SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2014 / Sayı: 29

THE ANALYSIS OF LARGE SCALE TESTS APPLIED IN TURKEY IN TERMS OF THEIR MULTIDIMENSIONALITY

TÜRKİYE'DE UYGULANAN GENİŞ ÖLÇEKLİ TESTLERİN ÇOK BOYUTLULUĞUNUN ANALİZİ

YEŞİM ÖZER ÖZKAN
MELTEM ACAR GÜVENDİR
Pages
31–47
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result of the hypothesis test it was found that all the subtests in ÖBBS 2002, 2005, and 2008 were multidimensional.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The methods that empirically evaluate test structure need to primarily provide information about test dimensionality and other structural characteristics.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The data in this study is obtained from the responses provided for the Turkish, Mathematics, Science and Technology, and Social Sciences tests in ÖBBS 2002.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the hypothesis test it was found that all the subtests in ÖBBS 2002, 2005, and 2008 were multidimensional.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2002 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The methods that empirically evaluate test structure need to primarily provide information about test dimensionality and other structural characteristics. Test dimensionality has a direct impact on a test's structure validity, score calculation, and result recording. The purpose of this study is to identify the dimensions of four subtests that constitute the parts of Evaluation of Student Achievement Test (ÖBBS) by using DIMTEST T statistics which is a nonparametric multidimensionality method. This study is a descriptive one. The data in this study is obtained from the responses provided for the Turkish, Mathematics, Science and Technology, and Social Sciences tests in ÖBBS 2002. In order to test the multidimensionality of the data DIMTEST T statistics was used. As a result of the hypothesis test it was found that all the subtests in ÖBBS 2002, 2005, and 2008 were multidimensional. When the skills that are necessary to solve the questions in cognitive tests are considered, it can be noticed that unidimensionality was not established.

Özet

Test yapısını ampirik olarak değerlendiren yöntemler öncelikle testin boyutluluğu olmak üzere bazı yapısal özellikler hakkında bilgi sağlamalıdır. Test boyutluluğu testin yapı geçerliliği, test puanlarının hesaplanması ve raporlanması üzerinde doğrudan bir etkiye sahiptir. Bu çalışmanın amacı Öğrenci Başarılarının Belirlenmesi Sınavının (ÖBBS) dört alt testinin boyutlarını parametrik olmayan çok boyutluluk yöntemlerinden DIMTEST T istatistiği kullanılarak belirlemektir. Araştırma betimsel türde temel bir çalışmadır. Araştırmanın verileri 2002, 2005 ve 2008 yılı ÖBBS'nin Türkçe, matematik, fen ve teknoloji, sosyal bilgiler ve İngilizce testlerine verilen yanıtlardan elde edilmiştir. Bu çalışma kapsamında verinin boyutlu olup olmadığının test edilmesi amaçlandığı için DIMTEST T istatistiği kullanılmıştır. Hipotez testi sonucu 2002, 2005 ve 2008 de uygulanan ÖBBS'nin tüm alt testlerinin çok boyutlu olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bilişsel testlerde yer alan soruları çözmek için gerekli olan beceriler düşünüldüğünde, tek boyutluluğun sağlanamadığı görülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZKAN, Y. Ö., GÜVENDİR, M. A. (2014). THE ANALYSIS OF LARGE SCALE TESTS APPLIED IN TURKEY IN TERMS OF THEIR MULTIDIMENSIONALITY. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı: 29, 31–47. https://ajindex.com/articles/276037

References (6)

  1. Ackerman, T.A. (1989). Unidimensional IRT calibration of compensatory and noncompensatory multidimensional items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 113- 127. Ackerman T.A. (1994). Using multidimensional item response theory to understand what items and tests are measuring. Applied Measurement In Education, 7(4), 255-278.
  2. Adams, R. J., Wilson, M., & Wang, W.C. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 1-23.
  3. Ansley, T.N. & Forsyth, R.A. (1985). An examination of the characteristics of unidimensional IRT parameter estimates derived from two-dimensional data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 37-48. Balàzs, K., Hidegkuti, I., & De Boeck, P.(2006). Heterogeneity in logistic regression models. Applied Psychological Measurement. Volume 30 Number 4 July. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çokluk, Ö. ve Köklü, N. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik (6. baskı). Ankara: Pegem A yayınevi Tic. Ltd. Şti. Camilli, G.,Wang, M., & Fesq, J. (1995). The effects of dimensionality on equating the law school admission test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32(1), 79-96.
  4. Douglas, J., Kim, H. R., Roussos, L., Stout, W., & Zhang, J. (1999). LSAT Dimensionality analysis for the december 1991, june 1992, and october 1992 administrations [Law School Admission Council Statistical Report 95-05].
  5. Drasgow, F. & Parsons, C.K. (1983). Application of Unidimensional item response theory models to multidimensional data. Applied Psychological Measurement,7,189-199.
  6. Elias, S., Hattie, J., & Douglas, G. (1998). An assessment of various ıtem response model and structural equation model fit ındices to detect unidimensionality. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA. Froelich, A.G. (2001). A new bias correction method for DIMTEST. Unpublished manuscript. Froelich, A. G. & Habing B. (2003). Conditional covariance based subtest selection for DIMTEST. ın william stout ınstitute for measurement, dımtest version 2.0[software manual]. Urbana-Champaign, IL: William Stout Institute for Measurement. Gao, F. (1997). DIMTEST Enhancements and some parametric IRT asymptotics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Hambleton, R. K. & Swaminathan H. (1985). Item response theory: principlesand application. Kluwer, Nijhoff Publishing a Member of Kluwer Academic Publisher Group. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan H., & Rogers, H.J. (1991). Fundament