Comparative Analysis of Psychometric Frameworks and Properties of Scores from Autogenerated Test Forms

Abstract This paper explores the psychometric properties of scores derived from autogenerated test forms by introducing three conceptual frameworks: Alternate Test Forms, Randomly Parallel Forms, and Approximately Parallel Forms. Each framework provides a distinct perspective on score comparability, definitions of true score and standard error of measurement (SEM), and the necessity of equating. Through a simulation study, we illustrate how these frameworks compare in terms of true scores and SEMs, while also assessing the impact of equating on score comparability across varying levels of form variability. Ultimately, this study seeks to lay the groundwork for implementing scoring practices in large‐scale standardized assessments that use autogenerated forms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Educational Measurement Issues and Practice
Published
2024-11-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12648
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.47
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Analysis of Psychometric Frameworks and Properties of Scores from Autogenerated Test Forms

Stella Yun Kim, Won‐Chan Lee
3 citations
Educational Measurement Issues and Practice
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
1.47
article

Comparative Analysis of Psychometric Frameworks and Properties of Scores from Autogenerated Test Forms

Stella Yun Kim, Won‐Chan Lee
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper explores the psychometric properties of scores derived from autogenerated test forms by introducing three conceptual frameworks: Alternate Test Forms, Randomly Parallel Forms, and Approximately Parallel Forms. Each framework provides a distinct perspective on score comparability, definitions of true score and standard error of measurement (SEM), and the necessity of equating. Through a simulation study, we illustrate how these frameworks compare in terms of true scores and SEMs, while also assessing the impact of equating on score comparability across varying levels of form variability. Ultimately, this study seeks to lay the groundwork for implementing scoring practices in large‐scale standardized assessments that use autogenerated forms.

Educational Measurement Issues and PracticeVol. 43(4)
University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US), University of Iowa (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
1.47
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Comparative Analysis of Psychometric Frameworks and Properties of Scores from Autogenerated Test Forms — Stella Yun Kim, Won‐Chan Lee · Educational Measurement Issues and Practice (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS