Affiliation:
1. School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Abstract
South Africa’s National Senior Certificate examination system was introduced in 2008 as a single national examination system, in order to facilitate fair and standardised assessment and to provide all learners with an equal chance of access to higher education. However, limited research has been done to investigate the discrimination power of the actual examination items and the spread difficulty level for learners from different school quintile types. The purpose of the study reported on here was to investigate differential performance of learners in the items of the 2009 National Senior Certificate mathematics examination. The dataset used in this study was from the Western Cape (WC) Education Department. From the analysis, the results show that the discrimination power of the different examination questions was not identical across different school quintiles. Further investigation of the data reflects a considerable range of category difficulty levels, with higher (above average) ability levels being tested for learners in the quintile 1 to quintile 4 schools, while only learners with average abilities were being tested in the quintile 5 and independent schools.
Publisher
Education Association of South Africa
Reference64 articles.
1. Ally N & McLaren D 2016. Fees are an issue at school too, not just university. GroundUp, 17 November. Available at https://www.groundup.org.za/article/fees-are-issue-school-too-not-just-university/. Accessed 31 January 2019.
2. An X & Yung YF 2014. Item response theory: What it is and how you can use the IRT procedure to apply it. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. Available at https://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings14/SAS364-2014.pdf. Accessed 30 November 2021.
3. Baker FB 2001. The basics of item response theory (2nd ed). College Park, MD: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED458219.pdf. Accessed 30 November 2021.
4. Banerjee PA 2016. A systematic review of factors linked to poor academic performance of disadvantaged students in science and maths in schools. Cogent Education, 3(1):1178441. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1178441
5. Biggs J & Collis K 1989. Towards a model of school-based curriculum development and assessment using the SOLO taxonomy. Australian Journal of Education, 33(2):151–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/168781408903300205