ERIC ED545109: 2011 NAEP-TIMSS Linking Study: Linking Methodologies and Their Evaluations. NCES 2013-469
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The 2011 NAEP-TIMSS linking study conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) was designed to predict Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) scores for the U.S. states that participated in 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics and science assessment of eighth-grade students. The study design involved four samples of students: (1) Students assessed in NAEP mathematics or science during the winter (January-March) 2011 NAEP administration (NAEP operational/national sample); (2) Students in the United States assessed in TIMSS (mathematics and science) during the spring (April-June) 2011 TIMSS administration (TIMSS U.S. operational/national sample); (3) Students assessed during the 2011 NAEP testing window with booklets, referred to as braided booklets, containing one block of NAEP and one block of TIMSS items (which followed NAEP administration procedures); and (4) Students assessed during the spring 2011 TIMSS testing window with booklets, also referred to as braided booklets, containing one block of NAEP and three blocks of TIMSS items (which followed TIMSS administration procedures). The braided-booklet sample under the NAEP administration window (i.e., sample 3) was given the NAEP-like booklets, which were designed to appear as similar as possible to a regular NAEP assessment booklet and were administered under the same conditions as NAEP. Similarly, the braided-booklet sample under the TIMSS administration window (i.e., sample 4) was given the TIMSS-like booklets. Those booklets were designed to appear as similar as possible to a regular TIMSS assessment booklet and were administered under nearly the same conditions as TIMSS. In addition, the braided booklets in the 2011 TIMSS window were administered in the same schools in which TIMSS was administered, with one intact classroom randomly assigned to the U.S. TIMSS national sample and another to the braided-booklet sample. In addition to these linking study samples, nine states--Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Florida, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and North Carolina--participated in 2011 TIMSS directly as separate jurisdictions and, therefore, received actual TIMSS scores. These nine states provided a "validation sample" upon which the NAEP-TIMSS link was evaluated. The validation states were selected based on their state enrollment and willingness to participate, and also on whether they as a whole represented a substantial range of performances relative to the national NAEP average, had previous experience as benchmarking participants in TIMSS, and were geographically diverse. [This 2011 NAEP-TIMSS linking methodology paper was prepared to supplement the "Linking Methodologies" section presented in "U.S. States in a Global Context: Results from the 2011 NAEP-TIMSS Linking Study. NCES 2013-460" (ED544218). This report was prepared with support from American Institutes for Research (AIR), Educational Testing Service (ETS), and the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) for the contract No. ED-07-CO-0107.]
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,083 | 0,006 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».