Dataset Information

Comparison of standard-setting methods for the Korea Radiological technologist Licensing Examination : Angoff, Ebel, Bookmark, and Hofstee.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

This study aims to compare the various standard setting methods for the Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing Examination with the fixed cut score and suggest the most appropriate method.

Methods

Six radiological technology professors, set the standards of 250 items for Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing examination that were conducted on December 2016 by using Angoff, Ebel, bookmark, and Hofstee methods.

Results

With the maximum percentile score of 100, the cut score for the examination was 71.27 in Angoff method, 62.2 in Ebel method, 64.49 in bookmark method, and 62 in Hofstee. Based on the Hofstee's acceptable cut score, the acceptable cut score for the examination was between 52.83 and 70, but the cut score was 71.27 in Angoff method.

Conclusion

Above results suggested that the best standard setting methods to determine the cut score was panel discussion with the modified Angoff or Ebel methods, and verification of the rated results by Hofstee method. Because there was still no adoption of standard setting in the Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing Examination, this study will be able to provide the practical guideline to introduce the standard setting.

SUBMITTER: Park J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6380908 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of standard-setting methods for the Korea Radiological technologist Licensing Examination : Angoff, Ebel, Bookmark, and Hofstee.

Park Janghee J Ahn Duck-Sun DS Yim Mi Kyoung MK Lee Jaehyoung J

Journal of educational evaluation for health professions 20181226

<h4>Purpose</h4>This study aims to compare the various standard setting methods for the Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing Examination with the fixed cut score and suggest the most appropriate method.<h4>Methods</h4>Six radiological technology professors, set the standards of 250 items for Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing examination that were conducted on December 2016 by using Angoff, Ebel, bookmark, and Hofstee methods.<h4>Results</h4>With the maximum percentile score of 100 ...[more]

PMID: 30586956

Similar Datasets

Project description:Licensure exams play a crucial role in ensuring the competence of individuals entering a profession, thereby safeguarding the public and maintaining the quality and integrity of the profession. In Sweden, dentists educated outside the European Union seeking to practise dentistry must undergoa re-certification process. The re-certification process includes a theoretical examination where pass marks are set using a three-level Angoff method. This study aimed to determine the consistency of the Angoff ratings using independent panels at two Swedish universities. Two cohorts of panellists were included in the study: one reference and one external. The reference panel was responsible for rating the upcoming theoretical examinations in the proficiency test, which were used to set the pass mark. The external panel, recruited from a dental school at a university in another region in Sweden, provided ratings after the examinations. Three examinations during 2019-2020 were included in this study (267 items in total). There was a strong correlation (ρ ≥ 0.70, p < .001) between the ratings of the two independent panels, with no significant differences in item ratings across the full exams, dental disciplines, and professional qualifications analysed. This suggests that the three-level Angoff method reliably produces similar standards for assessing the competence of the minimally qualified dentist across different institutions. The expectations of the minimally qualified but still acceptable dentist were comparable between the two independent panels across the three theoretical examinations explored. The alignment between the panels indicates valid, reliable standards across institutions, despite the independent syllabi of the two study programmes. However, while there is an alignment, differences in ratings remain. Consequently, involving multiple institutions in future standard-setting processes could help ensure that the standards reflect a broader range of educational practices, supporting the credibility of licensure examinations.

Dataset Information

Comparison of standard-setting methods for the Korea Radiological technologist Licensing Examination : Angoff, Ebel, Bookmark, and Hofstee.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Comparison of standard-setting methods for the Korea Radiological technologist Licensing Examination : Angoff, Ebel, Bookmark, and Hofstee.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets