Simpler standards for local performance examinations: the Yes/No Angoff and whole-test Ebel.
BACKGROUND
The whole-test Ebel and Yes/No Angoff methods offer the possibility of faster and easier standard-setting exercises for local, medium-stakes performance exams.


OBJECTIVE
We sought to establish if these less demanding methods might be substituted for the traditional but complex case-level Ebel.


METHODS
Six faculty judges each used all three methods to set standards for six standardized-patient checklists used for 178 fourth-year medical students. We compared the cut scores, passing rates, reliability, ease of use, and credibility of the three methods.


RESULTS
The three methods produced roughly equivalent cut scores. Generalizability of judgments was .94 and .96 for the case-level and whole-test Ebel, and .76 for the Yes/No Angoff. Judges found the simplified methods more credible than the case-level Ebel. The Yes/No Angoff method was preferred by five of six judges.


CONCLUSIONS
The whole-test Ebel and the Yes/No Angoff may be simple and realistic options for setting standards for local performance exams.
Yudkowsky
Rachel
R
Department of Medical Education, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60612-7309, USA. rachely@uic.edu
Downing
Steven M
SM
Wirth
Scott
S
D004504:Education, Medical, Undergraduate; D004521:Educational Measurement / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013337:Students, Medical