzing Multiple-Choice-Multiple-Response Items Using Item Response Theory Methods for utilizing Item response theory with Coupled, Multiple-Response assessments Impact of mathematical reasoning on students� understanding of quantum optics Leveraging queer epistemic subjectivity to advance justice through physics teaching
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1