Item validity vs. item discrimination index: a redundancy?

Panjaitan, Regina Lichteria; Irawati, Riana; Sujana, Atep; Hanifah, Nurdinah; Djuanda, Dadan

doi:10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012101

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most important indices are discrimination and difficulty indices. The DF shows the ability of a question to differentiate between a higher-and a lower-ability student [19][20][21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrimination Power of Short Essay Questions Versus Multiple Choice Questions as an Assessment Tool in Clinical Biochemistry

Eldakhakhny¹,

Elsamanoudy²

2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessment is fundamental to the educational process. Multiple choice questions (MCQs) and short essay questions (SEQs) are the most widely used assessment method in medical school. The current study evaluated the discriminating value of SEQs compared to MCQs as assessment tools in clinical biochemistry and correlated undergraduate students' SEQ scores with their overall scores during the academic years 2021-2022 and 2022-2023. This is a descriptive-analytical study in which MCQ and SEQ papers of clinical biochemistry were analyzed. The mean score for SEQs in males was 66.7 ± 1.2 and for females it was 64.0 ± 1.1 SEM, with a p-value of 0.09; for MCQs, the mean score for males was 68.5 ± 0.9 SEM and for females it was 72.6 ± 0.8. When analyzing the difficulty index (DI) and discrimination factor (DF) of the questions, MCQs have a mean DI of 0.70 ± 0.01,and DF of 0.05 to 0.6. SEQs have a mean DI of 0.73 ± 0.03 and DF of 0.68 ± 0.01; there was a significant difference between the DF of MCQs and SEQs (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, there was a significant difference between SEQs and MCQs when categorizing students based on their scores, except for A-scored students. According to the current study, SEQs have a higher discriminating ability than MCQs and help differentiate high-achieving students from low-achieving students.

show abstract

“…The most important indices are discrimination and difficulty indices. The DF shows the ability of a question to differentiate between a higher-and a lower-ability student [19][20][21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrimination Power of Short Essay Questions Versus Multiple Choice Questions as an Assessment Tool in Clinical Biochemistry

Eldakhakhny¹,

Elsamanoudy²

2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The discrimination index is a measure of how the good students are doing versus the poor students on a question and is given by [33,34]. In this study, the discrimination index was used to find the correlation between the score for individual questions and the score for the whole quiz and was calculated based on the following equation:…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Reimagined Approach to Promote the Use of Moodle in Teaching and Learning of First-Year Students

Nekhubvi,

Pearce,

Matsilele

et al. 2023

Reimagining Education - The Role of E-Learning, Creativity, and Technology in the Post-Pandemic Era

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teaching and learning in the contemporary era require technological or digital advancement. Various learning technologies offer a wide range of opportunities to enhance effective engagements between lecturers and students in institutions of higher learning. Consequently, this study explored the understanding of higher institutions in maximising the use of digital teaching and learning strategies to foster student success. In addition, the researchers investigated the proper provisioning of digital tools to successfully utilise online learning platforms. A total of 239 Science Foundation Students in the 2021 cohort participated in this study. A questionnaire with open and closed-ended questions regarding the availability of gadgets, university data provisions and network connectivity was administered. Results of this study revealed that 95 students had laptops while the rest used their smartphones, 52 students received university data during the investigation period and 186 managed to connect to the Internet mostly by utilising the university’s free Wi-Fi. These findings have significant implications for the development of effective planning prior to the implementation of digital teaching and learning. Furthermore, results showed reasonable students’ engagement regarding viewing quiz questions from the Modular Object-Orientated Dynamic Learning Environment (Moodle) platform and an infectiveness for the report posting exercises.

show abstract

“…The internal consistency coefficients and 95% confidence intervals for the three factors were all acceptable (Cortina, 1993) The item statistics of the finalized CCI-PT is presented in Table 3. Given the size of our sample, we chose a traditional method for calculating the item discrimination index (d) (Panjaitan, Irawati, Sujana, Hanifah, & Djuanda, 2018). Scores indicated that all items discriminated between the highest scorers and lowest scorers on the scale (all d's > .0, see Table 3).…”

Section: Efamentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Initial Validation of Cultural Competence Inventory–Preservice Teachers

Yang

Cox

Cho

2019

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the critical role of emotions in multicultural teacher education, no attempt has been made to develop an instrument including affect as a dimension in measuring cultural competence for preservice teachers. To bridge this gap, the present three-study research used three distinct samples of 456 preservice teachers to develop and estimate the reliability of scores and validity of inferences for Cultural Competence Inventory–Preservice Teachers (CCI-PT), an 18-item instrument including three subscales: emotional cultural competence (ECC), behavioral cultural competence (BCC), and cognitive cultural competence (CCC). The three-factor model was supported using exploratory factor analysis ( N = 203) in Study 1 and confirmatory factor analyses ( N = 199) in Study 2. Correlation results provided preliminary evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of CCI-PT in Study 1, and regression results in Study 3 ( N = 113) provided initial evidence of predictive validity of inference for the instrument. Further, the scores of cultural competence assessed through three independent studies also provided initial evidence of the reliability of CCI-PT.

show abstract

Item validity vs. item discrimination index: a redundancy?

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Discrimination Power of Short Essay Questions Versus Multiple Choice Questions as an Assessment Tool in Clinical Biochemistry

Discrimination Power of Short Essay Questions Versus Multiple Choice Questions as an Assessment Tool in Clinical Biochemistry

The Reimagined Approach to Promote the Use of Moodle in Teaching and Learning of First-Year Students

Development and Initial Validation of Cultural Competence Inventory–Preservice Teachers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About