Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

DINA MODEL İLE GELİŞTİRİLEN BİR TESTİN PSİKOMETRİK ÖZELLİKLERİNİN BELİRLENMESİ

Year 2018, Volume: 18 Issue: 1, 130 - 156, 30.03.2018
https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018..-383032

Abstract

Bu araştırmada Bilişsel Tanı
Modellerinden biri olan DINA model ile test geliştirme süreci gerçekleştirilmiş
ve teste ait psikometrik özellikler belirlenmiştir. Geliştirilen test, 7. Sınıf
Fen ve Teknoloji dersine ait Potansiyel ve Kinetik Enerji konu alanını
kapsamaktadır. Bu amaçla belirlenen beş uzman konu alanına ilişkin dört temel
özellik belirlemiştir. Maddeleri hazırlayan uzman grubundan bağımsız alanında
doktora düzeyinde eğitim almış beş uzmandan maddeler ile özellikleri
ilişkilendirmeleri istenmiş ve hazırlanan Q-matrisler karşılaştırılarak hem
fikir olunan 65 madde testin deneme uygulamasına konmuştur.  Ölçme aracının deneme uygulaması 504 kişilik
öğrenci grubuna uygulanmıştır. Deneme uygulaması için maddelere ait g
parametrelerinin aritmetik ortalaması 0.42, s parametrelerinin ortalaması 0.30
ve δ parametrelerine ait değerlerinin ortalaması ise 0.28 olarak hesaplanmıştır.
DINA modelde elde edilen g, s ve δ parametrelerine göre 25 maddelik testler
oluşturulmuş ve mevcut veri üzerinden analiz edilmiştir. Testlerin madde
parametreleri ve model veri uyumları karşılaştırıldığında literatürün de
desteklediği gibi nihai testin δ parametresi dikkate alınarak oluşturulmasına
karar verilmiştir. Nihai test 270 kişilik öğrenci grubuna uygulanmıştır. Nihai
teste ilişkin g, s ve δ  parametrelerinin
ortalaması ise sırasıyla 0.39, 0.26 ve 0.34 olarak hesaplanmıştır. 

References

  • Başokçu, T.O. (2011). Bağıl ve mutlak değerlendirme ile dına modele göre yapılan sınıflamaların geçerliğinin karşılaştırılması. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Cheng Y. ve Chang H. (2007). The modified maximum global discrimination ındex method for cognitive diagnostic computerized adaptive testing. Presented at the CAT and Cognitive Structure Paper Session, Haziran 7.
  • de la Torre, J. (2008). An empirically-based method of Q-matrix validation for the DINA model: Development and applications. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45, 343–362.
  • de la Torre, J. ve Douglas, J.A.(2004). Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis. Psychometrika 69, 333–353
  • de la Torre, J. ve Lee, Y.S. (2010). A note on Invariance of the DINA Model Parameters, Journal of Educational Measurement, 47(1), 115-127
  • Fischer, G.H. (1973). The linear logistic model as an instrument in educational research. Acta Psychologica 37, 359–374.
  • Haertel, E. H. (1989). Using restricted latent class models to map the skill structure of achievement items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 333-352.
  • Henson, R. (2004).Test discrimination and test construction for cognitive diagnostic models. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, University of Illinois.
  • Jang, E. E. (2008). A framework for cognitive diagnostic assessment. Natural language processing for diagnostic language assessment (pp. 117‐131).
  • Junker, B. W. ve Sijtsma, K. (2001). Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25(3), 258-272.
  • Kato, K. (2009). Improving efficiency of cognitive diagnosis by using diagnostic items and adaptive testing. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, The University of Minnesota.
  • Lee, Y., Park, Y. ve Taylan, D. (2011). A cognitive diagnostic modeling of attribute mastery in massachusetts,minnesota, and the u.s. national sample using the TIMSS 2007. International Journal of Testing, 11: 144–177, 2011
  • Leighton, J. P. ve Gierl M. J. (2007). Why cognitive diagnostic assessment? Leighton, J. P. Gierl M. J. (Editörler). Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Li, D., ve Oranje, A. (2007). Estimation of standard error ofregression effects in latent regression models using Binder’s linearization (ETS Research Rep. No. RR-07-09). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
  • Li, F. (2008). A Modified Higher-Order DINA model for detecting differential ıtem functioning and differential attribute functioning. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, The University of Georgia.
  • Macready, G.B., Dayton, C.M. (1977). The use of probabilistic models in the assessment of mastery. Journal of Educational Statistics 2, 99–120.
  • Maris, E. (1999). Estimating multiple classification latent class models. Psychometrika, 64, 187-212.
  • Nitko, A. J. (2001). Educational assessment of students. NJ: Merrill: Uper Saddle River.
  • No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107{110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
  • Nunnally , J. (1 978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Rupp, A. A. ve Templin, J. (2008). The effects of q-matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68. No 1, ss;78-96.
  • Nunnally , J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Rupp, A. A. ve Templin, J. (2008). The effects of q-matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68. No 1, ss;78-96.
  • Tatsuoka, K. (1983). Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement 20, 345–354.
  • Tatsuoka, K. (1991). Boolean algebra applied to determination of universal set of knowledge states. Araştırma Raporu ONR-1. Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service
  • Tatsuoka, K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structures and cognitive diagnosis: A statistical pattern recognition and classification approach. In P.D. Nichols, S. F.
  • Zhang, W. (2006). Detecting differential ıtem functioning using the DINA Model. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
Year 2018, Volume: 18 Issue: 1, 130 - 156, 30.03.2018
https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018..-383032

Abstract

References

  • Başokçu, T.O. (2011). Bağıl ve mutlak değerlendirme ile dına modele göre yapılan sınıflamaların geçerliğinin karşılaştırılması. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Cheng Y. ve Chang H. (2007). The modified maximum global discrimination ındex method for cognitive diagnostic computerized adaptive testing. Presented at the CAT and Cognitive Structure Paper Session, Haziran 7.
  • de la Torre, J. (2008). An empirically-based method of Q-matrix validation for the DINA model: Development and applications. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45, 343–362.
  • de la Torre, J. ve Douglas, J.A.(2004). Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis. Psychometrika 69, 333–353
  • de la Torre, J. ve Lee, Y.S. (2010). A note on Invariance of the DINA Model Parameters, Journal of Educational Measurement, 47(1), 115-127
  • Fischer, G.H. (1973). The linear logistic model as an instrument in educational research. Acta Psychologica 37, 359–374.
  • Haertel, E. H. (1989). Using restricted latent class models to map the skill structure of achievement items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 333-352.
  • Henson, R. (2004).Test discrimination and test construction for cognitive diagnostic models. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, University of Illinois.
  • Jang, E. E. (2008). A framework for cognitive diagnostic assessment. Natural language processing for diagnostic language assessment (pp. 117‐131).
  • Junker, B. W. ve Sijtsma, K. (2001). Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25(3), 258-272.
  • Kato, K. (2009). Improving efficiency of cognitive diagnosis by using diagnostic items and adaptive testing. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, The University of Minnesota.
  • Lee, Y., Park, Y. ve Taylan, D. (2011). A cognitive diagnostic modeling of attribute mastery in massachusetts,minnesota, and the u.s. national sample using the TIMSS 2007. International Journal of Testing, 11: 144–177, 2011
  • Leighton, J. P. ve Gierl M. J. (2007). Why cognitive diagnostic assessment? Leighton, J. P. Gierl M. J. (Editörler). Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Li, D., ve Oranje, A. (2007). Estimation of standard error ofregression effects in latent regression models using Binder’s linearization (ETS Research Rep. No. RR-07-09). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
  • Li, F. (2008). A Modified Higher-Order DINA model for detecting differential ıtem functioning and differential attribute functioning. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, The University of Georgia.
  • Macready, G.B., Dayton, C.M. (1977). The use of probabilistic models in the assessment of mastery. Journal of Educational Statistics 2, 99–120.
  • Maris, E. (1999). Estimating multiple classification latent class models. Psychometrika, 64, 187-212.
  • Nitko, A. J. (2001). Educational assessment of students. NJ: Merrill: Uper Saddle River.
  • No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107{110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
  • Nunnally , J. (1 978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Rupp, A. A. ve Templin, J. (2008). The effects of q-matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68. No 1, ss;78-96.
  • Nunnally , J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Rupp, A. A. ve Templin, J. (2008). The effects of q-matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68. No 1, ss;78-96.
  • Tatsuoka, K. (1983). Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement 20, 345–354.
  • Tatsuoka, K. (1991). Boolean algebra applied to determination of universal set of knowledge states. Araştırma Raporu ONR-1. Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service
  • Tatsuoka, K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structures and cognitive diagnosis: A statistical pattern recognition and classification approach. In P.D. Nichols, S. F.
  • Zhang, W. (2006). Detecting differential ıtem functioning using the DINA Model. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
There are 27 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Elif Kübra Demir

Nizamettin Koç This is me

Publication Date March 30, 2018
Submission Date October 26, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 18 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Demir, E. K., & Koç, N. (2018). DINA MODEL İLE GELİŞTİRİLEN BİR TESTİN PSİKOMETRİK ÖZELLİKLERİNİN BELİRLENMESİ. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 130-156. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018..-383032