Abstract

This study aims to compare Sequential Probability Ratio Test (SPRT) and Confidence Interval (CI) classification criteria, Maximum Fisher Information method on the basis of estimated-ability (MFI-EB) and Cut-Point (MFI-CB) item selection methods while ability estimation method is Weighted Likelihood Estimation (WLE) in Computerized Adaptive Classification Testing (CACT), according to the Average Classification Accuracy (ACA), Average Test Length (ATL), and measurement precision under content balancing (Constrained Computerized Adaptive Testing: CCAT and Modified Multinomial Model: MMM) and item exposure control (Sympson-Hetter Method: SH and Item Eligibility Method: IE) when the classification is done based on two, three, or four categories for a unidimensional pool of dichotomous items. Forty-eight conditions are created in Monte Carlo (MC) simulation for the data, generated in R software, including 500 items and 5000 examinees, and the results are calculated over 30 replications. As a result of the study, it was observed that CI performs better in terms of ATL, and SPRT performs better in ACA and correlation, bias, Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), and Mean Absolute Error (MAE) values, sequentially; MFI-EB is more useful than MFI-CB. It was also seen that MMM is more successful in content balancing, whereas CCAT is better in terms of test efficiency (ATL and ACA), and IE is superior in terms of item exposure control though SH is more beneficial in test efficiency. Besides, increasing the number of classification categories increases ATL but decreases ACA, and it gives better results in terms of the correlation, bias, RMSE, and MAE values.

Highlights

  • Testing in education might have various objectives

  • The Confidence Interval (CI) classification criterion performed better in terms of Average Test Length (ATL) under all research conditions and required fewer items to classify examinees compared to Sequential Probability Ratio Test (SPRT)

  • This finding is in agreement with those obtained by Gündeğer and Doğan (2018a), Nydick et al (2012), Thompson (2009), and Thompson and Ro (2007). These studies, in general, reported that the classifications made using CI ended with lower ATL and ACA compared to those made using SPRT

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Testing in education might have various objectives These objectives include increasing the effectiveness of education, assessing students individually, making selection or placement decisions, certification, monitoring learning progress, and testing for diagnostic purposes. To achieve these objectives, it seems to be critical to have access to timely and accurate information about learners’ level of ability. It seems to be critical to have access to timely and accurate information about learners’ level of ability In this regard, Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) is one of the greatest reflections of developments in information and communication technologies in the field of education and contributes to making more qualified and effective evaluations.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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