Publication Date
| In 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2024 | 0 |
| Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
| Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 0 |
| Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
Author
| Kingsbury, G. Gage | 3 |
| Adkins, Deborah | 1 |
| Cronin, John | 1 |
| Dahlin, Michael | 1 |
| Webb, Norman L. | 1 |
| Wise, Steven L. | 1 |
| Zara, Anthony R. | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Evaluative | 2 |
| Reports - Research | 2 |
| Numerical/Quantitative Data | 1 |
Education Level
| Elementary Secondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
| Arizona | 1 |
| California | 1 |
| Colorado | 1 |
| Delaware | 1 |
| Idaho | 1 |
| Illinois | 1 |
| Indiana | 1 |
| Kansas | 1 |
| Maine | 1 |
| Maryland | 1 |
| Massachusetts | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
| No Child Left Behind Act 2001 | 1 |
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Direct linkWise, Steven L.; Kingsbury, G. Gage; Webb, Norman L. – Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 2015
The alignment between a test and the content domain it measures represents key evidence for the validation of test score inferences. Although procedures have been developed for evaluating the content alignment of linear tests, these procedures are not readily applicable to computerized adaptive tests (CATs), which require large item pools and do…
Descriptors: Computer Assisted Testing, Adaptive Testing, Alignment (Education), Test Content
Peer reviewedKingsbury, G. Gage; Zara, Anthony R. – Applied Measurement in Education, 1991
This simulation investigated two procedures that reduce differences between paper-and-pencil testing and computerized adaptive testing (CAT) by making CAT content sensitive. Results indicate that the price in terms of additional test items of using constrained CAT for content balancing is much smaller than that of using testlets. (SLD)
Descriptors: Adaptive Testing, Comparative Analysis, Computer Assisted Testing, Computer Simulation
Download full textCronin, John; Dahlin, Michael; Adkins, Deborah; Kingsbury, G. Gage – Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2007
At the heart of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is the call for all students to be "proficient" in reading and mathematics by 2014. Yet the law expects each state to define proficiency as it sees fit and design its own tests. This study investigated three research questions related to this policy: (1) How consistent are various…
Descriptors: Federal Legislation, Mathematics Tests, Test Validity, Reading Tests
