职业学校会计测试工具质量与学生会计学习能力分析

Nur Ichsanuddin Achmad Kurniawan, S. Munadi
{"title":"职业学校会计测试工具质量与学生会计学习能力分析","authors":"Nur Ichsanuddin Achmad Kurniawan, S. Munadi","doi":"10.21831/PEP.V23I1.22484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study is aimed at describing: (1) characteristics of the items of the national examination try-out test of the accounting subject matter in the 2015/2016 academic year on classical test theory and modern test theory; and (2) classification of students’ masteries in the learning of accounting. The study is explorative research. Analyses are conducted using the classical and modern test theories for item characteristics and descriptive quantitative for students’ masteries in accounting using the test set for the national examination try-out in the 2015/2016 academic year. A total of 414 students do the Package A test. Results show that (1) based on the classical test analyses, a number of 11 items (27.5%) belong to the “easy” category, 22 items (55%) “medium” category, and 7 items (17.5%) “difficult” category allowing a total of 19 (47.5%) to be categorized as good items; meanwhile, on the modern-theory analyses, a total of 34 items (85%) belong to the “good” category. (2) Around 38% of the students have competencies of the medium and low categories. Most students have difficulty in answering questions of the higher-order thinking levels.  ","PeriodicalId":33364,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of the quality of test instrument and students’ accounting learning competencies at vocational school\",\"authors\":\"Nur Ichsanuddin Achmad Kurniawan, S. Munadi\",\"doi\":\"10.21831/PEP.V23I1.22484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study is aimed at describing: (1) characteristics of the items of the national examination try-out test of the accounting subject matter in the 2015/2016 academic year on classical test theory and modern test theory; and (2) classification of students’ masteries in the learning of accounting. The study is explorative research. Analyses are conducted using the classical and modern test theories for item characteristics and descriptive quantitative for students’ masteries in accounting using the test set for the national examination try-out in the 2015/2016 academic year. A total of 414 students do the Package A test. Results show that (1) based on the classical test analyses, a number of 11 items (27.5%) belong to the “easy” category, 22 items (55%) “medium” category, and 7 items (17.5%) “difficult” category allowing a total of 19 (47.5%) to be categorized as good items; meanwhile, on the modern-theory analyses, a total of 34 items (85%) belong to the “good” category. (2) Around 38% of the students have competencies of the medium and low categories. Most students have difficulty in answering questions of the higher-order thinking levels.  \",\"PeriodicalId\":33364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21831/PEP.V23I1.22484\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21831/PEP.V23I1.22484","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

本研究旨在描述:(1)2015/2016学年会计科目国家考试试考经典测试理论与现代测试理论的项目特点;(2)学生在会计学习中掌握程度的分类。这是一项探索性研究。利用2015/2016学年全国统考试考集,运用经典和现代测试理论对会计专业学生掌握的项目特征和描述性定量进行分析。总共有414名学生做A包测试。结果表明:(1)在经典测试分析基础上,有11个题项(27.5%)属于“易”类,22个题项(55%)属于“中”类,7个题项(17.5%)属于“难”类,总共有19个题项(47.5%)属于“好”类;同时,在现代理论分析中,共有34项(85%)属于“好”范畴。(2)约38%的学生具有中低类能力。大多数学生在回答高阶思维水平的问题时有困难。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analysis of the quality of test instrument and students’ accounting learning competencies at vocational school
The study is aimed at describing: (1) characteristics of the items of the national examination try-out test of the accounting subject matter in the 2015/2016 academic year on classical test theory and modern test theory; and (2) classification of students’ masteries in the learning of accounting. The study is explorative research. Analyses are conducted using the classical and modern test theories for item characteristics and descriptive quantitative for students’ masteries in accounting using the test set for the national examination try-out in the 2015/2016 academic year. A total of 414 students do the Package A test. Results show that (1) based on the classical test analyses, a number of 11 items (27.5%) belong to the “easy” category, 22 items (55%) “medium” category, and 7 items (17.5%) “difficult” category allowing a total of 19 (47.5%) to be categorized as good items; meanwhile, on the modern-theory analyses, a total of 34 items (85%) belong to the “good” category. (2) Around 38% of the students have competencies of the medium and low categories. Most students have difficulty in answering questions of the higher-order thinking levels.  
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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