ty_decisions: Decision accuracy and consistency: through-year vs single...

In throughyear: Linking, Routing and Fairness for Through-Year Assessment

Decision accuracy and consistency: through-year vs single summative

Description

Compares three ways of making a proficiency decision at 'cut' (theta scale):

summative

Single summative (cold MST, population prior).

through_year

Interim projection alone (prior mean from the link): the summative-replacement scenario.

combined

Summative scored with the interim prior (interims and summative both count).

Accuracy is agreement with the true decision. Consistency is agreement between two independent replications: two MST administrations, and two independent sets of interim scores ('prior' and 'prior_r2').

Usage

ty_decisions(
  mst,
  theta,
  prior,
  prior_r2,
  cut,
  population = NULL,
  groups = NULL,
  seed = NULL
)

Arguments

mst	A 'ty_mst'.
theta	True summative abilities.
prior, prior_r2	Student priors from two independent interim sets.
cut	Proficiency cut on the summative theta scale.
population	Population prior 'c(mean, sd)'.
groups	Optional named list of logical vectors for subgroup rows.
seed	Optional seed.

Value

Data frame: 'method', 'group', 'accuracy', 'consistency', 'false_proficient', 'false_not_proficient'.

Examples

sim <- ty_simulate(n_calibration = 300, n_operational = 300, seed = 1)
op <- sim[sim$cohort == "operational", ]
link <- ty_link(sim)
ty_decisions(ty_mst_default(), op$theta_S, predict(link, op),
             predict(link, op, suffix = "_r2"), cut = 0.3,
             groups = list(fast = op$fast), seed = 1)

throughyear documentation built on Oct. 8, 2026, 5:07 p.m.