A COMPARISON OF APPROACHES FOR SETTING PROFICIENCY STANDARDS
The issue of setting standards is a critical one when considering the many states and local school districts mandating minimum competency testing programs, and with them, an associated, defensible proficiency standard. In the present study the cut-off scores from two different types of procedures ar...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of educational measurement 1980-09, Vol.17 (3), p.167-178 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 178 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 167 |
| container_title | Journal of educational measurement |
| container_volume | 17 |
| creator | KOFFLER, STEPHEN L. |
| description | The issue of setting standards is a critical one when considering the many states and local school districts mandating minimum competency testing programs, and with them, an associated, defensible proficiency standard. In the present study the cut-off scores from two different types of procedures are examined. Standards are determined from judgments about groups (Contrasting Groups method) and from an inspection of test content (Nedelsky method). Additionally, a methodological and statistical framework for analysis of the data to obtain the standard using the Contrasting Groups procedure is presented. The results indicated that there was neither consistency nor pattern to the cut-off scores set from the two procedures. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1980.tb00824.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1295170266</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>1434832</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>1434832</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4047-3819eba6440696f2f98cfcfd04d688bc02904169b787a7939e21d57e143bfbd33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkMtKw0AUhgdRsFbfwEXQdeLcMhcRJKZpm9ImpamIqyFXaKymZlps396ElLr2bA6c_3LgA-AOQQs181BaiFPbJFJQC0kBrW0CocDU2p-B3kk6Bz0IMTYhs-1LcKV1CSGyuY164Mkx3HA2dxZ-FAZGODSc-XwROu7Yi4xhuDAib7n0g5HRHIe-63uB-25ESycYOItBdA0uinit85vj7oPXobd0x-Y0HPmuMzVTCik3iUAyT2JGKWSSFbiQIi3SIoM0Y0IkKcQSUsRkwgWPuSQyxyizeY4oSYokI6QP7rveTV1973K9VWW1q7-alwphaSMOMWON67FzpXWldZ0XalOvPuP6oBBULS1VqhaJapGolpY60lL7JvzchX9W6_zwj6SaeIMZYrxpuO0aSr2t6r8GSqgguJHNTl7pbb4_yXH9oZowt9VbMFIT94WP2ThSmPwCBQaDPg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1295170266</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A COMPARISON OF APPROACHES FOR SETTING PROFICIENCY STANDARDS</title><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>KOFFLER, STEPHEN L.</creator><creatorcontrib>KOFFLER, STEPHEN L.</creatorcontrib><description>The issue of setting standards is a critical one when considering the many states and local school districts mandating minimum competency testing programs, and with them, an associated, defensible proficiency standard. In the present study the cut-off scores from two different types of procedures are examined. Standards are determined from judgments about groups (Contrasting Groups method) and from an inspection of test content (Nedelsky method). Additionally, a methodological and statistical framework for analysis of the data to obtain the standard using the Contrasting Groups procedure is presented. The results indicated that there was neither consistency nor pattern to the cut-off scores set from the two procedures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0655</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1745-3984</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1980.tb00824.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Basic skills ; Educational standard setting ; Educational standards ; High school students ; Mathematical minima ; Mathematical procedures ; Mathematics ; Mathematics tests ; Minimum competency examinations ; Test scores</subject><ispartof>Journal of educational measurement, 1980-09, Vol.17 (3), p.167-178</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1980 National Council on Measurement in Education</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4047-3819eba6440696f2f98cfcfd04d688bc02904169b787a7939e21d57e143bfbd33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4047-3819eba6440696f2f98cfcfd04d688bc02904169b787a7939e21d57e143bfbd33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1434832$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/1434832$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27848,27903,27904,57996,58229</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>KOFFLER, STEPHEN L.</creatorcontrib><title>A COMPARISON OF APPROACHES FOR SETTING PROFICIENCY STANDARDS</title><title>Journal of educational measurement</title><description>The issue of setting standards is a critical one when considering the many states and local school districts mandating minimum competency testing programs, and with them, an associated, defensible proficiency standard. In the present study the cut-off scores from two different types of procedures are examined. Standards are determined from judgments about groups (Contrasting Groups method) and from an inspection of test content (Nedelsky method). Additionally, a methodological and statistical framework for analysis of the data to obtain the standard using the Contrasting Groups procedure is presented. The results indicated that there was neither consistency nor pattern to the cut-off scores set from the two procedures.</description><subject>Basic skills</subject><subject>Educational standard setting</subject><subject>Educational standards</subject><subject>High school students</subject><subject>Mathematical minima</subject><subject>Mathematical procedures</subject><subject>Mathematics</subject><subject>Mathematics tests</subject><subject>Minimum competency examinations</subject><subject>Test scores</subject><issn>0022-0655</issn><issn>1745-3984</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1980</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkMtKw0AUhgdRsFbfwEXQdeLcMhcRJKZpm9ImpamIqyFXaKymZlps396ElLr2bA6c_3LgA-AOQQs181BaiFPbJFJQC0kBrW0CocDU2p-B3kk6Bz0IMTYhs-1LcKV1CSGyuY164Mkx3HA2dxZ-FAZGODSc-XwROu7Yi4xhuDAib7n0g5HRHIe-63uB-25ESycYOItBdA0uinit85vj7oPXobd0x-Y0HPmuMzVTCik3iUAyT2JGKWSSFbiQIi3SIoM0Y0IkKcQSUsRkwgWPuSQyxyizeY4oSYokI6QP7rveTV1973K9VWW1q7-alwphaSMOMWON67FzpXWldZ0XalOvPuP6oBBULS1VqhaJapGolpY60lL7JvzchX9W6_zwj6SaeIMZYrxpuO0aSr2t6r8GSqgguJHNTl7pbb4_yXH9oZowt9VbMFIT94WP2ThSmPwCBQaDPg</recordid><startdate>198009</startdate><enddate>198009</enddate><creator>KOFFLER, STEPHEN L.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>National Council on Measurement in Education</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>JILTI</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198009</creationdate><title>A COMPARISON OF APPROACHES FOR SETTING PROFICIENCY STANDARDS</title><author>KOFFLER, STEPHEN L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4047-3819eba6440696f2f98cfcfd04d688bc02904169b787a7939e21d57e143bfbd33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1980</creationdate><topic>Basic skills</topic><topic>Educational standard setting</topic><topic>Educational standards</topic><topic>High school students</topic><topic>Mathematical minima</topic><topic>Mathematical procedures</topic><topic>Mathematics</topic><topic>Mathematics tests</topic><topic>Minimum competency examinations</topic><topic>Test scores</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>KOFFLER, STEPHEN L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 32</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><jtitle>Journal of educational measurement</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>KOFFLER, STEPHEN L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A COMPARISON OF APPROACHES FOR SETTING PROFICIENCY STANDARDS</atitle><jtitle>Journal of educational measurement</jtitle><date>1980-09</date><risdate>1980</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>167</spage><epage>178</epage><pages>167-178</pages><issn>0022-0655</issn><eissn>1745-3984</eissn><abstract>The issue of setting standards is a critical one when considering the many states and local school districts mandating minimum competency testing programs, and with them, an associated, defensible proficiency standard. In the present study the cut-off scores from two different types of procedures are examined. Standards are determined from judgments about groups (Contrasting Groups method) and from an inspection of test content (Nedelsky method). Additionally, a methodological and statistical framework for analysis of the data to obtain the standard using the Contrasting Groups procedure is presented. The results indicated that there was neither consistency nor pattern to the cut-off scores set from the two procedures.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1745-3984.1980.tb00824.x</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-0655 |
| ispartof | Journal of educational measurement, 1980-09, Vol.17 (3), p.167-178 |
| issn | 0022-0655 1745-3984 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1295170266 |
| source | Periodicals Index Online; Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | Basic skills Educational standard setting Educational standards High school students Mathematical minima Mathematical procedures Mathematics Mathematics tests Minimum competency examinations Test scores |
| title | A COMPARISON OF APPROACHES FOR SETTING PROFICIENCY STANDARDS |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T14%3A57%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20COMPARISON%20OF%20APPROACHES%20FOR%20SETTING%20PROFICIENCY%20STANDARDS&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20educational%20measurement&rft.au=KOFFLER,%20STEPHEN%20L.&rft.date=1980-09&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=167&rft.epage=178&rft.pages=167-178&rft.issn=0022-0655&rft.eissn=1745-3984&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1980.tb00824.x&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E1434832%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1295170266&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=1434832&rfr_iscdi=true |