Development and validation of a computerized-adaptive test for placement in general chemistry

In 1987, early versions of the authoring language Course Builder became available. The vendors of this authoring system claimed that it allowed an author to create stand-alone applications that could be used on the Macintosh computer. Course Builder was therefore judged a suitable vehicle for the development of a computerized-adaptive test (CAT) for placement in general chemistry at UIC.;Development of the CAT proceeded through several different phases: preparation of the question bank; determination of the CAT structure; construction of the actual examination; developmental testing and revisions to improve the user friendliness and evaluation of the overall quality of the CAT as a measurement tool for determining placement in general chemistry.;In the last stage, four groups were formed: Chemistry 111 CAT; Chemistry 111 paper-and-pencil; Chemistry 112 CAT and Chemistry 112 paper-and-pencil. Students placed into these chemistry courses, having taken the appropriate placement exam, were then monitored for their grade performance. Course grades and chemistry placement exam scores then allowed the development of linear regression equations that indicated the CAT was as good, if not slightly superior, to the traditional placement exam in the prediction of general chemistry course grades.;Further work showed that the correlation of ACT sub test scores (Mathematics, Natural Science and Composite) to course grades was, in three of four cases, inferior to that seen in the placement score versus course grade linear regression analysis. Multiple regression analysis (using one and only one ACT sub test score and corresponding placement exam score) indicated an overall improvement in prediction for both Chemistry 111 course groups but an improvement for only the Chemistry 112 paper-and-pencil test group.;This study started with two purposes. The first was to create a CAT program, using the full resources of Course Builder, that would be suitable for placement purposes in general chemistry. The second purpose was to validate the test and compare its efficacy to that of the traditional paper-and-pencil examination.