Development of an Item Bank of Order and Graph by Applying Multidimensional Item Response Theory

Somprasong Senarat, Sombat Tayraukham, Chatsiri Piyapimonsit, Sakesan Tongkhambanjong

Abstract


This study aimed to develop an item bank of Order and Graph of Mattayomsuksa 1 level (grade 7). The samples were 4,800 lower secondary students from 34 schools in northeastern area of Thailand, academic year 2011 chosen through multi-stage random sampling. The research tool used in the study was a multiple choicetest of an Order and Graph lesson by applying multidimensional item response theory. Parameter were analyzed by confi rmatory factor analysis by applying multidimensional normalogive model with guessing of the program normalogive harmonic analysis robust method (NOHARM). Discrimination power and Easiness intercept were equated through non–orthogonal procrustes method. The study results indicated that there were 59 items out of 140 passed the test standard.

Key words: Item bank; Cognitive process; Multidimensional item response theory (MIRT)


Keywords


Item bank; Cognitive process; Multidimensional item response theory (MIRT)

References


Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., … Wittrock, M.C. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Abridged ed.). New York: Longman.

Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook on I: Cognitive Domian. New York: David MCkay.

Bock, R.D., & Schilling, S.G. (2003). IRT Based Item Factor Analysis. In M. du Toit (Ed.) IRT from SSI: BILOG-MG, MULTILOG, PARSCALE, TESTFACT (pp. 584-591). Lincolnwood, Illinois: Scientific Software International.

Dechri, P., & Kamparasiri, K. (2009). Trends in International Mathematics Study 2007. Nontaburi: Sahamit Printing and Publishing.

Embretson, S.E., & Reise, S.P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Frey, A., & Seitz, N.N. (2009). Multidimensional Adaptive Testing in Educational and Psychological Measurement: Current State and Future Challenges. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35, 89-94.

Haberman, S. (2008). When can Subscores Have Value? Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 33(2), 204-229.

Kanjanawasri, S. (2007). Modern Test Theories (3rd ed.). Bangkok: The Printing Press of Chulalongkorn Univesrity.

Kanjanawasri, S. (2009). Classical Test Theory (6th ed.). Bangkok: The Printing Press of Chulalongkorn Univesrity.

McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Parshall, C.G., Davey, T., & Pashley, P.J. (2002). Innovative Item Types for Computerized Testing. In W. J. van der Linden & C.A.W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized Adaptive Testing: Theory and Practice (pp. 129-148). Netherlands: Kluwer.

Reckase, M.D., & Martineau, J.A. (2004, October). The Vertical Scaling of Science Achievement Tests. Paper Commissioned by the Committee on Test Design for K-12 Science Achievement Center for Education National Research Councile. Retrieved from http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/Vertical%20Scaling.pdf

Reckase, M.D., & McKinley, R.L. (1991) The Discriminating Power of Items That Measure More than One Dimension. Applied psychological Measurement, 15(4), 361-373.

Reckase, M.D. (2009). Multidimensional Item Response Theory. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.

Rupp, A.A., & Templin, J. (2008a). Unique Characteristics of Diagnostic Classification Models: A Comprehensive Review of the Current State-of-the-Art. Measurement, 6(4), 219-262.

Rupp, A.A. & Templin, J. (2008b). The Effects of Q- matrix Misspecification on Parameter Estimates and Misclassification Rates in the Dina Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(1), 78-96.

Samejima, F. (1974). Normal Ogive Model on the Continuous Response Level in the Multidimensional Latent Space. Psychometrika, 39(1), 111-121 .

Sinharay, S., Haberman, S., & Puhan, G. (2007). Subscores Based on Classical Test Theory: to Report or not to Report. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(4), 21-28.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968%2Fj.css.1923669720120804.1263

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Reminder

If you have already registered in Journal A and plan to submit article(s) to Journal B, please click the CATEGORIES, or JOURNALS A-Z on the right side of the "HOME".


We only use three mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; css@cscanada.net; css@cscanada.org

Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture

Address: 730, 77e AV, Laval, Quebec, H7V 4A8, Canada

Telephone: 1-514-558 6138

Http://www.cscanada.net Http://www.cscanada.org

E-mail:css@cscanada.net, css@cscanada.org