Evaluating and/or testing individuals is utilized in a wide range of instructional situations. This article reviews the development and use of mass testing procedures commonly employed to evaluate large groups of relatively homogeneous individuals and suggests computer adaptive testing (CAT) as a viable alternative to conventional testing in many situations. The CAT process is outlined and briefly described.
JosephJ. H.DwyerF. M., The Effects of Prior Knowledge, Presentation Mode and Visual Realism on Student Achievement, Journal of Experimental Education, 52, pp. 110–121, 1984.
3.
DwyerF. M.ParkhurstP., A Multifactor Analysis on the Instructional Effectiveness of Self-paced Visualized Instruction on Different Educational Objectives, Programmed Learning and Educational Technology Journal, 52, pp. 86–94, 1984.
4.
CarrierC. A.JonassenD. H., Adapting Courseware to Accommodate Individual Differences in Instructional Designs for Microcomputer Courseware, JonassenD. H. (ed.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 203–226, 1988.
5.
AndrewsD.GoodsonL., Comparative Analysis of Models of Instructional Design, Instructional Development, 3: 4, pp. 2–16, 1980.
6.
U.S. Department of Education, National Assessment of Educational Progress (Department of Education Publication No. NCES 91-1258), U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1991.
7.
DickW.CareyL., The Systematic Design of Instruction(2nd Edition), Scott Foresman, Glenview, Illinois, 1985.
8.
WainerH., Introduction and History, in Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer, WainerH. (ed.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 1–20, 1990.
9.
WainerH.KieleyG. L., Item Ousters and Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Case for Testlets, Journal of Educational Measurement, 24: 3, pp. 185–201, 1987.
10.
BrownJ. M.WeissD. J., An Adaptive Testing Strategy for Achievement Test Batteries, Research Report No. 77-6, Psychometric Methods Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1977.
11.
GialluciaK. A.WeissD. J., Efficiency of an Adaptive Inter Subtest Branching Strategy in the Measurement of Classroom Achievement, Research Report No. 79-6, Psychometric Methods Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1979.
12.
MaurelliV. A.WeissD. J., Factors Influencing the Psychometric Characteristics of an Adaptive Testing Strategy for Test Batteries, Research Report No. 81-4, Psychometric Methods Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1981.
13.
WeissD. J., Improving Measurement Quality and Efficiency with Adaptive Testing, Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, pp. 473–492, 1982.
14.
MorenoK. E.WetzelC. D.McBrideJ. R.WeissD. J., Relationship between Corresponding Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and Computerized Testing Subtests, Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, pp. 155–163, 1984.
15.
WeissD. J., Adaptive Testing by Computer, Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53: 6, pp. 774–789, 1985.
16.
LordF. M., A Theoretical Study of Two Stage Testing, Psychometrika, 36, pp. 227–242, 1971a.
17.
LordF. M., The Self-scoring Flexilevel Test, Journal of Educational Measurement, 8, pp. 147–151, 1971b.
18.
LordF. M., Application of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1980.
19.
WeissD. J., The Stratified Computerized Ability Test, Research Report No. 73-3, Psychometric Methods Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1973.
20.
ThissenD., Reliability and Measurement Precision, in Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer, WainerH. (ed.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 161–185, 1990.
21.
HulinC. L.DrasgowF.ParsonsC. K., Item Response Theory: Application to Psychological Measurement, Dow Jones-Irwin, Homewood, Illinois, 1983.
22.
WeissD. J.KingsburyG. G., Application of Computerized Adaptive Testing to Educational Problems, Journal of Educational Measurement, 21: 4, pp. 361–375, 1984.
23.
SuenH. K., Principles of Test Theories, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1990.
