KHPLEI
Search
- Page Path
- HOME > Search
Research articles
- Proposal for setting a passing score for the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination
-
Janghee Park
, Mi Kyoung Yim, Sujin Shin, Rhayun Song, Jun-Ah Song, Inyoung Lee, Heejeong Kim, Minjae Lee - J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2025;22:25. Published online September 8, 2025
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2025.22.25
- 2,023 View
- 228 Download
-
Abstract
PDF
Supplementary Material - Purpose
The Korean Nursing Licensing Examination (KNLE) is planning to transition to a computer-based test (CBT). This study aims to propose a reasonable and efficient method for setting passing scores.
Methods
A standard-setting (passing score setting) analysis was conducted using an expert panel over the past 3 years of the national nursing examination. The standard-setting method was modified from Angoff, and the validity of the passing score was verified through the Hofstee method. The standard-setting workshop was conducted in 2 stages: first, a pilot workshop for 2 subjects, followed by a second workshop where 6 additional subjects were selected based on the pilot results. For items with an actual correct answer rate of 90% or higher, the estimated correct answer rate for minimum competency was calculated using the observed correct answer rate. A survey and discussion with the expert panel were also conducted regarding the standard-setting procedures and results.
Results
The passing score for the national nursing examination was calculated using the new method, and the score was slightly higher than the existing score. The nursing subject had similar results; however, the legal subjects varied.
Conclusion
The modified Angoff and Hofstee methods were successfully applied to the KNLE. Using the actual correct answer rate as an indicator to derive expected minimum competency was shown to be effective. This approach could streamline future standard-setting processes, particularly when converting to CBT.
-
Comparison of standard-setting methods for the Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing Examination: Angoff, Ebel, bookmark, and Hofstee
-
Janghee Park, Duck-Sun Ahn, Mi Kyoung Yim, Jaehyoung Lee
- J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2018;15:32. Published online December 26, 2018
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.32
- 22,420 View
- 276 Download
- 16 Web of Science
- 11 Crossref
-
Abstract
PDFSupplementary Material
- Purpose
This study aimed to compare the possible standard-setting methods for the Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing Examination, which has a fixed cut score, and to suggest the most appropriate method.
Methods
Six radiological technology professors set standards for 250 items on the Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing Examination administered in December 2016 using the Angoff, Ebel, bookmark, and Hofstee methods.
Results
With a maximum percentile score of 100, the cut score for the examination was 71.27 using the Angoff method, 62.2 using the Ebel method, 64.49 using the bookmark method, and 62 using the Hofstee method. Based on the Hofstee method, an acceptable cut score for the examination would be between 52.83 and 70, but the cut score was 71.27 using the Angoff method.
Conclusion
The above results suggest that the best standard-setting method to determine the cut score would be a panel discussion with the modified Angoff or Ebel method, with verification of the rated results by the Hofstee method. Since no standard-setting method has yet been adopted for the Korean Radiological Technologist Licensing Examination, this study will be able to provide practical guidance for introducing a standard-setting process. -
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
- Third-Year Veterinary Student Academic Encumbrances and Tenacity: Navigating Clinical Skills Curricula and Assessment
Saundra H. Sample, Elpida Artemiou, Darlene J. Donszelmann, Cindy Adams
Journal of Veterinary Medical Education.2025; 52(3): 398. CrossRef - Standard setting for dental knowledge tests: reproducibility of the modified Angoff and Ebel method across judges
Ting Khee Ho, Noor Lide Abu Kassim, Lucy O’Malley, Reza Vahid Roudsari
BMC Medical Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef - Angoff methods in standard setting in health professional education: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Kannan Sridharan, Gowri Sivaramakrishnan
BMC Medical Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef - Setting standards for a diagnostic test of aviation English for student pilots
Maria Treadaway, John Read
Language Testing.2024; 41(3): 557. CrossRef - The challenges inherent with anchor-based approaches to the interpretation of important change in clinical outcome assessments
Kathleen W. Wyrwich, Geoffrey R. Norman
Quality of Life Research.2023; 32(5): 1239. CrossRef - Possibility of independent use of the yes/no Angoff and Hofstee methods for the standard setting of the Korean Medical Licensing Examination written test: a descriptive study
Do-Hwan Kim, Ye Ji Kang, Hoon-Ki Park
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2022; 19: 33. CrossRef - Comparison of the validity of bookmark and Angoff standard setting methods in medical performance tests
Majid Yousefi Afrashteh
BMC Medical Education.2021;[Epub] CrossRef - Comparing the cut score for the borderline group method and borderline regression method with norm-referenced standard setting in an objective structured clinical examination in medical school in Korea
Song Yi Park, Sang-Hwa Lee, Min-Jeong Kim, Ki-Hwan Ji, Ji Ho Ryu
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 25. CrossRef - Using the Angoff method to set a standard on mock exams for the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination
Mi Kyoung Yim, Sujin Shin
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2020; 17: 14. CrossRef - Performance of the Ebel standard-setting method for the spring 2019 Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada internal medicine certification examination consisting of multiple-choice questions
Jimmy Bourque, Haley Skinner, Jonathan Dupré, Maria Bacchus, Martha Ainslie, Irene W. Y. Ma, Gary Cole
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2020; 17: 12. CrossRef - Similarity of the cut score in test sets with different item amounts using the modified Angoff, modified Ebel, and Hofstee standard-setting methods for the Korean Medical Licensing Examination
Janghee Park, Mi Kyoung Yim, Na Jin Kim, Duck Sun Ahn, Young-Min Kim
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2020; 17: 28. CrossRef
- Third-Year Veterinary Student Academic Encumbrances and Tenacity: Navigating Clinical Skills Curricula and Assessment
First
Prev
