Search

Most computerized adaptive testing (CAT) programs do not allow test takers to review and change their responses because it could seriously deteriorate the efficiency of measurement and make tests vulnerable to manipulative test-taking strategies. Several modified testing methods have been developed that provide restricted review options while limiting the trade-off in CAT efficiency. The extent to which these methods provided test takers with options to review test items, however, still was quite limited. This study proposes the item pocket (IP) method, a new testing approach that allows test takers greater flexibility in changing their responses by eliminating restrictions that prevent them from moving across test sections to review their answers. A series of simulations were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the IP method against various manipulative test-taking strategies. Findings and implications of the study suggest that the IP method may be an effective solution for many CAT programs when the IP size and test time limit are properly set. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A total of 520 high school students were randomly assigned to a paper-and-pencil test (PPT), a computerized standard test (CST), or a computerized adaptive test (CAT) version of the Dutch School Attitude Questionnaire (SAQ), consisting of ordinal polytomous items. The CST administered items in the same order as the PPT. The CAT administered all items of three SAQ subscales in adaptive order using Samejima's graded response model, so that six different stopping rule settings could be applied afterwards. School marks were used as external criteria. Results showed significant but small multivariate administration mode effects on conventional raw scores and small to medium effects on maximum likelihood latent trait estimates. When the precision of CAT latent trait estimates decreased, correlations with grade point average in general decreased. However, the magnitude of the decrease was not very large as compared to the PPT, the CST, and the CAT without the stopping rule. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]