Descriptor
| Item Response Theory | 2 |
| Scores | 2 |
| Comparative Analysis | 1 |
| Equated Scores | 1 |
| Grades (Scholastic) | 1 |
| Higher Education | 1 |
| Item Banks | 1 |
| Law Schools | 1 |
| Law Students | 1 |
| Linear Programming | 1 |
| Predictive Validity | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
| Law School Admission Test | 2 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedvan der Linden, Wim J.; Luecht, Richard M. – Psychometrika, 1998
Derives a set of linear conditions of item-response functions that guarantees identical observed-score distributions on two test forms. The conditions can be added as constraints to a linear programming model for test assembly. An example illustrates the use of the model for an item pool from the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT). (SLD)
Descriptors: Equated Scores, Item Banks, Item Response Theory, Linear Programming
Peer reviewedYoung, John W. – Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1995
Two statistical approaches for adjusting grades were tested on data obtained from four American law schools (642 students). Neither item response theory nor the general linear model yielded consistent improvements in the predictive validity of Law School Admission Test scores and undergraduate grades for three schools. (SLD)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Grades (Scholastic), Higher Education, Item Response Theory
