Test score equating of multiple-choice mathematics items: techniques from characteristic curve of modern psychometric theory

Author:

Ayanwale Musa AdekunleORCID

Abstract

AbstractExamination scores obtained by students from the West African Examinations Council (WAEC), and National Business and Technical Examinations Board (NABTEB) may not be directly comparable due to differences in examination administration, item characteristics of the subject in question, and student abilities. For more accurate comparisons, scores from different assessments or examibations must be equated. In the literature, little is known about using Stocking-Lord and Haebara Item Response Theory (IRT) methods to equalize WAEC and NABTEB mathematics multiple-choice items. The study used a counterbalanced quantitative design for a single group. As a method for dealing with order effects, counterbalancing was used to assess 50 multiple-choice four-option items developed by WAEC and NABTEB for Grade 12 mathematics. The study selected 1210 Grade 12 students who were divided into groups A (647), and B (563). The IRT equating methods were employed to compare the two test forms based on the obtained data. The findings indicate that WAEC and NABTEB have similar construct domains, though WAEC is more difficult, and discriminates better. Further, when placed on the same scale, both tests are comparable. These findings have implications for curriculum redesign, academic performance assessment, and policymaking in the education sector, as well as refuting public perceptions of the credibility and value of these certificates awarded by the testing organizations in Nigeria.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference95 articles.

1. Cook LL. Practical problems in equating test scores: a practitioner’s perspective. In: Dorans NJ, Pommerich M, Holland PW, editors. Linking and aligning scores and scales. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2007. p. 73–87.

2. Tian F. A comparison of equating/linking using the Stocking-Lord method and concurrent calibration with mixed-format tests in the non-equivalent groups’ common-item design under IRT. Published doctoral dissertation, Boston College. 2011. https://core.ac.uk/reader/151481113.

3. Clark LA, Watson D. Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. In: Kazdin AE, editor. Methodological issues and strategies in clinical research. Washington: American Psychological Association; 2016. p. 187–203.

4. Kline P. A handbook of test construction (psychology revivals): introduction to psychometric design. Oxfordshire: Routledge; 2015.

5. Atsua TG, Uzoeshi IV, Oludi P, Wagbara ES. Equating 2015 and 2016 basic education certificate examination on civic education using classical test theory and item response theory in Oyo State, Nigeria. J Pristine. 2018; 14(1).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3