Evaluating knowledge levels of students with a Computerized Adaptive Test

Mustafa Yağci
{"title":"Evaluating knowledge levels of students with a Computerized Adaptive Test","authors":"Mustafa Yağci","doi":"10.51535/tell.1280384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study aims to develop and evaluate a CAT system for multiple-choice success tests. In this regard the measurement results obtained from the CAT system based on Item Response Theory (IRT) and the test mode based on the Classical Test Theory (CTT) were compared in terms of the knowledge level of the students, reliability of measurement and number of items. The study was conducted on 873 students from a state-university in Turkey. The research took three years three years and involved three phases. According to the findings of the present study, with the developed CAT system, academic success levels of the students were determined with very high reliability. When all the items in the test were scored according to both constructs, the relationship between the scores obtained was found to be high and meaningful in a positive direction. Moreover, there is a high, positive, significant relationship between students’ levels of knowledge that are estimated in CAT systems and the score of an achievement test they received from a Paper & Pencil test. Finally, the number of questions the students were exposed to in the CAT system was reduced by 50% compared to the test based on the CTT.","PeriodicalId":489120,"journal":{"name":"Journal of teacher education and lifelong learning","volume":"50 50","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of teacher education and lifelong learning","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1280384","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

The present study aims to develop and evaluate a CAT system for multiple-choice success tests. In this regard the measurement results obtained from the CAT system based on Item Response Theory (IRT) and the test mode based on the Classical Test Theory (CTT) were compared in terms of the knowledge level of the students, reliability of measurement and number of items. The study was conducted on 873 students from a state-university in Turkey. The research took three years three years and involved three phases. According to the findings of the present study, with the developed CAT system, academic success levels of the students were determined with very high reliability. When all the items in the test were scored according to both constructs, the relationship between the scores obtained was found to be high and meaningful in a positive direction. Moreover, there is a high, positive, significant relationship between students’ levels of knowledge that are estimated in CAT systems and the score of an achievement test they received from a Paper & Pencil test. Finally, the number of questions the students were exposed to in the CAT system was reduced by 50% compared to the test based on the CTT.
利用计算机适应性测试评估学生的知识水平
本研究旨在开发和评估用于多项选择成功测验的计算机辅助测验系统。为此,从学生的知识水平、测量可靠性和项目数量等方面,对基于项目反应理论(IRT)的计算机辅助测试系统和基于经典测试理论(CTT)的测试模式得出的测量结果进行了比较。研究对象是土耳其一所国立大学的 873 名学生。研究历时三年,分三个阶段进行。本研究的结果表明,使用开发的计算机辅助学习系统,学生学业成功水平的确定具有很高的可靠性。当测试中的所有项目都根据这两个构念进行评分时,发现所得分数之间的关系很高,且呈正向意义。此外,CAT 系统估算的学生知识水平与他们从纸笔测验中获得的成就测验分数之间也有很高的、积极的、有意义的关系。最后,与基于 CTT 的测试相比,学生在 CAT 系统中接触到的问题数量减少了 50%。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书