Using the Many-Faceted Rasch Model to Evaluate Standard Setting Judgments

Abstract

The many-faceted Rasch (MFR) model has been used to evaluate the quality of ratings on constructed response assessments; however, it can also be used to evaluate the quality of judgments from panel-based standard setting procedures. The current study illustrates the use of the MFR model for examining the quality of ratings obtained from a standard setting process employing the Multiple Yes-No, modified Angoff standard setting procedure to set the cut scores on the Advanced Placement Environmental Science exam. The panelists’ severity, judged item difficulties, rounds, and cut scores using the MFR model were examined, in addition to panelists’ characteristics (gender and level of course taught). Findings from the Rasch analyses conducted in this study provide evidence of acceptable quality of the ratings obtained from the panelists. Thus, the current study provides an important source of both internal and procedural validity evidence for the Advanced Placement Environmental Science standard setting as well as an illustration of the utility of the MFR model for evaluating standard setting judgments.