Discrimination and Difficulty Indices of a Senior High School Entrance Examination Using Classical Test Theory

Jeffrey Imer  Salim,

Discrimination and Difficulty Indices of a Senior High School Entrance Examination Using Classical Test Theory

Discipline: Education

Abstract:

Measurement of the psychological capacities of a person is done worldwide through the use of achievement testing. It is thereby important that the institution that uses achievement tests create correct, relevant and reliable test constructs in order to come up with the beneficial results. This study was done to evaluate the Discrimination and Difficulty Indices of the Annual Senior High School Entrance Examination, which consists of 75 English, 30 Science, 40 Mathematics, and 25 Aptitude multiple-choice questions, of the Senior High School Department of Mindanao State University - Tawi-Tawi College of Technology and Oceanography using the Classical Test Theory. Descriptive quantitative design was employed and raw data from the scored answer sheet of 200 examinees was utilized. Stratified sampling was applied to the raw data. Then, a computer application, Statistical Program for Social Sciences (SPSS), was employed to determine the discrimination and difficulty indices. The study concluded that the most of multiple-choice items of the examination have difficulty values less than 0.5, which means these items are difficult for the takers, and discrimination values higher than 0.2 which can be considered good items. The results also implied that the test constructs are highly reliable. The study recommends further enhancement of the examination.

References:

Awopeju, O. A., (2008). Comparative Analysis of Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory-Based Item Parameter Estimates of Senior School Certificate Mathematics Examination. doi: 10.19044/esj.2016.v12n28p263
Bandalos, D. L., (2018). Measurement Theory and Application for the Social Sciences. The Guildford Press New York London. pp 63- 69, 120, 157, 159, 404, 407, 420.
Crocker, L. & Algina J. (1986). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers: Fort Worth, pp 527.
Gregory, R.J. (2000). Psychological Testing. 3rd Edition. Illinios: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Gullicksen H. (1950). Theories of Mental Test Score. New York.
Haladyna, T., & Downing, S. (2004). Construct-irrelevant variance in high-stake testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 23(1), 17-27
Hambleton, R. K., Jones, R. W.. Comparison of Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory and their Application to Test Development.
Theory and Item Response Theory and their Application to Test Development. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1690.7561 &rep1&type=pdf
Hassan, S. & Hod, R. (2017). Use of Item Analysis to Improve the Quality of Single Best Answer Multiple Choice Question in Summative Assessment of Undergraduate Medical Students in Malaysia. Education in Medicine Journal. 2017;9(3):33-43. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2017.9.3.4
Kelly, T.L. (1939). The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 1724.
Lord F.M., Novick M (1969). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Osarumwense, H. J., Oyedeji, S. O. (2015). Empirical Comparison of Methods of Establishing Item Difficulty Index of Test Items Using Classical Test Theory (CTT).
Price, L. R. (2017). Theory into Practice. The Guild Press New York London. pp. 5
Sallil, U., 2017. Estimating Examinee’s Ability in Computerized Adaptive Testing and Non-Adaptive Testing using 3 parameters IRT model.
Spearman, C. (1907). Demonstration of formulae for true measurement of correlation. American Journal of Psychology, 18, 161-169.