Loading…
Using rasch measurement to score, evaluate, and improve examinations in an anatomy course
Any examination that involves moderate to high stakes implications for examinees should be psychometrically sound and legally defensible. Currently, there are two broad and competing families of test theories that are used to score examination data. The majority of instructors outside the high‐stake...
Saved in:
Published in: | Anatomical sciences education 2014-11, Vol.7 (6), p.450-460 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4796-7e3060f3a91f6df835d4e8675339c2c3728c9cb61b57fe7b74e627375cb475443 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4796-7e3060f3a91f6df835d4e8675339c2c3728c9cb61b57fe7b74e627375cb475443 |
container_end_page | 460 |
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 450 |
container_title | Anatomical sciences education |
container_volume | 7 |
creator | Royal, Kenneth D. Gilliland, Kurt O. Kernick, Edward T. |
description | Any examination that involves moderate to high stakes implications for examinees should be psychometrically sound and legally defensible. Currently, there are two broad and competing families of test theories that are used to score examination data. The majority of instructors outside the high‐stakes testing arena rely on classical test theory (CTT) methods. However, advances in item response theory software have made the application of these techniques much more accessible to classroom instructors. The purpose of this research is to analyze a common medical school anatomy examination using both the traditional CTT scoring method and a Rasch measurement scoring method to determine which technique provides more robust findings, and which set of psychometric indicators will be more meaningful and useful for anatomists looking to improve the psychometric quality and functioning of their examinations. Results produced by the more robust and meaningful methodology will undergo a rigorous psychometric validation process to evaluate construct validity. Implications of these techniques and additional possibilities for advanced applications are also discussed. Anat Sci Educ 7: 450–460. © 2014 American Association of Anatomists. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/ase.1436 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1619316080</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1044124</ericid><sourcerecordid>1619316080</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4796-7e3060f3a91f6df835d4e8675339c2c3728c9cb61b57fe7b74e627375cb475443</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kFlLJDEUhYMo7uAfcAj44oOlSSWVVB6laTfcwGWYp5BK39JoLZpUqf3vTdttDwhCIBfOx7nnHoS2KNmnhKQHJsA-5UwsoFWqWJYomZPF-SzTFbQWwhMhgtAsXUYrKeeMspSvon93wTUP2JtgH3ENJvQeamg63LU42NbDHoY3U_Wmi5NpRtjVL759AwwfpnaN6VzbBOyaqMVnurYeY9v2PsAGWipNFWBz9q-ju6Ph7eAkOb86Ph0cnieWSyUSCSzGKplRtBSjMmfZiEMuZMaYsqllMs2tsoWgRSZLkIXkIFLJZGYLLrN4xzranfrGXK89hE7XLlioKtNA2wdNRayBCpKTiO78QJ9i1Camm1BSxWUq_29ofRuCh1K_eFcbP9aU6EndOtatJ3VH9M_MsC9qGM3B734jsD0FwDs7l4dnlHBOv_Rkqr-7Csa_LtKHN8PZwhnvQgcfc974Zy0mpei_l8d6cHHE7q_Vhb5ln824n-c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1617937298</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Using rasch measurement to score, evaluate, and improve examinations in an anatomy course</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><source>ERIC</source><creator>Royal, Kenneth D. ; Gilliland, Kurt O. ; Kernick, Edward T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Royal, Kenneth D. ; Gilliland, Kurt O. ; Kernick, Edward T.</creatorcontrib><description>Any examination that involves moderate to high stakes implications for examinees should be psychometrically sound and legally defensible. Currently, there are two broad and competing families of test theories that are used to score examination data. The majority of instructors outside the high‐stakes testing arena rely on classical test theory (CTT) methods. However, advances in item response theory software have made the application of these techniques much more accessible to classroom instructors. The purpose of this research is to analyze a common medical school anatomy examination using both the traditional CTT scoring method and a Rasch measurement scoring method to determine which technique provides more robust findings, and which set of psychometric indicators will be more meaningful and useful for anatomists looking to improve the psychometric quality and functioning of their examinations. Results produced by the more robust and meaningful methodology will undergo a rigorous psychometric validation process to evaluate construct validity. Implications of these techniques and additional possibilities for advanced applications are also discussed. Anat Sci Educ 7: 450–460. © 2014 American Association of Anatomists.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1935-9772</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1935-9780</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ase.1436</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24431324</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Anatomy ; Anatomy - education ; Construct Validity ; Educational Measurement - methods ; evaluation ; Evaluation Methods ; Evaluation Research ; examinations ; gross anatomy education ; High Stakes Tests ; Higher Education ; Item Response Theory ; Measurement Techniques ; Medical Education ; Program Improvement ; Program Validation ; Psychometrics ; rasch measurement ; Robustness (Statistics) ; Scoring ; Scoring Rubrics ; Student Evaluation ; students assessments ; Test Theory ; Testing ; Testing Programs ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Anatomical sciences education, 2014-11, Vol.7 (6), p.450-460</ispartof><rights>2014 American Association of Anatomists</rights><rights>2014 American Association of Anatomists.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4796-7e3060f3a91f6df835d4e8675339c2c3728c9cb61b57fe7b74e627375cb475443</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4796-7e3060f3a91f6df835d4e8675339c2c3728c9cb61b57fe7b74e627375cb475443</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1044124$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24431324$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Royal, Kenneth D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilliland, Kurt O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kernick, Edward T.</creatorcontrib><title>Using rasch measurement to score, evaluate, and improve examinations in an anatomy course</title><title>Anatomical sciences education</title><addtitle>American Association of Anatomists</addtitle><description>Any examination that involves moderate to high stakes implications for examinees should be psychometrically sound and legally defensible. Currently, there are two broad and competing families of test theories that are used to score examination data. The majority of instructors outside the high‐stakes testing arena rely on classical test theory (CTT) methods. However, advances in item response theory software have made the application of these techniques much more accessible to classroom instructors. The purpose of this research is to analyze a common medical school anatomy examination using both the traditional CTT scoring method and a Rasch measurement scoring method to determine which technique provides more robust findings, and which set of psychometric indicators will be more meaningful and useful for anatomists looking to improve the psychometric quality and functioning of their examinations. Results produced by the more robust and meaningful methodology will undergo a rigorous psychometric validation process to evaluate construct validity. Implications of these techniques and additional possibilities for advanced applications are also discussed. Anat Sci Educ 7: 450–460. © 2014 American Association of Anatomists.</description><subject>Anatomy</subject><subject>Anatomy - education</subject><subject>Construct Validity</subject><subject>Educational Measurement - methods</subject><subject>evaluation</subject><subject>Evaluation Methods</subject><subject>Evaluation Research</subject><subject>examinations</subject><subject>gross anatomy education</subject><subject>High Stakes Tests</subject><subject>Higher Education</subject><subject>Item Response Theory</subject><subject>Measurement Techniques</subject><subject>Medical Education</subject><subject>Program Improvement</subject><subject>Program Validation</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>rasch measurement</subject><subject>Robustness (Statistics)</subject><subject>Scoring</subject><subject>Scoring Rubrics</subject><subject>Student Evaluation</subject><subject>students assessments</subject><subject>Test Theory</subject><subject>Testing</subject><subject>Testing Programs</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>1935-9772</issn><issn>1935-9780</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kFlLJDEUhYMo7uAfcAj44oOlSSWVVB6laTfcwGWYp5BK39JoLZpUqf3vTdttDwhCIBfOx7nnHoS2KNmnhKQHJsA-5UwsoFWqWJYomZPF-SzTFbQWwhMhgtAsXUYrKeeMspSvon93wTUP2JtgH3ENJvQeamg63LU42NbDHoY3U_Wmi5NpRtjVL759AwwfpnaN6VzbBOyaqMVnurYeY9v2PsAGWipNFWBz9q-ju6Ph7eAkOb86Ph0cnieWSyUSCSzGKplRtBSjMmfZiEMuZMaYsqllMs2tsoWgRSZLkIXkIFLJZGYLLrN4xzranfrGXK89hE7XLlioKtNA2wdNRayBCpKTiO78QJ9i1Camm1BSxWUq_29ofRuCh1K_eFcbP9aU6EndOtatJ3VH9M_MsC9qGM3B734jsD0FwDs7l4dnlHBOv_Rkqr-7Csa_LtKHN8PZwhnvQgcfc974Zy0mpei_l8d6cHHE7q_Vhb5ln824n-c</recordid><startdate>201411</startdate><enddate>201411</enddate><creator>Royal, Kenneth D.</creator><creator>Gilliland, Kurt O.</creator><creator>Kernick, Edward T.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley-Blackwell</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201411</creationdate><title>Using rasch measurement to score, evaluate, and improve examinations in an anatomy course</title><author>Royal, Kenneth D. ; Gilliland, Kurt O. ; Kernick, Edward T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4796-7e3060f3a91f6df835d4e8675339c2c3728c9cb61b57fe7b74e627375cb475443</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Anatomy</topic><topic>Anatomy - education</topic><topic>Construct Validity</topic><topic>Educational Measurement - methods</topic><topic>evaluation</topic><topic>Evaluation Methods</topic><topic>Evaluation Research</topic><topic>examinations</topic><topic>gross anatomy education</topic><topic>High Stakes Tests</topic><topic>Higher Education</topic><topic>Item Response Theory</topic><topic>Measurement Techniques</topic><topic>Medical Education</topic><topic>Program Improvement</topic><topic>Program Validation</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>rasch measurement</topic><topic>Robustness (Statistics)</topic><topic>Scoring</topic><topic>Scoring Rubrics</topic><topic>Student Evaluation</topic><topic>students assessments</topic><topic>Test Theory</topic><topic>Testing</topic><topic>Testing Programs</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Royal, Kenneth D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilliland, Kurt O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kernick, Edward T.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Anatomical sciences education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Royal, Kenneth D.</au><au>Gilliland, Kurt O.</au><au>Kernick, Edward T.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1044124</ericid><atitle>Using rasch measurement to score, evaluate, and improve examinations in an anatomy course</atitle><jtitle>Anatomical sciences education</jtitle><addtitle>American Association of Anatomists</addtitle><date>2014-11</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>450</spage><epage>460</epage><pages>450-460</pages><issn>1935-9772</issn><eissn>1935-9780</eissn><abstract>Any examination that involves moderate to high stakes implications for examinees should be psychometrically sound and legally defensible. Currently, there are two broad and competing families of test theories that are used to score examination data. The majority of instructors outside the high‐stakes testing arena rely on classical test theory (CTT) methods. However, advances in item response theory software have made the application of these techniques much more accessible to classroom instructors. The purpose of this research is to analyze a common medical school anatomy examination using both the traditional CTT scoring method and a Rasch measurement scoring method to determine which technique provides more robust findings, and which set of psychometric indicators will be more meaningful and useful for anatomists looking to improve the psychometric quality and functioning of their examinations. Results produced by the more robust and meaningful methodology will undergo a rigorous psychometric validation process to evaluate construct validity. Implications of these techniques and additional possibilities for advanced applications are also discussed. Anat Sci Educ 7: 450–460. © 2014 American Association of Anatomists.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>24431324</pmid><doi>10.1002/ase.1436</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1935-9772 |
ispartof | Anatomical sciences education, 2014-11, Vol.7 (6), p.450-460 |
issn | 1935-9772 1935-9780 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1619316080 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection; ERIC |
subjects | Anatomy Anatomy - education Construct Validity Educational Measurement - methods evaluation Evaluation Methods Evaluation Research examinations gross anatomy education High Stakes Tests Higher Education Item Response Theory Measurement Techniques Medical Education Program Improvement Program Validation Psychometrics rasch measurement Robustness (Statistics) Scoring Scoring Rubrics Student Evaluation students assessments Test Theory Testing Testing Programs Validity |
title | Using rasch measurement to score, evaluate, and improve examinations in an anatomy course |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T01%3A14%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using%20rasch%20measurement%20to%20score,%20evaluate,%20and%20improve%20examinations%20in%20an%20anatomy%20course&rft.jtitle=Anatomical%20sciences%20education&rft.au=Royal,%20Kenneth%20D.&rft.date=2014-11&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=450&rft.epage=460&rft.pages=450-460&rft.issn=1935-9772&rft.eissn=1935-9780&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ase.1436&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1619316080%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4796-7e3060f3a91f6df835d4e8675339c2c3728c9cb61b57fe7b74e627375cb475443%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1617937298&rft_id=info:pmid/24431324&rft_ericid=EJ1044124&rfr_iscdi=true |