W. Jake Thompson, Brooke Nash, Amy K. Clark, Jeffrey C. Hoover
{"title":"用模拟复验估计诊断评估系统的可靠性","authors":"W. Jake Thompson, Brooke Nash, Amy K. Clark, Jeffrey C. Hoover","doi":"10.1111/jedm.12359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>As diagnostic classification models become more widely used in large-scale operational assessments, we must give consideration to the methods for estimating and reporting reliability. Researchers must explore alternatives to traditional reliability methods that are consistent with the design, scoring, and reporting levels of diagnostic assessment systems. In this article, we describe and evaluate a method for simulating retests to summarize reliability evidence at multiple reporting levels. We evaluate how the performance of reliability estimates from simulated retests compares to other measures of classification consistency and accuracy for diagnostic assessments that have previously been described in the literature, but which limit the level at which reliability can be reported. Overall, the findings show that reliability estimates from simulated retests are an accurate measure of reliability and are consistent with other measures of reliability for diagnostic assessments. We then apply this method to real data from the Examination for the Certificate of Proficiency in English to demonstrate the method in practice and compare reliability estimates from observed data. Finally, we discuss implications for the field and possible next directions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Measurement","volume":"60 3","pages":"455-475"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Simulated Retests to Estimate the Reliability of Diagnostic Assessment Systems\",\"authors\":\"W. Jake Thompson, Brooke Nash, Amy K. Clark, Jeffrey C. Hoover\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jedm.12359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>As diagnostic classification models become more widely used in large-scale operational assessments, we must give consideration to the methods for estimating and reporting reliability. Researchers must explore alternatives to traditional reliability methods that are consistent with the design, scoring, and reporting levels of diagnostic assessment systems. In this article, we describe and evaluate a method for simulating retests to summarize reliability evidence at multiple reporting levels. We evaluate how the performance of reliability estimates from simulated retests compares to other measures of classification consistency and accuracy for diagnostic assessments that have previously been described in the literature, but which limit the level at which reliability can be reported. Overall, the findings show that reliability estimates from simulated retests are an accurate measure of reliability and are consistent with other measures of reliability for diagnostic assessments. We then apply this method to real data from the Examination for the Certificate of Proficiency in English to demonstrate the method in practice and compare reliability estimates from observed data. Finally, we discuss implications for the field and possible next directions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"volume\":\"60 3\",\"pages\":\"455-475\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jedm.12359\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jedm.12359","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
Using Simulated Retests to Estimate the Reliability of Diagnostic Assessment Systems
As diagnostic classification models become more widely used in large-scale operational assessments, we must give consideration to the methods for estimating and reporting reliability. Researchers must explore alternatives to traditional reliability methods that are consistent with the design, scoring, and reporting levels of diagnostic assessment systems. In this article, we describe and evaluate a method for simulating retests to summarize reliability evidence at multiple reporting levels. We evaluate how the performance of reliability estimates from simulated retests compares to other measures of classification consistency and accuracy for diagnostic assessments that have previously been described in the literature, but which limit the level at which reliability can be reported. Overall, the findings show that reliability estimates from simulated retests are an accurate measure of reliability and are consistent with other measures of reliability for diagnostic assessments. We then apply this method to real data from the Examination for the Certificate of Proficiency in English to demonstrate the method in practice and compare reliability estimates from observed data. Finally, we discuss implications for the field and possible next directions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Educational Measurement (JEM) publishes original measurement research, provides reviews of measurement publications, and reports on innovative measurement applications. The topics addressed will interest those concerned with the practice of measurement in field settings, as well as be of interest to measurement theorists. In addition to presenting new contributions to measurement theory and practice, JEM also serves as a vehicle for improving educational measurement applications in a variety of settings.