A Comparison of Procedures for Content-Sensitive Item Selection in Computerized Adaptive Tests

This simulation study compared two procedures to enable an adaptive test to select items in correspondence with a content blueprint. Trait level estimates obtained from testlet-based and constrained adaptive tests administered to 10,000 simulated examinees under two trait distributions and three item pool sizes were compared to the trait level estimates obtained from traditional adaptive tests in terms of mean absolute error, bias, and information. Results indicate that using constrained adaptive testing requires an increase of 5% to 11% in test length over the traditional adaptive test to reach the same error level and, using testlets requires an increase of 43% to 104% in test length over the traditional adaptive test. Given these results, the use of constrained computerized adaptive testing is recommended for situations in which an adaptive test must adhere to particular content specifications.