This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0013164407305584v1 68/2/197    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by MacCann, R. G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Modification to Angoff and Bookmarking Cut Scores to Account for the Imperfect Reliability of Test Scores

NSW Board of Studies, Sydney, Australia, maccann.1{at}optusnet.com.au

It is shown that the Angoff and bookmarking cut scores are examples of true score equating that in the real world must be applied to observed scores. In the context of defining minimal competency, the percentage ``failed'' by such methods is a function of the length of the measuring instrument. It is argued that this length is largely arbitrary, being heavily influenced by practical educational constraints. Hence, there is an ambiguity or nonuniqueness about the percentage failed. An argument is advanced that the failure rate should reflect the percentage of true scores below the cut score. A modification to the cut score is derived that achieves this outcome and simultaneously removes the nonuniqueness in the percentage failed.

Key Words: minimum competency • standard setting • cut score • Angoff method • bookmarking • score reliability • true score

This version was published on April 1, 2008

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 68, No. 2, 197-214 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164407305584


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?