03003nas a2200157 4500008004100000245007600041210006900117260005500186520243700241653002102678653002302699653002002722100001602742700001602758856007102774 2017 eng d00aGenerating Rationales to Support Formative Feedback in Adaptive Testing0 aGenerating Rationales to Support Formative Feedback in Adaptive  aNiigata, JapanbNiigata Seiryo Universityc08/20173 a

Computer adaptive testing offers many important benefits to support and promote life-long learning. Computers permit testing on-demand thereby allowing students to take the test at any time during instruction; items on computerized tests are scored immediately thereby providing students with instant feedback; computerized tests permit continuous administration thereby allowing students to have more choice about when they write their exams. But despite these important benefits, the advent of computer adaptive testing has also raised formidable challenges, particularly in the area of item development. Educators must have access to large numbers of diverse, high-quality test items to implement computerize adaptive testing because items are continuously administered to students. Hence, hundreds or even thousands of items are needed to develop the test item banks necessary for computer adaptive testing. Unfortunately, educational test items, as they are currently created, are time consuming and expensive to develop because each individual item is written, initially, by a content specialist and, then, reviewed, edited, and revised by groups of content specialists to ensure the items yield reliable and valid information. Hence, item development is one of the most important problems that must be solved before we can migrate to computer adaptive testing to support life-long learning because large numbers of high-quality, content-specific, test items are required.

One promising item development method that may be used to address this challenge is with automatic item generation. Automatic item generation is a relatively new but rapidly evolving research area where cognitive and psychometric modelling practices are used produce hundreds of new test items with the aid of computer technology. The purpose of our presentation is to describe a new methodology for generating both the items and the rationales required to solve each generated item in order to produce the feedback needed to support life-long learning. Our item generation methodology will first be described. To ensure our description is practical, the method will also be demonstrated using generated items from the health sciences to demonstrate how item generation can promote life-long learning for medical educators and practitioners.

 

Session Video

10aAdaptive Testing10aformative feedback10aItem generation1 aGierl, Mark1 aBulut, Okan uhttps://drive.google.com/open?id=1O5KDFtQlDLvhNoDr7X4JO4arpJkIHKUP03826nas a2200157 4500008004100000245008500041210006900126260005500195520325800250653000803508653002203516653002303538100001603561700002003577856007103597 2017 eng d00aA Large-Scale Progress Monitoring Application with Computerized Adaptive Testing0 aLargeScale Progress Monitoring Application with Computerized Ada aNiigata, JapanbNiigata Seiryo Universityc08/20173 a

Many conventional assessment tools are available to teachers in schools for monitoring student progress in a formative manner. The outcomes of these assessment tools are essential to teachers’ instructional modifications and schools’ data-driven educational strategies, such as using remedial activities and planning instructional interventions for students with learning difficulties. When measuring student progress toward instructional goals or outcomes, assessments should be not only considerably precise but also sensitive to individual change in learning. Unlike conventional paper-pencil assessments that are usually not appropriate for every student, computerized adaptive tests (CATs) are highly capable of estimating growth consistently with minimum and consistent error. Therefore, CATs can be used as a progress monitoring tool in measuring student growth.

This study focuses on an operational CAT assessment that has been used for measuring student growth in reading during the academic school year. The sample of this study consists of nearly 7 million students from the 1st grade to the 12th grade in the US. The students received a CAT-based reading assessment periodically during the school year. The purpose of these periodical assessments is to measure the growth in students’ reading achievement and identify the students who may need additional instructional support (e.g., academic interventions). Using real data, this study aims to address the following research questions: (1) How many CAT administrations are necessary to make psychometrically sound decisions about the need for instructional changes in the classroom or when to provide academic interventions?; (2) What is the ideal amount of time between CAT administrations to capture student growth for the purpose of producing meaningful decisions from assessment results?

To address these research questions, we first used the Theil-Sen estimator for robustly fitting a regression line to each student’s test scores obtained from a series of CAT administrations. Next, we used the conditional standard error of measurement (cSEM) from the CAT administrations to create an error band around the Theil-Sen slope (i.e., student growth rate). This process resulted in the normative slope values across all the grade levels. The optimal number of CAT administrations was established from grade-level regression results. The amount of time needed for progress monitoring was determined by calculating the amount of time required for a student to show growth beyond the median cSEM value for each grade level. The results showed that the normative slope values were the highest for lower grades and declined steadily as grade level increased. The results also suggested that the CAT-based reading assessment is most useful for grades 1 through 4, since most struggling readers requiring an intervention appear to be within this grade range. Because CAT yielded very similar cSEM values across administrations, the amount of error in the progress monitoring decisions did not seem to depend on the number of CAT administrations.

Session Video

10aCAT10aLarge-Scale tests10aProcess monitoring1 aBulut, Okan1 aCormier, Damien uhttps://drive.google.com/open?id=1uGbCKenRLnqTxImX1fZicR2c7GRV6Udc