SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 1

Psychometric Characteristics of a Test and Individualized Feedback via DINA Model: TIMSS 2015

Sinem ŞENFERAH
Mahmut Sami KOYUNCU
Ayşenur ERDEMİR
Pages
103–120
Publication Date
2022-11-04
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)

In addition, it can be used to give detailed individualized feedback to students, which is different from CTT and IRT.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of the study is to show how to use DINA model in defining psychometric characteristics of a test and giving students individualized feedback.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The data of the study is taken from multiple-choice items in booklet-1 of eighth graders’ mathematics test of TIMSS 2015 Turkey sample. 435 students took booklet-1.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, it can be used to give detailed individualized feedback to students, which is different from CTT and IRT.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of the study is to show how to use DINA model in defining psychometric characteristics of a test and giving students individualized feedback. The data of the study is taken from multiple-choice items in booklet-1 of eighth graders’ mathematics test of TIMSS 2015 Turkey sample. 435 students took booklet-1. The parameters of DINA model were estimated via R Studio and interpreted by comparing with CTT and IRT parameters. Additionally, diagnostic profile report example for individualized feedback was constructed. The result of the study shows that DINA model has a good fit (SRMSR, MADcor, MADQ3, MADaQ3, and RMSEA < 0.05). The parameters of DINA model are similar to those of CTT and IRT. The reliability values of DINA, CTT and IRT are (Pc)=0.913, KR-20=0.80 and marginal reliability=0.70, respectively. Thus, reliability of DINA model is bigger than the others’ values. As a result, it is suggested that DINA model can be used to report psychometric characteristics of a test. In addition, it can be used to give detailed individualized feedback to students, which is different from CTT and IRT.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENFERAH, S., KOYUNCU, M. S., ERDEMİR, A. (2022). Psychometric Characteristics of a Test and Individualized Feedback via DINA Model: TIMSS 2015. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 1, 103–120. https://ajindex.com/articles/623218

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Awopeju, O. A. ve Afolabi, E. R. I. (2016). Comparative analysis of classical test theory and item response theory based item parameter estimates of senior school certificate mathematics examination. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 12(28). de Ayala, R. J. (2009). Theory and practice of item response theory. Guilford Publications. de la Torre, J. ve Douglas, J. (2004). Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis. Psychometrika, 69 (3), 333-353. de la Torre, J. (2007). Evaluation of model fit in a large-scale assessment application of cognitive diagnosis. In Presentation at the annual meeting of the national council on measurement in education, Chicago, IL. de la Torre, J. (2009). DINA model and parameter estimation: A didactic. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 34, 115-130. de la Torre, J. (2011). The generalized DINA model framework. Psychometrika, 76(2), 179-199. de La Torre, J. ve Minchen, N. (2014). Cognitively diagnostic assessments and the cognitive diagnosis model framework. Psicología Educativa, 20(2), 89-97.
  2. DiBello, L. V., Roussos, L. A. ve Stout, W. F. (2007). Review of cognitively diagnostic assessment and a summary of psychometric models. In C. R. Rao ve S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of statistics. Volume 26: Psychometrics (pp. 979-1030).
  3. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. Ebel, R.L. ve Frisbie, D.A. (2009). Essentials Of Educational Measurement (5th ed.). New Delhi: Prentice- Hall Of India Pvt. Limited. Embretson, S. (1984). A general latent trait model for response processes. Psychometrika, 49(2), 175- 186. doi: 10.1007/BF02294171 Embretson, S.E. (1997). Multicomponent response models. In: van der Linden,W.J., Hambleton, R.L. (Eds.), Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. New York: Springer, pp. 305–321.
  4. George, A. C. ve Robitzsch, A. (2015). Cognitive diagnosis models in R: A didactic. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 11(3), 189-205.
  5. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H. ve Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. London: Sage. Hartz, S., Roussos, L. ve Stout, W. (2002). Skills diagnosis: Theory and practice. User Manual for Arpeggio software. ETS. Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  6. Jang, E. E. (2005). A validity narrative: Effects of reading skills diagnosis on teaching and learning in the context of N