User talk:Amead

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Amead, welcome to Wikipedia. Excellent article on Item response theory! I just wondered if it should be moved to Item Response Theory though. I've nearly always seen the capitalised version used.

Some pages you might find useful are: how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 12:53, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)


Ok, but my thought was that the original wording sounded a bit anti-testing. However, I'm happy with the way it reads now. I normally try to avoid editing topics like this as I'm way too biased about it. :) Angela. 19:44, Jan 5, 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Jimbo Visit

I will be at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 23 October, 2004, speaking at the ACM Reflections | Projections Conference 2004 -

This conference runs from 22. - 24. October 2004; it would be fantastic to have a Wikipedia booth, if I can get volunteers for it.

Do you think you could come? Jimbo Wales 16:20, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] MBTI

Could I invite your comments on our discussion over at the MBTI entry?--Coroebus 14:46, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] IRT

Hey Amead, Stephenhumphry 03:39, 30 July 2005 (UTC) here. Wanted to get in touch about item response theory article. I reverted changes, and have outlined my concerns in the discussion. I don't want to get into a debate about Rasch vs IRT coz I don't think it is productive -- but I wonder whether you think I'm biased. You're right, there is sometimes bitter debate, but should this appear in the article? To make my position clear, my research deals with discrimination. I see both sides. The Rasch model is too prescriptive, but the 2PLM is problematic. Both are far better than CTT, and the article should reflect the most important features of IRT in a balanced way. Point is, I'd rather work with you to make the article as cohesive and strong as possible, and just wanted to get in touch.

[edit] Guttman Scale

Howdy,

I'm doing some work on improving the various articles that relate to classical psychometric scaling techniques. I was wondering if you could take a look at Guttman scale, which talks about Louis Guttman's unidimensional cumulative model.

Klonimus 02:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Five Factor Model

It has now been redirected thanks to user:Extreme Unction. Thank you, for the notification. - Akamad 19:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CAT article and vandalism

There is no need to get upset about a silly template. The computer-adaptive test article just needs some good citations. There is certainly no need to commit such acts of vandalism as completely erasing the article. As you probably noticed, it was another user who reverted your edit, not me. So there are other people out there that agree with me that this article just needs some good citations.

You claim to be a psychometrician, so I'm going to guess that you've had to write papers and maybe some articles. When you receive feedback about the papers or articles, do you just shred them? I'm guessing not. You probably accept the feedback and make the necessary changes. So why don't we work like that here?

– Chris53516 (Talk) 14:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)