|
University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy >
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities >
Applied Psychological Measurement >
Volume 03, 1979 >
Please use this permanent URL to cite or link to this item:
http://purl.umn.edu/99940
|
| Title: | Ordering power of separate versus grouped true-false tests: Interaction of type of test with knowledge levels of examinees |
| Authors: | Hsu, Louis M. |
| Issue Date: | 1979 |
| Citation: | Hsu, Louis M. (1979). Ordering power of separate versus grouped true-false tests: Interaction of type of test with knowledge levels of examinees. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 529-536. doi:10.1177/014662167900300409 |
| Abstract: | The ordering power of an objective test was defined
in terms of the probability that this test led to
the correct ranking of examinees. A comparison of
the relative ordering power of separate and
grouped-items true-false (T-F) tests indicated that
neither type of test was uniformly superior to the
other across all levels of knowledge of examinees.
Instead, separate-items T-F tests were found to be
superior in discriminating among examinees with
medium and high levels of knowledge, and
grouped-items T-F tests with two and three items
per cluster were found to be superior for discriminating
among examinees with low levels of
knowledge. These findings do not support blanket
recommendations such as Ebel’s (1978) that "test
constructors should avoid constructing items in
multiple-choice form which are essentially collections
of T-F statements" (p. 43) or that, in general,
"it is better to present such statements as independent
T-F items" (p. 43). Rather, they are
similar to Lord’s (1977) findings concerning the
relative efficiency of multiple-choice tests with different
numbers of options per question for
examinees of differing ability levels. |
| Permanent URL: | http://purl.umn.edu/99940 |
| Appears in Collections: | Volume 03, 1979
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format |
|---|
| v03n4p529.pdf | | 533Kb | PDF | View/Open |
|
Items in the Digital Conservancy are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|
