2011 Volume 7 Issue 1 Pages 85-98
When equating tests which consist of subtests for the single-group design, we can consider (a) equating tests by total scores and (b) summing equating scores after equating corresponding subtests. In this article, we call the former ”equating by total scores” and the latter ”equating by subtest scores”. The purpose of the study was to compare those equating strategies especially in terms of the standard error of equating. Thus, we conducted a simulation study using the results of three multiple-choice subtests of the Japan Law School Admission Test (JLSAT). Simulation results showed that the equating scores by those equating strategies were not much different. In addition, ”equating by subtest scores” had smaller errors in terms of the standard error of equating in all simulation conditions and had a wider range of scores which could be equated below a certain error level. We conclude that ”equating by subtest scores” have an advantage in the standard error of equating within the scope of the current simulation setting.
