The advent of open testing and test disclosure legislation has fostered a renewed interest in the problems and issues associated with test equating. This article focuses on a specific application of test equating, namely that of credentialing examination programs in the health professions. First, the role of test equating in the credentialing process is considered. Its usefulness for maintaining consistent standards and monitoring performance trends across time is discussed. Second, the issues that must be considered when implementing test equating in a credentialing examination program are described. Issues are considered as either test development concerns or as technical concerns. The audience for the article includes credentialing board members and other individuals who hold the major responsibilityfor preparing, administering, and scoring credentialing examinations as well as all other persons interested and/or involved in credentialing health professionals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Educational Research Association
, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (1985) Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2.
ANDREW, B. J.
and J. T. HECHT (1976) "A preliminary investigation of two procedures for setting examination standards."Educ. and Psych. Measurement36: 45-50.
3.
ANGOFF, W. H.
(1971) "Scales, norms and equivalent scores," in R. Thorndike (ed.) Educational Measurement (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
4.
EBEL, R. L.
(1972) Essentials of Educational Measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
5.
FLANAGAN, J. C.
(1951) "Units, scores and norms," pp. 695-763 in E. F. Lindquist (ed.) Educational Measurement. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
6.
HALPIN, G.
, G. SIGMON, and G. HALPIN (1983) "Minimum competency standards set by three divergent groups of raters using three judgmental procedures: implications for validity."Educ. and Psych. Measurement43: 185-196.
7.
HAMBLETON, R. K.
[ed.] (1983) Application of Item Response Theory. Vancouver, Canada: Educational Research Institute of British Columbia.
8.
HAMBLETON, R. K.
, S. POWELL, and D. R. EIGNOR (1979) "Issues and methods for standard setting," in R. K. Hambleton and D. R. Eignor (eds.) A Practitioner's Guide to Criterion-Referenced Test Development, Validation, and Test Score Usage. Amherst: Laboratory of Psychometric and Evaluative Research, University of Massachusetts.
9.
HAMBLETON, R. K.
and H. SWAMINATHAN (1985) Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
10.
HOLLAND, P. W.
and D. B. RUBIN (1982) Test Equating. New York: Academic.
11.
LORD, F. M.
(1950) Notes on Comparable Scales for Test Scores (ETS RB 50-48). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
12.
LORD, F. M.
(1955) "Equating test scores: a maximum likelihood solution."Psychometrika20: 193-200.
13.
LORD, F. M.
(1975) A Survey of Equating Methods Based on Item Characteristic Curve Theory (RB-75-13). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
14.
LORD, F. M.
(1977) "Practical applications of item characteristic curve theory."J. of Educ. Measurement14: 117-138.
15.
LORD, F. M.
(1980) Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
MILLS, C. N.
and J. E. BARR (1983) "A comparison of standard setting methods: do the same judges establish the same standards with different methods?" Presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
17.
NEDELSKY, L.
(1954) "Absolute grading standards for objective tests."Educ. and Psych. Measurement14: 3-19.
18.
PETERSEN, N. S.
, G. L. MARCO, and E. E. STEWART (1982) "A test of the adequacy of linear score equating models," in P. W. Holland and D. B. Rubin (eds.) Test Equating. New York: Academic.
19.
POTTHOFF, R. F.
(1982) "Some issues in test equating," in P. W. Holland and D. B. Rubin (eds.) Test Equating. New York: Academic.
20.
SAUNDERS, J. C.
, J. P. RYAN, and H. HUYNH (1981) "A comparison of two approaches to setting passing scores based on the Nedelsky procedure."Applied Psych. Measurement5: 209-467.
21.
SHEPARD, L. A.
(1979) "Setting standards," in M. A. Bunda and J. R. Sanders (eds.) Practices and Problems in Competency-Based Measurement. Washington, DC: National Council on Measurement in Education.
22.
SHEPARD, L. A.
(1981) "Standard setting issues and methods."Applied Psych. Measurement4: 447-467.
23.
SHIMBERG, B.
(1982) Occupational Licensing: A Public Perspective. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
24.
SHIMBERG, B.
, B. ESSER, and D. KRUGER (1972) Occupational Licensing: Practices and Policies. Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press.
25.
SKAGGS, G.
and R. W. LISSITZ (1981) "Test equating: relevant issues and a review of recent research." Presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
26.
SLINDE, J. A.
and R. L. LINN (1977) "Vertically equated tests: fact or phantom?"J. of Educ. Measurement14: 23-32.
27.
WARM, T. A.
(1978) A Primer of Item Response Theory (CG-941278). U.S. Coast Guard Institute: P.O. Substation 18, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
28.
WRIGHT, B. D.
and M. H. STONE (1979) Best Test Design: Rasch Measurement. Chicago: Mesa Press.
