# ITEM - In Linden K.W(1985 Designing tools for assessing...

This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

In Linden, K.W. (1985) Designing tools for assessing classroom achievement: A handbook of materials and exercises for Educational 524 . ITEM ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES I. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the items in a test requires answers to the following questions dealing with distribution of responses , discriminating power of the item , and difficulty value of the item : Distribution of Responses: Did the distractors (incorrect response choices) prove to be attractive to students who did not know the correct answer? Did the distractors or the stem contain ambiguities? Discriminating Power of the Item (D): Did the item discriminate between “good” and “poor” students? That is, did more of the students obtaining high scores on the test as a whole get the item right than did students who made low scores on the test as a whole? Difficulty Value of the Item (P): Was the item high, low or medium in difficulty? What was the tendency of the test as a whole with respect to the difficulty of the items? In the following sections, each of the above questions is discussed specifically, and a method is recommended for determining the answer to each question. Certain of these questions are evaluated by means of a study of the pattern of responses; others are described mathematically by numerical indices. The methods of item analysis described are applicable to groups as small as 30 cases. However, with small groups, the discrimination index and the difficulty value will tend to fluctuate more from one use go another than they will with large groups (approximately 100 cases or more). In order to obtain reasonably stable estimates of discriminating power and difficulty value from one administration , it is suggested that at least 100 students take the test. If this is not possible, item data can be cumulated from several groups taking the same test. II. Distribution of Responses A. Directions for obtaining the distribution of responses: 1. Place the test papers in order of score from the highest to the lowest. 2. Select the 27% of the papers having the highest scores and the 27% of the papers having the lowest scores.

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
3. For each item in turn, tabulate the number of students in the top 27% (designated the High group, H) and the number of students in the bottom 27% (designated the Low group, L) choosing each possible response to the item. B. The tabulation of the following four-choice objective item might look like this: Item 38: The height of the tide is dependent, in part, upon the position of the moon in relation to the (A) planets (b) earth (c) plane of the ecliptic (d) sun Item No. Responses Group Omit A B* C D NR 38 H 17 15 3 5 L 3 11 3 12 0 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

### What students are saying

• As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

• I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

• The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern