Improving a Classroom-Based Assessment Test

I. Discuss and answer the following questions based on the given distracter analysis table.

Alternatives
Item Difficulty Discrimination
Group
𝑵= Index (𝒑) Index (𝑫) A B C D Omit
𝟒𝟎
Upper 2 10 ∗5 3
1 0.38 −0.35
Lower 2 0 12 6
Upper 2 ∗4 10 4
2 0.45 −0.50
Lower 5 14 1 0

1. In Item 1, what could a frequency of 10 in option B possibly suggest?

 Proportion of high scoring group is greater than that of the low scoring
group

2. In Item 1, which alternatives need to be revised? Cite your reason for each one and
suggest what could be done.
 The lower group of option B should improve their learning performances
to catch up or at least be equal to the higher group.

3. In Item 2, which alternatives need to be revised? Cite your reason for each one and
suggest what could be done?
 The lower group of option D should improve their learning performances
to catch up or at least be equal to the higher group.

4. Draw a distracter analysis table giving hypothetical frequencies for four alternatives for
a positively discriminating item. Class size is 30.

II. Below are descriptions of procedures done to review and improve items. On the space
provided, write J if a judgmental approach is used and E if empirically-based.

J 1. The Math Coordinator of Grade VII classes examined the periodical tests
prepared by the Math teachers to see if their items are aligned to the target
outcomes for the first quarter.

E 2. The alternatives of the multiple-choice items of the Social Studies test were
reviewed to discover if they have only one correct answer.

E 3. To determine if the items are efficiently discriminating between the more able
students from the less able ones, a Biology teacher obtained the
discrimination index (𝐷) of the items.

Worksheet Assessment in Learning 1

J 4. A Technology Education teacher was interested to see if the criterion-
referenced test he has devised shows a difference in the items’ post-test and
pre-test 𝑝-values.

Worksheet Assessment in Learning 1

 J 5. An English teacher conducted a session with his students to find out if there are
other responses acceptable in their literature test. He encouraged them to
rationalize their answers.

III. This component will test your ability to apply empirical procedures for item-improvement.

1. A final test in Science was administered to a Grade IV class of 50. The teacher wants to
improve further the items for next year’s use. Calculate a quality index that can be used
using the given data and indicate the possible revision needed by some items.

Number getting
Item Index Revision needed to be done
item correct

1 34 0.68 Item 1 has a p value of 0.68. Sixty-

2 18
3 10
4 46
5 8
eight percent (68%) got the item
right while 32% missed it.
0.36 Item 1 has a p value of 0.36. thirty-
six percent (36%) got the item
right while 64% missed it
0.2 Item 1 has a � value of 0.2. Two
percent (2%) got the item right
while 98% missed it
0.92 Item 1 has a � value of 0.92.
Ninety-two percent (92%) got the
item right while 8% missed it.
0.16 Item 1 has a � value of 0.16.
Sixteen percent (16%) got the item
right while 84% missed it.

2. Below are additional data collected for the same items. Calculate another quality
index and indicate what needs to be improved with the obtained index as a basis.

Item Upper Group Lower Group Index Revision needed to be done

1 25 9 0.64 Very good item

2 9 9 0 Poor item, to be rejected or

3 2
4 38
5 1
improved by revision
8 -0.24 Poor item, to be rejected or
improved by revision
8 1.2 Ver good item
7 -0.24 Poor item, to be rejected or
improved by revision

3. A distracter analysis table is given for a test item given to a class of 60. Obtain the
necessary item statistics using the given data.
 Alternatives
Item Difficulty Discrimination
Group
𝑵= Index (𝒑) Index (𝑫) A B *C D Omit
𝟑𝟎

Upper 2 18 5 0
1 0.42 -0.5
Lower 0 10 20 0
 Write your evaluation on the following aspects of the item:

a. Difficulty of the item –

The first table above which is a final test in Science that was administered to a
Grade IV class of 50 shows that the items are somewhat balance when it comes
to level of difficulty. It is not too difficult since the result is not very low. Items
answered correctly and incorrectly by the students reveal that there are things
to improve or items to be revised for a better achievement of high percentage
of test result.
b. Discriminating power of the item –
In the table 2 which was divided into two groups, upper and lower groups, those
who belonged to the upper group answered the items 1 and 4 more than those
from the other one and the proportion of the upper group, which is considered
as high scoring is better than the lower one. This indicates and concludes that
those items are positively discriminating. Even though there were items
answered well by the lower group, still it did not overtake the upper group’s
proportion and another thing is that there is also an item that is not
discriminating which is item 2 where both groups have an equal proportion.
c. Plausibility of options –
The plausibility of options has led to misjudgment of the correct option that is to
be chosen. This might confuse of what item from the table above should be
calculated in order to find the difficulty and discrimination index. It also distracts
when it comes to calculation of both index and could probably lead you to a
wrong answer
d. Ambiguity of the answer –
Perhaps, there is a problem with the items given to the students that is why there
were items which were only answered by few of them or maybe students did
not know the answer and ended up having low scores. Some also have studied
well and during examination they analyz and understand the question first
before coming up to a conclusion or choosing the best one among the options
given, in that way there can be no detected ambiguity in their answer.

Source: De Guzman, E. & Adamos, J. (2015). Assessment of Learning 1. Adriana Publishing Company: Quezon City