An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities

Abstract Background Standard setting is one of the most challenging aspects of assessment in high-stakes healthcare settings. The Angoff methodology is widely used, but poses a number of challenges, including conceptualisation of the just-passing candidate, and the time-cost of implementing the meth...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: John C. McLachlan, K. Alex Robertson, Bridget Weller, Marina Sawdon
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2021-01-01
Series:BMC Medical Education
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02418-5
id doaj-cf7f9acaea834a599906fb952cc716e7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-cf7f9acaea834a599906fb952cc716e72021-01-10T12:14:24ZengBMCBMC Medical Education1472-69202021-01-012111710.1186/s12909-020-02418-5An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilitiesJohn C. McLachlan0K. Alex Robertson1Bridget Weller2Marina Sawdon3University of Central LancashireCNTW Trust, Hopewood Park HospitalUniversity of Central LancashireSchool of Medicine, University of SunderlandAbstract Background Standard setting is one of the most challenging aspects of assessment in high-stakes healthcare settings. The Angoff methodology is widely used, but poses a number of challenges, including conceptualisation of the just-passing candidate, and the time-cost of implementing the method. Cohen methodologies are inexpensive and rapid but rely on the performance of an individual candidate. A new method of standard setting, based on the entire cohort and every item, would be valuable. Methods We identified Borderline candidates by reviewing their performance across all assessments in an academic year. We plotted the item scores of the Borderline candidates in comparison with Facility for the whole cohort and fitted curves to the resulting distribution. Results It is observed that for any given Item, an equation of the form y ≈ C. eFx where y is the Facility of Borderline candidates on that Item, x is the observed Item Facility of the whole cohort, and C and F are constants, predicts the probable Facility for Borderline candidates over the test, in other words, the cut score for Borderline candidates. We describe ways of estimating C and F in any given circumstance, and suggest typical values arising from this particular study: that C = 12.3 and F = 0.021. Conclusions C and F are relatively stable, and that the equation y = 12.3. e0.021x can rapidly be applied to the item Facility for every item. The average value represents the cut score for the assessment as a whole. This represents a novel retrospective method based on test takers. Compared to the Cohen method which draws on one score and one candidate, this method draws on all items and candidates in a test. We propose that it can be used to standard set a whole test, or a particular item where the predicted Angoff score is very different from the observed Facility.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02418-5Standard-settingRetrospectiveCostRapidExponential
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author John C. McLachlan
K. Alex Robertson
Bridget Weller
Marina Sawdon
spellingShingle John C. McLachlan
K. Alex Robertson
Bridget Weller
Marina Sawdon
An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
BMC Medical Education
Standard-setting
Retrospective
Cost
Rapid
Exponential
author_facet John C. McLachlan
K. Alex Robertson
Bridget Weller
Marina Sawdon
author_sort John C. McLachlan
title An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
title_short An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
title_full An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
title_fullStr An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
title_full_unstemmed An inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
title_sort inexpensive retrospective standard setting method based on item facilities
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Education
issn 1472-6920
publishDate 2021-01-01
description Abstract Background Standard setting is one of the most challenging aspects of assessment in high-stakes healthcare settings. The Angoff methodology is widely used, but poses a number of challenges, including conceptualisation of the just-passing candidate, and the time-cost of implementing the method. Cohen methodologies are inexpensive and rapid but rely on the performance of an individual candidate. A new method of standard setting, based on the entire cohort and every item, would be valuable. Methods We identified Borderline candidates by reviewing their performance across all assessments in an academic year. We plotted the item scores of the Borderline candidates in comparison with Facility for the whole cohort and fitted curves to the resulting distribution. Results It is observed that for any given Item, an equation of the form y ≈ C. eFx where y is the Facility of Borderline candidates on that Item, x is the observed Item Facility of the whole cohort, and C and F are constants, predicts the probable Facility for Borderline candidates over the test, in other words, the cut score for Borderline candidates. We describe ways of estimating C and F in any given circumstance, and suggest typical values arising from this particular study: that C = 12.3 and F = 0.021. Conclusions C and F are relatively stable, and that the equation y = 12.3. e0.021x can rapidly be applied to the item Facility for every item. The average value represents the cut score for the assessment as a whole. This represents a novel retrospective method based on test takers. Compared to the Cohen method which draws on one score and one candidate, this method draws on all items and candidates in a test. We propose that it can be used to standard set a whole test, or a particular item where the predicted Angoff score is very different from the observed Facility.
topic Standard-setting
Retrospective
Cost
Rapid
Exponential
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02418-5
work_keys_str_mv AT johncmclachlan aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
AT kalexrobertson aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
AT bridgetweller aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
AT marinasawdon aninexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
AT johncmclachlan inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
AT kalexrobertson inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
AT bridgetweller inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
AT marinasawdon inexpensiveretrospectivestandardsettingmethodbasedonitemfacilities
_version_ 1724343252288536576