Equating Subscores Using Total Scaled Scores as an Anchor. Research Report. ETS RR-11-07

Because the demand for subscores is ever increasing, this study examined two different approaches for equating subscores: (a) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using internal common items as the anchor to conduct the equating, and (b) equating a subscore on the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Educational Testing Service 2011
Hauptverfasser: Puhan, Gautam, Liang, Longjuan
Format: Report
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Educational Testing Service
container_volume
creator Puhan, Gautam
Liang, Longjuan
description Because the demand for subscores is ever increasing, this study examined two different approaches for equating subscores: (a) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using internal common items as the anchor to conduct the equating, and (b) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using equated total scores as the anchor to conduct the equating. Equated total scores can be used as an anchor to equate the subscores because the total equated scores are comparable across both the new and the old forms. Data from 2 tests (Tests X and Y) were used to conduct the study, and results showed that when the number of internal common items was large (approximately 50% of the total subscore), then using common items to equate the subscores was preferable. However, when the number of common items was small (approximately 25% of the total subscore, which is common practice), then using total scaled scores (TSS) to equate the subscores was preferable. Using raw subscores (not equating) resulted in a considerable amount of bias for both tests. Indices to measure equating variability and bias are appended. (Contains 4 tables, 5 figures and 4 notes.)
format Report
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>eric_GA5</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_eric_primary_ED523735</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>ED523735</ericid><sourcerecordid>ED523735</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-eric_primary_ED5237353</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNrjZIhwLSxNLMnMS1cILk0qTs4vSi1WCC0G8UPySxJzFIKTE3NSU4AUWCYRiPIUHPOSM_KL9BSCUotTE4uSM4CMgvyiEj0F15BghaAgXUNDXQNzHgbWtMSc4lReKM3NIOPmGuLsoZtalJkcX1CUmZtYVBnv6mJqZGxubGpMQBoAQBU0vQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>report</recordtype></control><display><type>report</type><title>Equating Subscores Using Total Scaled Scores as an Anchor. Research Report. ETS RR-11-07</title><source>ERIC - Full Text Only (Discovery)</source><creator>Puhan, Gautam ; Liang, Longjuan</creator><creatorcontrib>Puhan, Gautam ; Liang, Longjuan ; Educational Testing Service</creatorcontrib><description>Because the demand for subscores is ever increasing, this study examined two different approaches for equating subscores: (a) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using internal common items as the anchor to conduct the equating, and (b) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using equated total scores as the anchor to conduct the equating. Equated total scores can be used as an anchor to equate the subscores because the total equated scores are comparable across both the new and the old forms. Data from 2 tests (Tests X and Y) were used to conduct the study, and results showed that when the number of internal common items was large (approximately 50% of the total subscore), then using common items to equate the subscores was preferable. However, when the number of common items was small (approximately 25% of the total subscore, which is common practice), then using total scaled scores (TSS) to equate the subscores was preferable. Using raw subscores (not equating) resulted in a considerable amount of bias for both tests. Indices to measure equating variability and bias are appended. (Contains 4 tables, 5 figures and 4 notes.)</description><language>eng</language><publisher>Educational Testing Service</publisher><subject>Comparative Analysis ; Equated Scores ; Methods ; Raw Scores ; Scaling</subject><ispartof>Educational Testing Service, 2011</ispartof><tpages>34</tpages><format>34</format><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,687,776,881,4475</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED523735$$EView_record_in_ERIC_Clearinghouse_on_Information_&amp;_Technology$$FView_record_in_$$GERIC_Clearinghouse_on_Information_&amp;_Technology$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED523735$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Puhan, Gautam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liang, Longjuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Educational Testing Service</creatorcontrib><title>Equating Subscores Using Total Scaled Scores as an Anchor. Research Report. ETS RR-11-07</title><title>Educational Testing Service</title><description>Because the demand for subscores is ever increasing, this study examined two different approaches for equating subscores: (a) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using internal common items as the anchor to conduct the equating, and (b) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using equated total scores as the anchor to conduct the equating. Equated total scores can be used as an anchor to equate the subscores because the total equated scores are comparable across both the new and the old forms. Data from 2 tests (Tests X and Y) were used to conduct the study, and results showed that when the number of internal common items was large (approximately 50% of the total subscore), then using common items to equate the subscores was preferable. However, when the number of common items was small (approximately 25% of the total subscore, which is common practice), then using total scaled scores (TSS) to equate the subscores was preferable. Using raw subscores (not equating) resulted in a considerable amount of bias for both tests. Indices to measure equating variability and bias are appended. (Contains 4 tables, 5 figures and 4 notes.)</description><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Equated Scores</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Raw Scores</subject><subject>Scaling</subject><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>report</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>report</recordtype><sourceid>GA5</sourceid><recordid>eNrjZIhwLSxNLMnMS1cILk0qTs4vSi1WCC0G8UPySxJzFIKTE3NSU4AUWCYRiPIUHPOSM_KL9BSCUotTE4uSM4CMgvyiEj0F15BghaAgXUNDXQNzHgbWtMSc4lReKM3NIOPmGuLsoZtalJkcX1CUmZtYVBnv6mJqZGxubGpMQBoAQBU0vQ</recordid><startdate>201103</startdate><enddate>201103</enddate><creator>Puhan, Gautam</creator><creator>Liang, Longjuan</creator><general>Educational Testing Service</general><scope>ERI</scope><scope>GA5</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201103</creationdate><title>Equating Subscores Using Total Scaled Scores as an Anchor. Research Report. ETS RR-11-07</title><author>Puhan, Gautam ; Liang, Longjuan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-eric_primary_ED5237353</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>reports</rsrctype><prefilter>reports</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Equated Scores</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Raw Scores</topic><topic>Scaling</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Puhan, Gautam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liang, Longjuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Educational Testing Service</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC - Full Text Only (Discovery)</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Puhan, Gautam</au><au>Liang, Longjuan</au><aucorp>Educational Testing Service</aucorp><format>book</format><genre>unknown</genre><ristype>RPRT</ristype><ericid>ED523735</ericid><atitle>Equating Subscores Using Total Scaled Scores as an Anchor. Research Report. ETS RR-11-07</atitle><jtitle>Educational Testing Service</jtitle><date>2011-03</date><risdate>2011</risdate><abstract>Because the demand for subscores is ever increasing, this study examined two different approaches for equating subscores: (a) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using internal common items as the anchor to conduct the equating, and (b) equating a subscore on the new form to the same subscore in the old form using equated total scores as the anchor to conduct the equating. Equated total scores can be used as an anchor to equate the subscores because the total equated scores are comparable across both the new and the old forms. Data from 2 tests (Tests X and Y) were used to conduct the study, and results showed that when the number of internal common items was large (approximately 50% of the total subscore), then using common items to equate the subscores was preferable. However, when the number of common items was small (approximately 25% of the total subscore, which is common practice), then using total scaled scores (TSS) to equate the subscores was preferable. Using raw subscores (not equating) resulted in a considerable amount of bias for both tests. Indices to measure equating variability and bias are appended. (Contains 4 tables, 5 figures and 4 notes.)</abstract><pub>Educational Testing Service</pub><tpages>34</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier
ispartof Educational Testing Service, 2011
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_eric_primary_ED523735
source ERIC - Full Text Only (Discovery)
subjects Comparative Analysis
Equated Scores
Methods
Raw Scores
Scaling
title Equating Subscores Using Total Scaled Scores as an Anchor. Research Report. ETS RR-11-07
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T18%3A15%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-eric_GA5&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=unknown&rft.atitle=Equating%20Subscores%20Using%20Total%20Scaled%20Scores%20as%20an%20Anchor.%20Research%20Report.%20ETS%20RR-11-07&rft.jtitle=Educational%20Testing%20Service&rft.au=Puhan,%20Gautam&rft.aucorp=Educational%20Testing%20Service&rft.date=2011-03&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Ceric_GA5%3EED523735%3C/eric_GA5%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=ED523735&rfr_iscdi=true