Examples Of Item Analysis

Content validity is achieved when the content of the assessment matches the educational objectives. Criterion validity is demonstrated by the ability of the test to relate to external requirements. Construct validity takes into account the educational variables, such as the native language of the students, to predict the test outcomes. Reliable assessments have consistent results; Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure. A test is considered reliable if we get the same result repeatedly.

All the questions in the cover page are answered and each item assigned a score of between 0 and 4. The raw scale scores are obtained by summing up the scores of the items in the score. Once this is done, the raw scores are transferred to T-scores and percentiles by using the appendix. EDI-3 has T-scores for the three subscales and their composites and these are calculated using an analytical technique that removes any form of irregularities (Cumella, 2006). For the composite scores, the T-scores are summed up and transferred to percentiles. The EDI-3 profile sheet as well as the appendix play a critical role in charting T-scores and

According to the technical manual, Test Validity can be defined as the degree to which empirical evidence and theory support the use and interpretation of the test (Schrank & McGrew, 2001). The main constructs and measures attained by the WJ III are resultant from the Cattell Horn Carrol theory of the cognitive abilities (CHC theory). Content validity, which is how well a test measures the behaviors it was intended to measure, was accompanied through requirement of a master test and cluster-content revision blueprint. Each cluster of the Woodcock- Johnson COG battery was created to heighted the range of validity measurement (Schrank & McGrew, 2001). This was done by providing two qualitatively separate narrow abilities included in the broad ability, as defined by CHC theory. The WJ III ACH was also knowledgeable by CHC theory. In order to strengthen

This also provides flexibility in the analysis of the responses. On the other hand, standardized questionnaire items often represent the least common denominator in assessing people’s attitudes, orientations, circumstances, and experiences. By designing questions that will be appropriate for all respondents, it is possible to miss what is most appropriate to many of the respondents (Babbie, 1992).

Bilker, W. B., Hansen, J. A., Brensinger, C. M., Richard, J., Gur, R. E., & Gur, R. C. (2012). Development of Abbreviated Nine-item Forms of the Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices Test. Assessment, 19(3),

Missing values were replaced by the average of all the other items in that scale for that individual respondent. Analyses were conducted to determine if the mean scores for individual items were significantly different (less than or greater) from zero, the neutral response value—signifying either statistically significant disagreement or agreement with an item, respectively. Next, a factor analysis was performed to determine if similar items clustered together into subscales. Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) and one sample, two-tailed t-tests were calculated for each resulting subscale (Butler, 2010).

For any measure to be valuable in psychological research, it needs to be both valid and reliable (Goodwin, 2008: 128). Research is reliable when more researchers have found the same results, or, within for instance behavioural research, when the same behaviour occurs at several measurements (Goodwin, 2008: 124). There are different types of validity. Firstly, there is construct validity, which measures whether an operationalisation of a construct actually measures what it is supposed to measure. Secondly, criterion validity determines whether a certain phenomenon is related to another phenomenon, and can accurately determine future developments. Lastly, content validity determines whether a test measures all aspects of the construct that is being measured (Goodwin, 2008: 125-126).

When multiple people are given assessments of some kind or are the subjects of some test, then similar people under the same circumstances should lead to scores that are similar or duplicates ("Types Of Reliability", 2011). This is the idea of inter-rater reliability. Another mode of reliability is the administration of the same test among different participants and expecting the same or similar results ("Types Of Reliability", 2011). This is known as Test-retest reliability. This method of measurement might be used to make determinations about the effectiveness of a school exam or personality test ("Types Of Reliability", 2011). Surveys and other methods of research present the appropriate avenues for data collection.

When I asked my friend Tyrone to pick 6-8 items of his choice at random for me to smell and try to guess he decided to pick, Basketball, whopper from burger king, Lime green Gatorade, breezeway crack cookies, apple juice, mouth wash and Irish spring body wash. At the beginning I thought this whole idea of trying to guess the smell of these random objects and naming would be super easy like a walk thought the park you could say but it was a lot harder than I thought even the fact that I was smelling stuff that I was really familiar with I still got only got 2 out of 7 and that was a huge shocker to me. My favorite fast food burger is the whooper from burger king so I wasn’t super surprised that I got that correct I used to eat it like three times a week as kid growing up.

Five major criticism of test The five criticisms of tests are “1) Tests Create Anxiety. 2) Test Categorize and Label Students. 3) Tests Damage Students’ Self-Concepts. 4) Tests Create Self-Fulfilling Prophecies. 5) Consequences on Teaching.” (Miller, Linn, & Gronlund, 2013)

| Based on explicit knowledge and this can be easy and fast to capture and analyse.Results can be generalised to larger populationsCan be repeated – therefore good test re-test reliability and validityStatistical analyses and interpretation are

A percentage of results will be used to check accuracy via inputting means, standard deviations and minimum and maximum scoring of questionnaires, ensuring missing values are categorised correctly. Missing value analysis will be used to identify any trends and managed appropriately. If outliers are identified, transformation, alteration or deletion will commence. The skew and kurtosis will be tested for significance. Tests for homogeneity of variance will be performed and managed appropriately. Descriptive statistics will be obtained followed by between-subjects analyses e.g. ANOVA or MANOVA.

The questionnaires are scored by converting each answer to a numerical equivalent and comparing the totals for each area with the empirically derived cutoff points for that area. The responses yes, sometimes, and not yet are converted to points 10, 5, and 0, respectively describe in the steps below.

Using criterion-related validity, we can get a glimpse into the relationship between test scores and outcomes.

Content validation is most appropriate when there are two few people to form a sample for purposes of criterion-related validation or when criterion measures are either unavailable or of poor quality. Our sample size of 832 is adequate for criterion-related validation and such measures are available. Nevertheless, content validation can be useful.