Educational and Psychological Measurement, 79(6), 1198–1209. On the Connections Between Item Response Theory and Classical Test Theory: A Note on True Score Evaluation for Polytomous Items via Item Response Modeling. Timss 2015 International Results in Science Saved. Focus Group Discussions (Understanding Qualitative Research).
Proceedings of the 2017 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, FedCSIS 2017, 11, 189–194. Semi-real-time analyses of item characteristics for medical school admission tests. TIMMS 2011 International Result in Science. Focus group interviews as a data collecting strategy. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics): Vol. An Item Bank Calibration Method for a Computer Adaptive Test. Kozierkiewicz-Hetmańska, A., & Poniatowski, R. Applied Psychological Measurement, 40(8), 559–572. Comparison of Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory in Individual Change Assessment.
User’s Manual for the ITEMAN TM Conventional Item Analysis Program. How Many Focus Groups Are Enough? Building an Evidence Base for Nonprobability Sample Sizes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43(2), 113–124. The Effect of Option Homogeneity in Multiple-Choice Items. This shows that examinees from FGD in assessing the level of difficulty of high-level reasoning questions can be the teacher’s choice in schools other than the Iteman program.Īpplegate, G. This means that the estimated level of difficulty of the FGD examinees has a similarity with the output of the Iteman program from the response data of the FGD examinees. The results showed that the average level of difficulty in the FGD approach had significant similarity with the average level of difficulty in the output of the Iteman program approach. The comparative of difficulty level using Scheffe test with a significance level of 0.05. Each FGD consisted of four people, one teacher and three students of class VIII. The study used a quantitative-comparative approach involving 79 FGDs of students and teachers of SMP/MTs in Soppeng Regency. The estimation of the FGD approach uses a semantic differential scale on a scale of 1-7, while the Iteman program uses version 4.0. This study aims to estimate the difficulty level of high-level reasoning math problems by comparing the estimated difficulty level of the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) approach and the Iteman program.