Cited by 1Psychometric Methodologies and TestingEducational Assessment and PedagogyTeacher Education and Assessments

It's Not Just Angoff: Misperceptions of Hard and Easy Items in Bookmark‐Type Ratings

Wyse, Adam E., Babcock, Ben·2020·Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Abstract

A common belief is that the Bookmark method is a cognitively simpler standard‐setting method than the modified Angoff method. However, a limited amount of research has investigated panelist's ability to perform well the Bookmark method, and whether some of the challenges panelists face with the Angoff method may also be present in the Bookmark method. This article presents results from three experiments where panelists were asked to give Bookmark‐type ratings to separate items into groups based on item difficulty data. Results of the experiments showed, consistent with results often observed with the Angoff method, that panelists typically and paradoxically perceived hard items to be too easy and easy items to be too hard. These perceptions were reflected in panelists often placing their Bookmarks too early for hard items and often placing their Bookmarks too late for easy items. The article concludes with a discussion of what these results imply for educators and policymakers using the Bookmark standard‐setting method.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/emip.12315

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An overreliance on standardized tests may not fully capture the cognitive abilities of students.

    “One significant issue is the limitations of assessment methods; an overreliance on standardized tests may not fully capture the cognitive abilities of students [93,94].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wyse, A. E., & Babcock, B.
Affiliations
  • Renaissance
  • The American Registry of Radiologic Technologists
Venue
Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-02-26
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
22-29
ISSN
  • 0731-1745 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-3992
OpenAlex
W3007483724
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Educational Measurement Issues and Practice (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Assessments
Keywords
Bookmark method, Angoff method, standard setting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review