의학전문대학원의 임상과목 지필시험에서 변별도 지수들과 라쉬모형에 의한 문항반응이론의 비교
A Comparison between Discrimination Indices and Item‐Response Theory Using the Rasch Model in a Clinical Course Written Examination of a Medical School
2
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: The reliability of test is determined by each items' characteristics. Item analysis is achieved by classical test theory and item response theory. The purpose of the study was to compare the discrimination indices with item response theory using the Rasch model. Methods: Thirty‐one 4th‐year medical school students participated in the clinical course written examination, which included 22A‐type items and 3 R‐type items. Point biserial correlation coefficient (Cpbs) was compared to method of extreme group (D), biserial correlation coefficient (Cbs), item‐total correlation coefficient (Cit), and corrected item‐total correlation coeffcient (Ccit). Rasch model was applied to estimate item difficulty and examinee's ability and to calculate item fit statistics using joint maximum likelihood. Results: Explanatory power (r2) of Cpbs is decreased in the following order: Ccit (1.00), Cit (0.99), Cbs (0.94), and D (0.45). The ranges of difficulty logit and standard error and ability logit and standard error were -0.82 to 0.80 and 0.37 to 0.76, -3.69 to 3.19 and 0.45 to 1.03, respectively. Item 9 and 23 have outfit ≥1.3. Student 1, 5, 7, 18, 26, 30, and 32 have fit ≥1.3. Conclusion: Cpbs, Ccit, and Cit are good discrimination parameters. Rasch model can estimate item difficulty parameter and examinee's ability parameter with standard error. The fit statistics can identify bad items and unpredictable examinee's responses.
Abstract
Purpose: The reliability of test is determined by each items' characteristics. Item analysis is achieved by classical test theory and item response theory. The purpose of the study was to compare the discrimination indices with item response theory using the Rasch model. Methods: Thirty‐one 4th‐year medical school students participated in the clinical course written examination, which included 22A‐type items and 3 R‐type items. Point biserial correlation coefficient (Cpbs) was compared to method of extreme group (D), biserial correlation coefficient (Cbs), item‐total correlation coefficient (Cit), and corrected item‐total correlation coeffcient (Ccit). Rasch model was applied to estimate item difficulty and examinee's ability and to calculate item fit statistics using joint maximum likelihood. Results: Explanatory power (r2) of Cpbs is decreased in the following order: Ccit (1.00), Cit (0.99), Cbs (0.94), and D (0.45). The ranges of difficulty logit and standard error and ability logit and standard error were -0.82 to 0.80 and 0.37 to 0.76, -3.69 to 3.19 and 0.45 to 1.03, respectively. Item 9 and 23 have outfit ≥1.3. Student 1, 5, 7, 18, 26, 30, and 32 have fit ≥1.3. Conclusion: Cpbs, Ccit, and Cit are good discrimination parameters. Rasch model can estimate item difficulty parameter and examinee's ability parameter with standard error. The fit statistics can identify bad items and unpredictable examinee's responses.
참고문헌 (20)
- Fajardo LL, "Evaluation of medical students in radiology. Written testing using uncued multiple‐choice questions", Invest Radiol, 28, pp.964~968 (1993)
- Cureton EE, "The upper and lower twenty‐seven per cent rule", Psychometrika, 22, pp.293~296 (1957)
- Campo‐Arias A, "Internal consistency of a five‐item form of the Francis Scale of Attitude Toward Christianity among adolescent students", J Soc Psychol, 149, pp.258~262 (2009)
- Smith RM, "Rasch fit statistics as a test of the invariance of item parameter estimates", J Appl Meas, 4, pp.153~163 (2003)
- Karabatsos G, "A critique of Rasch residual fit statistics", J Appl Meas, 1, pp.152~176 (2000)
- Cronbach LJ, "Test “reliability”: its meaning and determination", Psychometrika, 12, pp.1~16 (1947)
- Andersen EB, "A goodness of fit test for the rasch model", Psychometrika, 38, pp.123~140 (1973)
- Willse JT, "Mixture Rasch models with joint maximum likelihood estimation", Educ Psychol Meas, 71, pp.5~19 (2011)
- Baker FB, "The basics of item response theory. 2nd ed", pp.83~149 (2001), ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation
- Dinero TE, "Applicability of the Rasch model with varying item discriminations", Appl Psychol Meas, 1, pp.581~592 (1977)
- Ji EL, "Theory and practice of Rasch model. 2nd ed" (2000), Kyoyukkwahaksa
- Brentari E, "Unidimensionality in the Rasch model: how to detect and interpret", Statistica, 67, pp.253~261 (2007)
- Linacre JM, "Rasch model estimation: further topics", J Appl Meas, 5, pp.95~110 (2004)
- Ebel RL, "Measuring educational achievement. 2nd ed" (1972), Prentice‐Hall
- Clauser BE, "An evaluation of the Rasch model for equating multiple forms of a performance assessment of physicians' patientmanagement skills", Acad Med, 72(10 Suppl 1), pp.S76~S78 (1997)
- Linacre JM, "Understanding Rasch measurement: estimation methods for Rasch measures", J Outcome Meas, 3, pp.382~405 (1999)
- Hessen DJ, "A new class of parametric IRT models for dichotomous item scores", J Appl Meas, 5, pp.385~397 (2004)
- Sijtsma K, "Item response theory: past performance, present developments, and future expectations", Behaviormetrika, 33, pp.75~102 (2006)
- Erhart M, "A comparison of Rasch item‐fit and Cronbach's alpha item reduction analysis for the development of a Quality of Life scale for children and adolescents", Child Care Health Dev, 36, pp.473~484 (2010)
- Tesio L, "Measuring behaviours and perceptions: Rasch analysis as a tool for rehabilitation research", J Rehabil Med, 35, pp.105~115 (2003)