Abstract

This article examines the role of reviewer agreement in judgments about alignment between tests and standards. We used case data from three state alignment studies to explore how different approaches to incorporating reviewer agreement changes alignment conclusions. The three case studies showed varying degrees of reviewer agreement about correspondences between objectives and test items. Moreover, taking into account reviewer agreement in the analyses sometimes had a marked effect on alignment conclusions. We discuss reasons for differences across case studies and alignment approaches, as well as implications for future alignment efforts.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.