Rotating item banks versus restriction of maximum exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing

Abstract

If examinees were to know, beforehand, part of the content of a computerized adaptive test, their estimated trait levels would then have a marked positive bias. One of the strategies to avoid this consists of dividing a large item bank into several sub-banks and rotating the sub-bank employed (Ariel, Veldkamp & van der Linden, 2004). This strategy permits substantial improvements in exposure control at little cost to measurement accuracy. However, we do not know whether this option provides better results than using the master bank with greater restriction in the maximum exposure rates (Sympson & Hetter, 1985). In order to investigate this issue, we worked with several simulated banks of 2100 items, comparing them, for RMSE and overlap rate, with the same banks divided in two, three… up to seven sub-banks. By means of extensive manipulation of the maximum exposure rate in each bank, we found that the option of rotating banks slightly outperformed the option of restricting maximum exposure rate of the master bank by means of the Sympson-Hetter method.