Title: Modeling judgments in the Angoff and Contrasting-Groups method of standard setting
Authors: Van Nijlen, DaniĆ«l ×
Janssen, Rianne #
Issue Date: Mar-2008
Publisher: National Council on Measurement in Education
Series Title: Journal of Educational Measurement vol:45 issue:1 pages:45-63
Abstract: Essential for the validity of the judgments in a standard-setting study is that they follow the implicit task assumptions. In the Angoff method, judgments are assumed to be inversely related to the difficulty of the items; contrasting-groups judgments are assumed to be positively related to the ability of the students. In the present study, judgments from both procedures were modeled with a random-effects probit regression model. The Angoff judgments showed a weaker link with the position of the items on the latent scale than the contrasting-groups judgments with the position of the students. Hence, in the specific context of the study, the contrasting-groups judgments were more aligned with the underlying assumptions of the method than the Angoff judgments.
ISSN: 0022-0655
Publication status: published
KU Leuven publication type: IT
Appears in Collections:Education and Training
× corresponding author
# (joint) last author

Files in This Item:
File Description Status SizeFormat
VanNijlen2008MJITA.pdfMain article Published 609KbAdobe PDFView/Open


All items in Lirias are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

© Web of science