IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jcallt/v7y2017i3p58-72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Argument-Based Approach to Test Fairness: The Case of Multiple-Form Equating in the College English Test

Author

Listed:
  • Yan Jin

    (School of Foreign Languages, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China)

  • Eric Wu

    (University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Temple City, CA, USA)

Abstract

This article aims to demonstrate how innovative testing practices can effectively prevent high-tech mass cheating and improve fairness in language assessment. The article first introduces Xi's (2010) view of validity and fairness and her proposal of an argument-based approach to empirically examining test fairness. The article then describes the threat to fair testing posed by high-tech cheating on the College English Test (CET). A study of multiple-form equating was conducted and reported in the article, which was aimed at achieving alternate form reliability when multiple versions and multiple forms were used in the CET. The article then concludes with a discussion on the usefulness of an argument-based approach to empirically examining test fairness.

Suggested Citation

  • Yan Jin & Eric Wu, 2017. "An Argument-Based Approach to Test Fairness: The Case of Multiple-Form Equating in the College English Test," International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), IGI Global, vol. 7(3), pages 58-72, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:igg:jcallt:v:7:y:2017:i:3:p:58-72
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/IJCALLT.2017070104
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jcallt:v:7:y:2017:i:3:p:58-72. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.