emis_exams_module
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
emis_exams_module [2022/08/18 04:02] – [Exam Items] ghachey | emis_exams_module [2022/08/22 04:04] (current) – [By benchmarks] ghachey | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
==== Subject Areas, Standards and Benchmarks ==== | ==== Subject Areas, Standards and Benchmarks ==== | ||
- | Exams (aka. assessments) are typically given at various stages of a student' | + | Exams (aka. assessments) are typically given at various stages of a student' |
* Standard 3.1: Number Sense | * Standard 3.1: Number Sense | ||
Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
==== Exam Items ==== | ==== Exam Items ==== | ||
- | To assess students a number of items (questions) make up an exam. This can be anywhere from 40 items to 100 items. There is no hard rule on the number of items but typically it will be a multiple of 4 since the results are usually compiled into 4 levels of achievement discussed in the next section. And since the analysis is possible all the way down to indicators it is usually required to have 4 items minimum to assess a particular indicator. So for the simplified example above the whole test could have 20 items (a small exam). | + | To assess students a number of items (questions) make up an exam. This can be anywhere from 40 items to 72 items, but it could be more or less. There is no hard rule on the number of items but typically it will be a multiple of 4 since the results are usually compiled into 4 levels of achievement discussed in the next section. And since the analysis is possible all the way down to indicators it is usually required to have 4 items minimum to assess a particular indicator. So for the simplified example above the whole test could have 20 items (a small exam). |
* Standard 3.1: Number Sense | * Standard 3.1: Number Sense | ||
Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
For simplicity, the levels of achievement will be referred to as simply Level 1, Level 2, Level 3 and Level 4 for the remaining of this document. | For simplicity, the levels of achievement will be referred to as simply Level 1, Level 2, Level 3 and Level 4 for the remaining of this document. | ||
- | ===== Candidate Count ===== | + | ===== Analysis Method - Candidate Count ===== |
+ | |||
+ | The candidate count analysis can be done at various levels including: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * By individual candidate (student) | ||
+ | * By exam (whole test) | ||
+ | * By standards | ||
+ | * By benchmarks | ||
+ | * By indicators | ||
+ | |||
+ | Regardless of the level at which the analysis is performed, the methodology is the same. You take the total number of items and you divide by 4 to get your " | ||
+ | |||
+ | * 0 or 1 items correct out of 4 => Level 1 | ||
+ | * 2 items correct out of 4 => Level 2 | ||
+ | * 3 items correct out of 4 => Level 3 | ||
+ | * 4 items correct out of 4 => Level 4 | ||
+ | |||
+ | If you have 40 items (e.g. analysis for a whole test) you have the following: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * 0 to 10 items correct out of 40 => Level 1 | ||
+ | * 11 to 20 items correct out of 40 => Level 2 | ||
+ | * 21 to 30 items correct out of 40 => Level 3 | ||
+ | * 31 to 40 items correct out of 40 => Level 4 | ||
+ | |||
+ | <note important> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Let's review the analysis at different levels with examples. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By individual candidate (student) ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | To get the level of achievement of an individual you look at all the correct items for the whole test and see where the student falls within the cut-offs. This test has 20 items and thus the cut-offs are as follows: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * 0 to 5 items correct out of 20 => Level 1 | ||
+ | * 6 to 10 items correct out of 20 => Level 2 | ||
+ | * 11 to 15 items correct out of 20 => Level 3 | ||
+ | * 16 to 20 items correct out of 20 => Level 4 | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By exam ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | From our original example we have the exam for Math Grade 3. This exam as 20 items. Therefore the cut-offs are as below: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * 0 to 5 items correct out of 20 => Level 1 | ||
+ | * 6 to 10 items correct out of 20 => Level 2 | ||
+ | * 11 to 15 items correct out of 20 => Level 3 | ||
+ | * 16 to 20 items correct out of 20 => Level 4 | ||
+ | |||
+ | What follows is a illustration of how this analysis would be produced. The items for the whole exams are highlighted in blue (all exam items). | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | And the resulting chart analysis. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By standards ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | From our original example we have two standards. And based on the standard' | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Standard 3.1: Number Sense [12 ITEMS] with the cut-offs as: | ||
+ | * 0 to 3 items correct out of 12 => Level 1 | ||
+ | * 4 to 6 items correct out of 12 => Level 2 | ||
+ | * 7 to 9 items correct out of 12 => Level 3 | ||
+ | * 10 to 12 items correct out of 12 => Level 4 | ||
+ | * Standard 3.2: Geometry and measurement concepts. [8 ITEMS] with the cut-offs as: | ||
+ | * 0 to 2 items correct out of 8 => Level 1 | ||
+ | * 3 to 4 items correct out of 8 => Level 2 | ||
+ | * 5 to 6 items correct out of 8 => Level 3 | ||
+ | * 7 to 8 items correct out of 8 => Level 4 | ||
+ | |||
+ | What follows is a illustration of how this analysis would be produced. The items for the two different standards are highlighted in their own respective colors. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | And the resulting chart analysis. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By benchmarks ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | From our original example we have three benchmarks. And based on the benchmarks' | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Benchmark 3.1.1: Use place value understanding and properties of operations to perform … [12 ITEMS] with the cut-offs as: | ||
+ | * 0 to 3 items correct out of 12 ⇒ Level 1 | ||
+ | * 4 to 6 items correct out of 12 ⇒ Level 2 | ||
+ | * 7 to 9 items correct out of 12 ⇒ Level 3 | ||
+ | * 10 to 12 items correct out of 12 ⇒ Level 4 | ||
+ | * Benchmark 3.2.1 Solve problems of time and temperature. apply knowledge to real world problems. [4 ITEMS] with the cut-offs as: | ||
+ | * 0 to 1 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 1 | ||
+ | * 2 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 2 | ||
+ | * 3 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 3 | ||
+ | * 4 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 4 | ||
+ | * Benchmark 3.2.2 Find the area and perimeter of figures. [4 ITEMS] with the cut-offs as: | ||
+ | * 0 to 1 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 1 | ||
+ | * 2 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 2 | ||
+ | * 3 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 3 | ||
+ | * 4 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 4 | ||
+ | |||
+ | What follows is a illustration of how this analysis would be produced. The items for the three different benchmarks are highlighted in their own respective colors. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | And the resulting chart. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By indicators ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | From our original example we have 5 indicators. And we know that each indicators have 4 items each on the exams. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Indicator 3.1.1.1: Use base-ten blocks to count, read and write numbers to ...[4 ITEMS] with the cut-offs as: | ||
+ | * 0 to 1 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 1 | ||
+ | * 2 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 2 | ||
+ | * 3 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 3 | ||
+ | * 4 items correct out of 4 ⇒ Level 4 | ||
+ | * Indicator 3.1.1.2: Understand and use properties of multiplication (e.g. commutative property ...[4 ITEMS] with same cut-offs as above | ||
+ | * Indicator 3.1.1.3: Divide with tables of 6, 7, 8, and 9 using models ...[4 ITEMS] with same cut-offs as above | ||
+ | * Indicator 3.2.1.1: Tell time to the minute. Read time on a digital clock...[4 ITEMS] with same cut-offs as above | ||
+ | * Indicator 3.2.2.1: Understand the meaning of area. Use square units to find[4 ITEMS] with same cut-offs as above | ||
+ | |||
+ | What follows is an illustration of how this analysis would be produced. The items for the five different indicators are highlighted in their own respective colors. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | And the resulting chart. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Analysis Method - Indicator Count ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Candidate count is the simpler more natural way to analyze the results. However, it is not the only way. The indicator count traditionally used in SOE Assessment does it differently. Instead of counting students performing at each levels of achievement for benchmarks, standards and whole exams this methods count the indicators performing at the levels of achievement for benchmarks, standards and whole exams. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <note important> | ||
+ | |||
+ | How exactly does this work? First, the analysis on indicators must be done and it is done just like in the candidate count method shown above. That is the starting point and everything else is based on the indicators results. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By exam (whole test) ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Since every single indicator is part of the exam. For the analysis of the whole we count all the Level 1, Level 2, Level 3 and Level 4 for all indicators. Totalling them up should equal the number of student (i.e. i our example | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | This then translates into the following analysis. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By standards ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | For standards, we need to group the indicators into their respective standards as shown in the following figure. And we do a count on those. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | This will then translate into the following. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== By benchmarks ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Similarly to standards, for benchmarks we also group the indicators into their respective benchmarks and count from there. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | Resulting in the following analysis. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
- | ===== Indicator Count ===== | ||
emis_exams_module.1660795324.txt.gz · Last modified: 2022/08/18 04:02 by ghachey