Showing papers by "National League for Nursing published in 1977"

An index of dependability for mastery tests

Abstract: Glaser and Nitko (1971) define a criterion-referenced test as "one that is deliberately constructed to yield measurements that are directly interpretable in terms of specified performance standards" (p. 653). This is probably the best-known definition of a criterion-referenced test, but others have been proposed (e.g., Harris and Stewart, 1971; Ivens, 1970; Kriewall, 1969; and Livingston, 1972). Nothing in the Glaser and Nitko definition, or in most other definitions of "criterion-referenced test," necessitates the existence or use of a single criterion or cutting score as a "specified performance standard." However, much of the literature subsumed under the heading of criterion-referenced measurement does, in fact, postulate the existence of a single cutting score. Since this inconsistency in terminology can lead to confusion, we prefer to reserve the term mastery test for a criterion-referenced test with a single fixed mastery cutting score (see Harris, 1974). Hively (1974) and Millman (1974), among others, suggest using the descriptor "domain-referenced test" rather than "criterion-referenced test." They note that the word "criterion" is ambiguous in some contexts, and they argue that the word "domain" provides a more direct specification of the entir, set of items or tasks under consideration. If one accepts these arguments, a mastery test can be defined as a domain-referenced test with a single cutting score. In this paper we develop and discuss an index of dependability for mastery tests. For reasons discussed later, we choose not to call our index a reliability coefficient, although many of the indices previously developed for mastery tests have been proposed as indices of reliability (see Brennan, 1974, for a review of the literature). For example, Livingston (1972) proposed a reliability coefficient based upon the squared deviations of scores from the cutting score; Swaminathan, Hambleton, and Algina (1974) proposed the use of Cohen's (1960) coefficient K; Marshall and Haertel (1975) suggest using a mean split-half coefficient of agreement; and Carver (1970) suggests two other coefficients.

Signal/noise ratios for domain-referenced tests

Abstract: Using the assumption of randomly parallel tests and concepts from generalizability theory, three signal/noise ratios for domain-referenced tests are developed, discussed, and compared. The three ratios have the same noise but different signals depending upon the kind of decision to be made as a result of measurement. It is also shown that these ratios incorporate a definition of noise or error which is different from the classical definition of noise typically used to characterize norm-referenced tests.