Descriptor
| Adaptive Testing | 3 |
| Computer Assisted Testing | 3 |
| Review (Reexamination) | 3 |
| Ability | 2 |
| Certification | 2 |
| Comparative Testing | 2 |
| Medical Students | 2 |
| Pass Fail Grading | 2 |
| Academic Ability | 1 |
| Change | 1 |
| Confidence Testing | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Author
| Lunz, Mary E. | 3 |
| Stone, Gregory Ethan | 1 |
Publication Type
| Reports - Research | 3 |
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedLunz, Mary E.; And Others – Applied Psychological Measurement, 1992
The effects of reviewing items and altering responses on the efficiency of computerized adaptive tests and resultant ability estimates of the examinees were explored for medical technology students (220 students could and 492 students could not review and alter their responses). Data do not support disallowing review. (SLD)
Descriptors: Ability, Adaptive Testing, Comparative Testing, Computer Assisted Testing
Peer reviewedStone, Gregory Ethan; Lunz, Mary E. – Applied Measurement in Education, 1994
Effects of reviewing items and altering responses on examinee ability estimates, test precision, test information, decision confidence, and pass/fail status were studied for 376 examinees taking 2 certification tests. Test precision is only slightly affected by review, and average information loss can be recovered by addition of one item. (SLD)
Descriptors: Ability, Adaptive Testing, Certification, Change
Lunz, Mary E.; And Others – 1991
This paper explores the effect of reviewing items and altering responses on the efficiency of computer adaptive tests (CATs) and the resultant ability measures of examinees. Subjects included 712 medical students: 220 subjects were randomly assigned to the review condition; 492 were randomly assigned to a review control condition (the usual CAT…
Descriptors: Academic Ability, Adaptive Testing, Certification, Comparative Testing
