Test Maddelerinin Ölçtüğü Bilişsel Düzey ve Test Yönergesinin Tahminle Yanıtlama Davranışına Etkisi

Yarı deneysel bir araştırma olan bu çalışmanın amacı, test yönergesi ve test maddelerinin ölçtüğü bilişsel düzeyin tahmin davranışı üzerindeki etkisini incelemektir. Araştırmanın çalışma grubu, 2014-2015 bahar döneminde Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesinde öğrenim gören 220 öğrenciden oluşmaktadır. Çalışma grubundaki öğrencilere, bilgi, kavrama ve uygulama düzeylerini ölçen eşit sayıda madde içeren çoktan seçmeli ölçme ve değerlendirme dersi başarı testi uygulanmıştır. Test yönergesinin tahmin davranışı üzerindeki etkisini belirlemek için test dört farklı yönergeyle uygulanmıştır. Veriler; Kruskal-Wallis testi, ilişkili örneklemeler tek faktörlü varyans analizi ve Friedman testiyle analiz edilmiştir. Araştırmadan elde edilen bulgular, tahmin davranışının test yönergesi ve testteki maddelerin ölçtüğü bilişsel düzeye göre manidar olarak değiştiğini göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Test yönergesi, düzeltme formülleri, bilişsel düzey, tahminle yanıtlama davranışı

The Effect of Cognitive Level Measured by Test Items and Test Instruction on Guessing Tendency

The aim of this study which is a quasi-experimental research is to investigate the effect of test instruction and cognitive level measured by test items on guessing tendency. The study group of the research consisted of 220 undergraduate students studying at different departments of Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences in 2014-2015 spring term. An achievement test of measurement and evaluation containing equal number of items measuring knowledge, comprehension and application levels was applied to students in the study group. The test was applied with four different instructions to determine the effect of test instruction on guessing. The data were analyzed by using Kruskal-Wallis test, repeated measure one-way analysis of variance and Friedman test. The findings showed that test instruction and cognitive level measured by test items significantly affected guessing tendency.

Keywords:

Test instruction, correction formulas, cognitive level, guessing tendency,

PDF

___

Albanese, M. A. (1988). The projected impact of the correction for guessing on individual scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25(2), 149-157. Angoff, W. H., & Schrader, W. B. (1984). A study of hypotheses basic to the use of rights and formula scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21(1), 1-17. Avila, C., & Torrubia, R. (2004). Personality, expectations, and response strategies in multiple‐choice question examinations in university students: A test of Gray's hypotheses. European Journal of Personality, 18(1), 45-59. Budescu, D., & Bar‐Hillel, M. (1993). To guess or not to guess: A decision‐theoretic view of formula scoring. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30(4), 277-291. Baykul, Y. (2010). Eğitimde ve psikolojide ölçme: Klasik test teorisi ve uygulaması (2. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları. Bereby‐Meyer, Y., Meyer, J., & Flascher, O. M. (2002). Prospect theory analysis of guessing in multiple choice tests. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(4), 313-327. Bereby-Meyer, Y., Meyer, J., & Budescu, D. V. (2003). Decision making under internal uncertainty: The case of multiple-choice tests with different scoring rules. Acta Psychologica, 112(2), 207-220. Burton, R. F. (2001). Quantifying the effects of chance in multiple choice and true/false tests: Question selection and guessing of answers. Assessment ve Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(1), 41-50. Can, A. (2013). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating qualitative research (4th Edition). Boston: Pearson Education. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical ve modern test theory. Belmont: Wadsworth Group. Cronbach, L. J. (1960). Essentials of psychological testing. (2nd Edition). New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers. Dirkzwager, A. (2003). Multiple evaluation: A new testing paradigm that exorcizes guessing. International Journal of Testing, 3(4), 333-352. Ebel, R. L. (1965). Measuring educational achievement. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Espinosa, M. P., & Gardeazabal, J. (2010). Optimal correction for guessing in multiple-choice tests. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 54(5), 415-425. Haladyna, T. M. (1997). Writing test items to evaluate higher order thinking. USA: Ally ve Bacon. Kurz, T. B. (1999). "A review of scoring algorithms for multiple-choice tests." Paper presented at the annual meeting of Southwest Educational Research Association, San Antonio, TX. Prieto, G., & Delgado, A. R. (1999a). The effect of instructions on multiple-choice test scores. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 15(2), 143–150. Reid, J. F. (1976). Scoring multiple- choice exams. The Journal of Economic Education, 8, 55-59. Rowley, G. L., & Traub, R. E. (1977). Formula scoring, number right scoring, and test-taking strategy. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14(1), 15-22. Swineford, F., & Miller, P. M. (1953). Effects of directions regarding guessing on item statistics of a multiple-choice vocabulary test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 44(3), 129-139. Thorndike, R. M. (2005). Measurement and evaluation in psycholgy and education (7th Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education. Ulutaş, S. (2003). Genel liselerdeki öğretmenlerin ölçme ve değerlendirme alanındaki yeterlikleri ile ölçme ve değerlendirme ilkelerini uygulama düzeylerinin araştırılması (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. Valadares, J. (2011). Correcting scores of tests taking into account the guessing factor: Yes or no? International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education, 2(92), 381-387. Wood, R. (1976). Inhibiting blind guessing: The effect of instructions. Journal of Educational Measurement, 13(4), 297-307. Zimmerman, D. W., & Williams, R. H. (1965). Effect of chance success due to guessing on error of measurement in multiple-choice tests. Psychological Reports, 16(3), 1193-1196.