Objective. To compare the reliability and credibility of Angoff-based, absolute criteria derived by faculty, alumni, and a combination of alumni and faculty judge panels.
Methods. Independently, faculty, alumni, and mixed faculty-alumni judge panels developed pass/fail criteria for an 86-item test. Generalizability and decision studies were performed. Root mean square errors (RMSE) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for reliability and credibility assessment. School graduate performance upon the North American Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) was the comparator for credibility assessment.
Results. RMSEs were 1.06%, 1.42%, and 2.32% for the alumni, faculty, and mixed judge panels respectively. The school's NAPLEX pass rate was 97.5%. This rate triangulated well with the faculty judge panel (pass rate = 93.9%, CI95% = 87.1% - 98.2%), but did not with either mixed judge or alumni judge panels.
Conclusions. Faculty-derived criteria offer superior pass/fail decision defensibility relative to both alumni derived and mixed faculty-alumni derived criteria.
H. Glenn Anderson Jr and Arthur A. Nelson (2011). Reliability and Credibility of Progress Test Criteria Developed by Alumni, Faculty, and Mixed Alumni-Faculty Judge Panels. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education: Volume 75, Issue 10, Article 200. doi: 10.5688/ajpe7510200