Standard setting anchor statements: a double cross-over trial of two different methods
Context: We challenge the philosophical acceptability of the Angoff method, and propose an alternative method of standard setting based on how important it is for candidates to know the material each test item assesses, and not how difficult it is for a subgroup of candidates to answer each item....
Main Authors: | Steven Burr, Theresa Martin, James Edwards, Colin Ferguson, Kerry Gilbert, Christian Gray, Adele Hill, Joanne Hosking, Karen Johnstone, Jolanta Kisielewska, Chloe Milsom, Siobhan Moyes, Ann Rigby-Jones, Iain Robinson, Nick Toms, Helen Watson, Daniel Zahra |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
F1000 Research Ltd
2021-02-01
|
Series: | MedEdPublish |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.mededpublish.org/Manuscripts/3529 |
Similar Items
-
Comparison of the validity of bookmark and Angoff standard setting methods in medical performance tests
by: Majid Yousefi Afrashteh
Published: (2021-01-01) -
ESTIMACIÓN DE LA CONFIABILIDAD EN MEDICIONES DE DOS ÍTEMS: EL COEFICIENTE ANGOFF-FELDT
by: Sergio Alexis Domínguez Lara, et al.
Published: (2016-06-01) -
The standard setting process: validating interpretations of stakeholders
by: Nele Kampa, et al.
Published: (2019-02-01) -
Do We Know Who the Person With the Borderline Score is, in Standard-Setting and Decision-Making
by: Andrew S. Lane, et al.
Published: (2020-12-01) -
Batería de Evaluación de Cognición Social en Psicología Forense: Adaptación y Validación
by: Carolina Gutiérrez de Piñeres Botero, et al.
Published: (2021-03-01)