|
== A bibliography of CCT research ==
{{refbegin}}
Armitage, P. (1950). Sequential analysis with more than two alternative hypotheses, and its relation to discriminant function analysis. [[Journal of the Royal Statistical Society]], 12, 137-144.
*Armitage, P. (1950). Sequential analysis with more than two alternative hypotheses, and its relation to discriminant function analysis. [[Journal of the Royal Statistical Society]], 12, 137-144.
*Braun, H., Bejar, I.I., and Williamson, D.M. (2006). Rule-based methods for automated scoring: Application in a licensing context. In Williamson, D.M., Mislevy, R.J., and Bejar, I.I. (Eds.) Automated scoring of complex tasks in computer-based testing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
*Dodd, B. G., De Ayala, R. J., & Koch, W. R. (1995). Computerized adaptive testing with polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 5-22.
Dodd*Eggen, B. G., De Ayala, RT. J., & Koch, WH. RM. (19951999). ComputerizedItem selection in adaptive testing with polytomousthe itemssequential probability ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1923, 5249-22261.
*Eggen, T. J. H. M, & Straetmans, G. J. J. M. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing for classifying examinees into three categories. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 713-734.
*Epstein, K. I., & Knerr, C. S. (1977). Applications of sequential testing procedures to performance testing. Paper presented at the 1977 Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference, Minneapolis, MN.
Eggen, T. J. H. M. (1999). Item selection in adaptive testing with the sequential probability ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 249-261.
*Ferguson, R. L. (1969). The development, implementation, and evaluation of a computer-assisted branched test for a program of individually prescribed instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
*Frick, T. W. (1989). Bayesian adaptation during computer-based tests and computer-guided exercises. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 89-114.
Eggen, T. J. H. M, & Straetmans, G. J. J. M. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing for classifying examinees into three categories. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 713-734.
*Frick, T. W. (1990). A comparison of three decisions models for adapting the length of computer-based mastery tests. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6, 479-513.
*Frick, T. W. (1992). Computerized adaptive mastery tests as expert systems. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8, 187-213.
Epstein, K. I., & Knerr, C. S. (1977). Applications of sequential testing procedures to performance testing. Paper presented at the 1977 Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference, Minneapolis, MN.
*Huang, C.-Y., Kalohn, J.C., Lin, C.-J., and Spray, J. (2000). Estimating Item Parameters from Classical Indices for Item Pool Development with a Computerized Classification Test. (Research Report 2000-4). Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
*Jacobs-Cassuto, M.S. (2005). A Comparison of Adaptive Mastery Testing Using Testlets
Ferguson, R. L. (1969). The development, implementation, and evaluation of a computer-assisted branched test for a program of individually prescribed instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Frick, T. W. (1989). Bayesian adaptation during computer-based tests and computer-guided exercises. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 89-114.
Frick, T. W. (1990). A comparison of three decisions models for adapting the length of computer-based mastery tests. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6, 479-513.
Frick, T. W. (1992). Computerized adaptive mastery tests as expert systems. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8, 187-213.
Huang, C.-Y., Kalohn, J.C., Lin, C.-J., and Spray, J. (2000). Estimating Item Parameters from Classical Indices for Item Pool Development with a Computerized Classification Test. (Research Report 2000-4). Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
Jacobs-Cassuto, M.S. (2005). A Comparison of Adaptive Mastery Testing Using Testlets
With the 3-Parameter Logistic Model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
*Jiao, H., & Lau, A. C. (2003). The Effects of Model Misfit in Computerized Classification Test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Educational Measurement, Chicago, IL, April 2003.
*Jiao, H., Wang, S., & Lau, AC. CA. (20032004). TheAn EffectsInvestigation of ModelTwo MisfitCombination Procedures of SPRT for Three-category Classification Decisions in Computerized Classification Test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council ofAmerican Educational MeasurementResearch Association, Chicago,San ILAntonio, April 20032004.
*Kalohn, J. C., & Spray, J. A. (1999). The effect of model misspecification on classification decisions made using a computerized test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 47-59.
*Kingsbury, G.G., & Weiss, D.J. (1979). An adaptive testing strategy for mastery decisions. Research report 79-05. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Psychometric Methods Laboratory.
Jiao, H., Wang, S., & Lau, C. A. (2004). An Investigation of Two Combination Procedures of SPRT for Three-category Classification Decisions in Computerized Classification Test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Antonio, April 2004.
*Kingsbury, G.G., & Weiss, D.J. (1983). A comparison of IRT-based adaptive mastery testing and a sequential mastery testing procedure. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 237-254). New York: Academic Press.
*Lau, C. A. (1996). Robustness of a unidimensional computerized testing mastery procedure with multidimensional testing data. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City IA.
Kalohn, J. C., & Spray, J. A. (1999). The effect of model misspecification on classification decisions made using a computerized test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 47-59.
*Lau, C. A., & Wang, T. (1998). Comparing and combining dichotomous and polytomous items with SPRT procedure in computerized classification testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
*Lau, C. A., & Wang, T. (1999). Computerized classification testing under practical constraints with a polytomous model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Kingsbury, G.G., & Weiss, D.J. (1979). An adaptive testing strategy for mastery decisions. Research report 79-05. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Psychometric Methods Laboratory.
*Lau, C. A., & Wang, T. (2000). A new item selection procedure for mixed item type in computerized classification testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.
*Lewis, C., & Sheehan, K. (1990). Using Bayesian decision theory to design a computerized mastery test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 367-386.
Kingsbury, G.G., & Weiss, D.J. (1983). A comparison of IRT-based adaptive mastery testing and a sequential mastery testing procedure. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 237-254). New York: Academic Press.
*Lin, C.-J. & Spray, J.A. (2000). Effects of item-selection criteria on classification testing with the sequential probability ratio test. (Research Report 2000-8). Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
*Linn, R. L., Rock, D. A., & Cleary, T. A. (1972). Sequential testing for dichotomous decisions. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 32, 85-95.
Lau, C. A. (1996). Robustness of a unidimensional computerized testing mastery procedure with multidimensional testing data. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City IA.
*Luecht, R. M. (1996). Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Testing in a Certification or Licensure Context. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 389-404.
*Reckase, M. D. (1983). A procedure for decision making using tailored testing. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 237-254). New York: Academic Press.
Lau, C. A., & Wang, T. (1998). Comparing and combining dichotomous and polytomous items with SPRT procedure in computerized classification testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
*Rudner, L. M. (2002). An examination of decision-theory adaptive testing procedures. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 1-5, 2002, New Orleans, LA.
Lau*Sheehan, C. AK., & WangLewis, TC. (19991992). Computerized classificationmastery testing under practical constraints with anonequivalent polytomous modeltestlets. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American EducationalApplied ResearchPsychological AssociationMeasurement, Montreal16, Canada65-76.
*Spray, J. A. (1993). Multiple-category classification using a sequential probability ratio test (Research Report 93-7). Iowa City, Iowa: ACT, Inc.
*Spray, J. A., Abdel-fattah, A. A., Huang, C., and Lau, C. A. (1997). Unidimensional approximations for a computerized test when the item pool and latent space are multidimensional (Research Report 97-5). Iowa City, Iowa: ACT, Inc.
Lau, C. A., & Wang, T. (2000). A new item selection procedure for mixed item type in computerized classification testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.
*Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1987). The effect of item parameter estimation error on decisions made using the sequential probability ratio test (Research Report 87-17). Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
Lewis*Spray, CJ. A., & SheehanReckase, KM. D. (19901994). UsingThe Bayesianselection decisionof theorytest toitems designfor decision making with a computerized masteryadaptive test. AppliedPaper Psychologicalpresented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education (New Orleans, 14LA, 367April 5-3867, 1994).
*Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1996). Comparison of SPRT and sequential Bayes procedures for classifying examinees into two categories using a computerized test. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics,21, 405-414.
Lin*Thompson, C.-J. & Spray, JN.A. (20002006). Effects of itemVariable-selectionlength criteria oncomputerized classification testing with theitem sequentialresponse probability ratio testtheory. (Research Report 2000-8).CLEAR IowaExam CityReview, IA: ACT, Inc17(2).
*Vos, H. J. (1998). Optimal sequential rules for computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19, 133-154.
Linn*Vos, RH. LJ., Rock, D(1999). A.,Applications &of Cleary,Bayesian T.decision A.theory (1972).to Sequentialsequential mastery testing. forJournal dichotomous decisions.of Educational &and PsychologicalBehavioral MeasurementStatistics, 3224, 85271-95292.
*Wald, A. (1947). Sequential analysis. New York: Wiley.
*Weiss, D. J., & Kingsbury, G. G. (1984). Application of computerized adaptive testing to educational problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 361-375.
Luecht, R. M. (1996). Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Testing in a Certification or Licensure Context. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 389-404.
*Weissman, A. (2004). Mutual information item selection in multiple-category classification CAT. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA.
*Weitzman, R. A. (1982a). Sequential testing for selection. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 337-351.
Reckase, M. D. (1983). A procedure for decision making using tailored testing. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 237-254). New York: Academic Press.
*Weitzman, R. A. (1982b). Use of sequential testing to prescreen prospective entrants into military service. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1982 Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program, 1982.
{{refend}}
Rudner, L. M. (2002). An examination of decision-theory adaptive testing procedures. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 1-5, 2002, New Orleans, LA.
Sheehan, K., & Lewis, C. (1992). Computerized mastery testing with nonequivalent testlets. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 65-76.
Spray, J. A. (1993). Multiple-category classification using a sequential probability ratio test (Research Report 93-7). Iowa City, Iowa: ACT, Inc.
Spray, J. A., Abdel-fattah, A. A., Huang, C., and Lau, C. A. (1997). Unidimensional approximations for a computerized test when the item pool and latent space are multidimensional (Research Report 97-5). Iowa City, Iowa: ACT, Inc.
Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1987). The effect of item parameter estimation error on decisions made using the sequential probability ratio test (Research Report 87-17). Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1994). The selection of test items for decision making with a computerized adaptive test. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education (New Orleans, LA, April 5-7, 1994).
Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1996). Comparison of SPRT and sequential Bayes procedures for classifying examinees into two categories using a computerized test. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics,21, 405-414.
Thompson, N.A. (2006). Variable-length computerized classification testing with item response theory. CLEAR Exam Review, 17(2).
Vos, H. J. (1998). Optimal sequential rules for computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19, 133-154.
Vos, H. J. (1999). Applications of Bayesian decision theory to sequential mastery testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 271-292.
Wald, A. (1947). Sequential analysis. New York: Wiley.
Weiss, D. J., & Kingsbury, G. G. (1984). Application of computerized adaptive testing to educational problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 361-375.
Weissman, A. (2004). Mutual information item selection in multiple-category classification CAT. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA.
Weitzman, R. A. (1982a). Sequential testing for selection. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 337-351.
Weitzman, R. A. (1982b). Use of sequential testing to prescreen prospective entrants into military service. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1982 Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program, 1982.
==External links==
|
