利用Rasch模型对师范院校入学考试进行验证

Manuel O Malonisio, Cherryl C Malonisio
{"title":"利用Rasch模型对师范院校入学考试进行验证","authors":"Manuel O Malonisio, Cherryl C Malonisio","doi":"10.53894/ijirss.v6i3.1726","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the College Entrance Test (CET) used by a teacher education institution to assess the general and specialization knowledge of prospective students in English, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies. The Rasch model was employed to analyze the data collected from the sample of 250 test takers for the general knowledge test, 122 for specialization in English, 74 for Mathematics, 122 for science and 77 for Social Studies. The measurement analysis components including person and item reliability, unidimensionality, person-item map, fit statistics, Point Measure Correlation (PTMEA) and item local dependence were used. The study findings indicated that some test components had poor person reliability and the degree of item difficulty was higher than the students' abilities. There were also concerns about the conformity to the unidimensionality criteria, suggesting an analysis of items that might form another dimension in the constructs of the tests, although each of the items is independent. Furthermore, some items were misfitting or overfitting the Rasch model. In conclusion, the CET needs improvement to ensure its quality as a reliable and valid selection tool for the college. The study's results provide significant insights into the CET's strengths and weaknesses that can guide the test developers in revising and enhancing the CET to effectively measure the general and specialization knowledge of test takers in English, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies.","PeriodicalId":282613,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the teacher education institution’s entrance test using the Rasch model\",\"authors\":\"Manuel O Malonisio, Cherryl C Malonisio\",\"doi\":\"10.53894/ijirss.v6i3.1726\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the College Entrance Test (CET) used by a teacher education institution to assess the general and specialization knowledge of prospective students in English, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies. The Rasch model was employed to analyze the data collected from the sample of 250 test takers for the general knowledge test, 122 for specialization in English, 74 for Mathematics, 122 for science and 77 for Social Studies. The measurement analysis components including person and item reliability, unidimensionality, person-item map, fit statistics, Point Measure Correlation (PTMEA) and item local dependence were used. The study findings indicated that some test components had poor person reliability and the degree of item difficulty was higher than the students' abilities. There were also concerns about the conformity to the unidimensionality criteria, suggesting an analysis of items that might form another dimension in the constructs of the tests, although each of the items is independent. Furthermore, some items were misfitting or overfitting the Rasch model. In conclusion, the CET needs improvement to ensure its quality as a reliable and valid selection tool for the college. The study's results provide significant insights into the CET's strengths and weaknesses that can guide the test developers in revising and enhancing the CET to effectively measure the general and specialization knowledge of test takers in English, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":282613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v6i3.1726\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v6i3.1726","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在评估某师范教育机构所使用的大学入学考试(CET)的信度和效度,以评估英语、数学、科学和社会学科的准学生的一般知识和专业知识。Rasch模型被用来分析从250名普通知识测试、122名英语专业测试、74名数学测试、122名科学测试和77名社会研究测试中收集的样本数据。测量分析成分包括人与项目信度、单维度、人-项目图、拟合统计、点测量相关(PTMEA)和项目局部依赖。研究结果表明,部分试题的人信度较差,且题目难度高于学生的能力。也有人担心是否符合单维性标准,建议对可能在测试结构中构成另一个维度的项目进行分析,尽管每个项目都是独立的。此外,有些项目是不拟合或过拟合的Rasch模型。总之,大学英语考试需要改进,以确保其作为大学可靠和有效的选拔工具的质量。研究结果对大学英语考试的优势和劣势提供了重要的见解,可以指导考试开发者修改和改进大学英语考试,以有效地衡量考生在英语、数学、科学和社会研究方面的一般知识和专业知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validation of the teacher education institution’s entrance test using the Rasch model
This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the College Entrance Test (CET) used by a teacher education institution to assess the general and specialization knowledge of prospective students in English, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies. The Rasch model was employed to analyze the data collected from the sample of 250 test takers for the general knowledge test, 122 for specialization in English, 74 for Mathematics, 122 for science and 77 for Social Studies. The measurement analysis components including person and item reliability, unidimensionality, person-item map, fit statistics, Point Measure Correlation (PTMEA) and item local dependence were used. The study findings indicated that some test components had poor person reliability and the degree of item difficulty was higher than the students' abilities. There were also concerns about the conformity to the unidimensionality criteria, suggesting an analysis of items that might form another dimension in the constructs of the tests, although each of the items is independent. Furthermore, some items were misfitting or overfitting the Rasch model. In conclusion, the CET needs improvement to ensure its quality as a reliable and valid selection tool for the college. The study's results provide significant insights into the CET's strengths and weaknesses that can guide the test developers in revising and enhancing the CET to effectively measure the general and specialization knowledge of test takers in English, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Empowering village-owned enterprises: Examining leadership, innovation and government support Development of a quality management monitoring system for social and pedagogical educational programs The impact of an interdisciplinary co-creation teaching model on the design and creative abilities of college students in a smart classroom environment Assessing the impact of green logistics performance on vietnam's export trade to regional comprehensive economic partnership countries Perspective on the consumption of ultra-processed foods among university students
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1