Validating Standards-Based Test Score Interpretations

59 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A Nonparametric Framework for Comparing Trends and Gaps Across Tests (2009, background): “If NAEP and state tests are designed to measure different proficiencies, it may be possible but not meaningful to map a cut score from one test onto the scale of another (Haertel & Lorie, 2004).”
A Historical Perspective on Validity Arguments for Accountability Testing (2005, background): “…of standards-based tests, these imperfect estimates must then be converted into proficiency classifications—based on one of a number of standard-setting methods that have been developed over the last four decades, a process that brings significant technical challenges (Haertel & Lorié, 2004).”
On an Approach to Testing and Modeling Competence (2013, background): “Standard setting (e.g., Cizek, 2001; Haertel & Lorie, 2004), however, is wrought with problems (e.g., Rekase, 2000).”
Assessment and Innovation in Education (2009, background): “Moreover, all assessments and examinations contain some degree of error, and as Haertel and Lorié (2004) assert, can only provide “an imperfect estimate of student performance”.”