Examinee Noneffort and the Validity of Program Assessment Results

@article{Wise2010ExamineeNA,
  title={Examinee Noneffort and the Validity of Program Assessment Results},
  author={S. Wise and Christine E DeMars},
  journal={Educational Assessment},
  year={2010},
  volume={15},
  pages={27 - 41}
}
  • S. Wise, Christine E DeMars
  • Published 2010
  • Psychology
  • Educational Assessment
  • Educational program assessment studies often use data from low-stakes tests to provide evidence of program quality. The validity of scores from such tests, however, is potentially threatened by examinee noneffort. This study investigated the extent to which one type of noneffort—rapid-guessing behavior—distorted the results from three types of commonly used program assessment designs. It was found that, for each design, a modest amount of rapid guessing had a pronounced effect on the results… CONTINUE READING
    78 Citations
    Measuring Motivation in Low-Stakes Assessments
    • 38
    • PDF
    Institutional strategies related to test-taking behavior in low stakes assessment
    • 2
    • PDF
    Patterns of Solution Behavior across Items in Low-Stakes Assessments
    • 2
    The Effects of Motivational Instruction on College Students' Performance on Low-Stakes Assessment
    • 36
    • Highly Influenced
    The (Non)Impact of Differential Test Taker Engagement on Aggregated Scores
    • 4

    References

    SHOWING 1-10 OF 26 REFERENCES
    The Generalizability of Motivation Filtering in Improving Test Score Validity
    • 50
    An Investigation of the Differential Effort Received by Items on a Low-Stakes Computer-Based Test
    • 118
    Changes in Rapid-Guessing Behavior Over a Series of Assessments
    • 44
    Response Time Effort: A New Measure of Examinee Motivation in Computer-Based Tests
    • 315
    • PDF
    Low Examinee Effort in Low-Stakes Assessment: Problems and Potential Solutions
    • 348
    Taking the Time to Improve the Validity of Low-Stakes Tests: The Effort-Monitoring CBT.
    • 52
    An Application of Item Response Time: The Effort‐Moderated IRT Model
    • 148
    • PDF