Mabalacat City College

INSTITUTE OF ARTS, SCIENCES AND TEACHER EDUCATION

Mabalacat City, Pampanga

PCK 104 – Assessment of Learning 1

2 nd Semester A.Y. 2019-2020

INDIVIDUAL
ITEM AND
OPTION
ANALYSIS
SUBMITTED BY:

Alona Ramos
2nd Year, Bachelor of Elementary Education

SUBMITTED TO:

Ma’am Irene Christy M. Bacolod

DATE OF SUBMISSION:
SEPTEMBER 3,2020

1
 Mabalacat City College
INSTITUTE OF ARTS, SCIENCES AND TEACHER EDUCATION
Mabalacat City, Pampanga

TEMPLATE FOR INDIVIDUAL ITEM ANALYSIS

PCK104- ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING 1
2nd Semester A.Y. 2019-2020

Name:Ramos, Alona Date Submitted: September 3, 2020

Course and Major: IASTE-Bachelor of Elementary Education

Test Number of Proportion of Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index and Evaluation of Each Item

Item Students in Students in the

Number Upper and Upper & Lower

Lower Group Group Per Item

Upper Lower PU PL Difficulty Interpretation Discrimination Interpretation Evaluation

Group Group Index Index

n=3 n=3

1
2 2 0.67 0.67 0.67 Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject
limited acceptability
2
2 2 0.67 0.67 0.67 Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject
limited acceptability
3
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject
limited acceptability
4
3 1 1 0.34 0.67 Easy 0.66 High discrimination and Retain
acceptable
5
2 2 0.67 0.67 0.67 Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject
limited acceptability
6
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject
limited acceptability
7
3 1 1 0.34 0.67  Easy 0.66 High discrimination and Retain 
acceptable 
8
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33  Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable
9
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable 
10
3 1 1 0.34 0.67  Easy 0.66  High discrimination and Retain
acceptable
11
3 2 1 0.67 0.84 Very Easy 0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable 
12
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable 
13
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable 
14
3 2 1 0.67 0.84 Very Easy  0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable 
15
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy  0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
16
3 3 1 1 1  Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
17
3 2 1 0.67 0.84 Very Easy  0.33  Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable
18
2 2 0.67 0.67 0.67 Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
19
3 2 1 0.67 0.84 Very Easy 0.33  Moderate discrimination Reject
and acceptable
20
3 3 1 1 1  Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
21
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy  0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
22
3 3 1 1 1  Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
23
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable
2
24
3 3 1 1 1  Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
25
2 3 0.67 1 0.84  Very Easy -0.33 Low discrimination and Reject
limited acceptability
26
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33  Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable
27
3 3 1 1 1  Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
28
3 3 1 1 1  Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
29
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy  0  Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
30
3 1 1 0.34 0.67 Easy 0.66  High discrimination and Retain
acceptable
31
2 3 0.67 1 0.84  Very Easy -0.33  Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
32
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy  0  Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
33
2 2 0.67 0.67 0.67 Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
34
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy  0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
35
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy  0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
36
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable
37
3 3 1 1 1 Very Easy  0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptability
38
3 2 1 0.67 0.84  Very Easy 0.33  Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable
39
3 2 1 0.67 0.84 Very Easy  0.33 Moderate discrimination Reject 
and acceptable
40
3 3 1 1 1  Very Easy 0 Low discrimination and Reject 
limited acceptably

3
Documentation (Test Paper, Item Analysis)

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Documentation (Process of the Activity)

13
14
We have distributed the test papers through our group chat.

15
16
 Reflection

My experience in self- learning the lesson is very challenging yet fulfilling. Challenging because I'm

the one who will figure out what will do each of the time, but ofcourse our instructor is very much willing

to help if we have questions in mind. Then, every time I follow the instructions given on our lecture by

myself after determine the answer, it makes me more interested and gives me the feeling of fulfilment.

In the process, I'm slowly realizing the importance of what I'm doing. From checking the test

papers then arranging them from lowest to highest. Next ascertain the said to be upper group and lower

group following the steps of an item analysis. Honestly I’ve repeated the procedure because the “n” that

I’ve used was wrong. I thought the “n” will be from the 1/3 of the total test paper that I have for the item

analysis. But I’ve realized that the test papers that I have was already a portion to the whole test papers

we have as a group on our past past activity.So,I did the item analysis again.

I did not do the option analysis because there's no item to be revised and they are mostly rejected

on the decision table. This decision was based on the discrimination and difficulty index of an item. I

supposed, in order to have an effective test questionairre there should be more retainable/ acceptable

items than other decisions. Where an item will be concluded as retain or accept if the difficulty index are

easy, moderately difficult, and difficult with a discrimination index of high discriminating. I've learned that

difficulty index determines the proportion of students who answer an item correctly. While the

discrimination index calculates the difference between those students who score well and those who score

poorly. This means, the two should be balanced to have a good item. I believe, if a lot of students will

miss an item then the teacher should review it's content to the class. And discarding or improving bad

items based on the item analysis may make the scores of the students more reliable and valid.

I guess, this type of learning is not that bad. But ofcourse it may be more effective if it is taught

personally by our instructor but due to our current situation which I understand is very risky to do so.

Because of this I've researched and read a lot. I hope I will not forget this analysis, because as a future

educator it will surely ameliorate my skills on designing an effective test paper. I surmise, improving the

items on a test questionnaire will improve the overall quality of the test. So, learning from your mistakes

is the moral of this lesson and activity.

17
References:

[1] https://www.geneseo.edu › sitesPDF

Web results
Chapter 6: Item Analysis for Teachers

[2] www.specialconnections.ku.edu › it...

Web results
Assessment/Quality Test Construction/Teacher Tools/Item ...

18