Skip to content

Stick with 100 examinees per form, not 200

The advice. Asked whether Pearson should wait to reach 200 examinees per year for high/medium incidence fields, or whether 100 is enough: “Stick with 100 because it will get you more forms.”

Why. 100 is the stated minimum for statistical equating. Waiting for 200 buys precision on each form at the cost of halving the rate at which new forms enter service — and form scarcity, not equating precision, is the problem the programme is trying to solve. Given Prefer fewer forms with less overlap, the committee is not asking for many marginal forms; it is asking that the forms which do exist not be delayed for a precision gain that does not address the security risk.

Status. Open.

Related. MTTC Meaningfully Different Forms · Escalate a field to the next group after two years below 100