Item Estimates under Low-Stakes Conditions: How Should Omits Be Treated?
1998
- 38Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage38
- Downloads34
- Abstract Views4
Artifact Description
Using data from a pilot test of science and math, item difficulties were estimated with a one-parameter model (partial-credit model for the multi-point items). Some items were multiple-choice items, and others were constructed-response items (open-ended). Four sets of estimates were obtained: estimates for males and females, and treating omitted items as incorrect and treating omitted items as not-presented (not-reached). Then, using data from an operational test (high-stakes, for diploma endorsement), the fit of these item estimates was assessed. In science, the fit was quite good under all conditions. In math, the fit was better for girls than for boys, the fit was better when omitted items were treated as not-presented, and the gender difference in fit was smaller when the omitted items were treated as not-presented.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know