Abstract

Reporting standard errors of equating has been advocated as a standard practice when conducting test equating. The two most widely applied procedures for standard errors of equating including the bootstrap method and the delta method are either computationally intensive or confined to the derivations of complicated formulas. In the current study, a hypothetical example was used to illustrate how the multiple imputation method could be taken as an alternative procedure for obtaining the standard errors for the item response theory (IRT) true score equating coefficients in the context of the common-item nonequivalent groups equating design under the three-parameter logistic IRT model. This method makes use of multiple sets of imputed item parameter values. By using the simulated and real data, the performance of the multiple imputation method was examined and compared with that of the bootstrap and delta methods. The results indicated that the multiple imputation method performed as effectively as the bootstrap method and the delta method when using the characteristic curve methods. The multiple imputation method produced very similar results to the delta method when the moment methods were used.

摘要

在进行测试等值时，报告等值的标准误差已被提倡作为一种标准做法。两种最广泛应用的等式标准误差程序，包括 bootstrap 方法和 delta 方法，要么计算量大，要么仅限于复杂公式的推导。在当前的研究中，一个假设的例子被用来说明在共同项目不等价的情况下，多重插补方法可以作为一种替代程序来获得项目反应理论 (IRT) 真分数等值系数的标准误差在三参数逻辑 IRT 模型下对等值设计进行分组。该方法利用了多组估算的项目参数值。通过使用模拟数据和真实数据，检验了多重插补方法的性能，并与 bootstrap 和 delta 方法的性能进行了比较。结果表明，在使用特征曲线法时，多重插补法与 bootstrap 法和 delta 法一样有效。当使用矩方法时，多重插补方法产生了与 delta 方法非常相似的结果。