Using Alignment Index and Polytomous Item Response Theory on Statistics Essay Test

被引:4
|
作者
Hidayati, Kana [1 ]
Budiyono [2 ]
Sugiman [1 ]
机构
[1] Yogyakarta State Univ, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
[2] Sebelas Maret Univ, Surakarta, Indonesia
关键词
Alignment; validity; reliability; IRT polytomous GPCM; essay test; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.14689/ejer.2019.79.6
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Purpose: Essay test in mathematics, both in the form of restricted-response and extended-response, generally consist of polytomous scored items. However, the essay test used by teachers in Indonesia has not been fully supported by sufficient quality evidence. There have been many studies focusing on the development of the essay test, but not many of them have applied the use of relevant measurement theory for the polytomous data. The evidence of content validity also has not been supported by its alignment with the curriculum. This study used alignment index to prove the content validity and IRT polytomous GPCM to determine the characteristics of test items in order to produce an essay test that could accurately measure the achievement of students on statistical materials. Method: Procedures of this study: (1) preparation of preliminary test, (2) trials, (3) interpretation. Trial was conducted involving 688 Junior High School students in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Results: The content validity of the test was good, supported by V Aiken index of 0.88-1.00 and Porter alignment index of 0.93. The test items had good construct validity. Test reliability was categorized as good with the Construct Reliability coefficient of 0.88 and the Alpha coefficient of 0.78. Judging from its characteristics, all test items were categorized as good. Implications for Research and Practice: The use of the alignment index contribution to the verification of content validity of essay test and the use of the IRT polytomous GPCM may provide reference for the use of appropriate measurement theory to determine the item characteristics of essay test. (c) 2019 Ani Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved
引用
收藏
页码:115 / 132
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Polytomous Item Explanatory Item Response Theory Models
    Kim, Jinho
    Wilson, Mark
    EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 2020, 80 (04) : 726 - 755
  • [3] Handbook of Polytomous Item Response Theory Models
    Keller, Lisa A.
    Schweid, Jason A.
    JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT, 2011, 48 (01) : 98 - 100
  • [4] Item response theory and classical test theory: An empirical comparison of their item/person statistics
    Fan, XT
    EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1998, 58 (03) : 357 - 381
  • [5] Relationships and properties of polytomous item response theory models
    van der Ark, LA
    APPLIED PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 2001, 25 (03) : 273 - 282
  • [6] Introduction to bifactor polytomous item response theory analysis
    Toland, Michael D.
    Sulis, Isabella
    Giambona, Francesca
    Porcu, Mariano
    Campbell, Jonathan M.
    JOURNAL OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 60 : 41 - 63
  • [7] On the Connections Between Item Response Theory and Classical Test Theory: A Note on True Score Evaluation for Polytomous Items via Item Response Modeling
    Raykov, Tenko
    Dimitrov, Dimiter M.
    Marcoulides, George A.
    Harrison, Michael
    EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 2019, 79 (06) : 1198 - 1209
  • [8] Measuring the academic success of students with ASICS using polytomous item response theory
    Ahmad, Hishamuddin
    Mokshein, Siti Eshah
    Husin, Mohd Razimi
    Ali, Siti Rahaimah
    Panessai, Ismail Yusuf
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES, 2019, 6 (04): : 123 - 129
  • [9] A note on monotonicity of item response functions for ordered polytomous item response theory models
    Kang, Hyeon-Ah
    Su, Ya-Hui
    Chang, Hua-Hua
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL & STATISTICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 71 (03): : 523 - 535
  • [10] An NCME Instructional Module on Polytomous Item Response Theory Models
    Penfield, Randall David
    EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT-ISSUES AND PRACTICE, 2014, 33 (01) : 36 - 48