Klasik Test Kuramı’na ve Madde Tepki Kuramı’na Dayalı Test Eşitleme Yöntemlerinin Karşılaştırılması

Ceren MUTLUER, Mehtap ÇAKAN
{"title":"Klasik Test Kuramı’na ve Madde Tepki Kuramı’na Dayalı Test Eşitleme Yöntemlerinin Karşılaştırılması","authors":"Ceren MUTLUER, Mehtap ÇAKAN","doi":"10.19171/uefad.1325587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to decide the equating method with the least equating error by using the equating methods in Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory. In this study, booklet 1 and booklet 3 data were used for PISA 2012 Mathematics test. For this study, data from Turkey, Indonesia, Shanghai/China and Finland countries participating in PISA 2012 were selected. Linear equating methods (Tucker (w1=1, w1=0.5), Levine observed score (w1=1, w1=0.5), Levine true score, Classical Congeneric and Braun-Holland), equipercentile equating methods (pre smoothing according to C6 polynomial degree, beta4, post smoothing according to S 0.05 cubic function, frequency estimation (w1=1, w1=0.5)) were used in the study. In Classical Test Theory, the least error is obtained from the frequency estimation method with a synthetic universe weight of w1 = 0.5. For the Item Response Theory, the calibration method was first decided and this method is the Stocking-Lord method. In Item Response Theory, it was decided that the true and observed equating methods were equated with the least errors in the IRT true score equating method. When the theories are compared, the actual score equating method based on the IRT method is the recommended equating method with the least equating errors.","PeriodicalId":186052,"journal":{"name":"Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1325587","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aims to decide the equating method with the least equating error by using the equating methods in Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory. In this study, booklet 1 and booklet 3 data were used for PISA 2012 Mathematics test. For this study, data from Turkey, Indonesia, Shanghai/China and Finland countries participating in PISA 2012 were selected. Linear equating methods (Tucker (w1=1, w1=0.5), Levine observed score (w1=1, w1=0.5), Levine true score, Classical Congeneric and Braun-Holland), equipercentile equating methods (pre smoothing according to C6 polynomial degree, beta4, post smoothing according to S 0.05 cubic function, frequency estimation (w1=1, w1=0.5)) were used in the study. In Classical Test Theory, the least error is obtained from the frequency estimation method with a synthetic universe weight of w1 = 0.5. For the Item Response Theory, the calibration method was first decided and this method is the Stocking-Lord method. In Item Response Theory, it was decided that the true and observed equating methods were equated with the least errors in the IRT true score equating method. When the theories are compared, the actual score equating method based on the IRT method is the recommended equating method with the least equating errors.
基于经典测验理论和项目反应理论的测验均衡化方法比较
本研究旨在运用经典测试理论和项目反应理论中的方程方法,确定方程误差最小的方程方法。在本研究中,小册子1和小册子3的数据用于PISA 2012数学测试。在这项研究中,来自土耳其、印度尼西亚、上海/中国和芬兰参加2012年PISA的国家的数据被选中。采用线性方程法(Tucker (w1=1, w1=0.5)、Levine观察评分法(w1=1, w1=0.5)、Levine真实评分法、Classical Congeneric法和Braun-Holland法)、等位数方程法(按C6多项式次预平滑、bet4、按s0.05三次函数后平滑、频率估计法(w1=1, w1=0.5))。在经典测试理论中,合成宇宙权值w1 = 0.5的频率估计方法误差最小。对于项目反应理论,首先确定了标定方法,该方法为stockinglord法。在项目反应理论中,IRT真值相等法中判定真值相等法和观察值相等法误差最小。在理论对比中,基于IRT法的实际计分方法是推荐的计分误差最小的计分方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信