BİREYE UYARLANMIŞ TESTLER ÜZERİNE KAVRAMSAL BİR İNCELEME: GELİŞİMİ, YÖNTEMİ, AVANTAJLARI VE DEZAVANTAJLARI

Year 2025, Volume: 6 Issue: 1, 1 - 12, 30.06.2025

Emrah Büyükatak

Abstract

Teknolojik gelişmeler son çeyrek yüzyılda çok hızlı bir şekilde ilerlemiş, bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin gelişmesiyle bilgisayarlar amaçlarımızın çoğuna ulaşmada en yararlı kolaylaştırıcı haline gelmiştir. Bu gelişmeler her sektörü etkilediği gibi eğitim ortamında, özellikle de öğrenme, test etme ve değerlendirme gibi alanlarda değişikliklere yol açmıştır. Bu doğrultuda testler ve testlerin uygulanma yöntemleri de gelişerek çeşitlenmiştir. Bilgisayarların artan uygunluğu ve hesaplama yeteneği sebebiyle, bilgisayarlı değerlendirme testlerde daha belirgin bir rol kazanmıştır. Bilgisayar teknolojisinin eğitimde kullanımının artmasıyla birlikte yakın dönemde seçme, yerleştirme ve yetenek düzeyinin belirlenmesi gibi çeşitli maksatlarla bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanan testler kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışma bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanan testler üzerine kavramsal bir araştırma yaparak, bu testlerin gelişiminin, yönteminin, avantajlarının ve dezavantajlarının incelenmesini amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaç kapsamında, bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanan testlerin özelliklerine ve uygulanmasına yönelik kavramsal ve kuramsal yapısı incelenmiştir. Bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanan testlerin kullanımı farklı etkilere sahiptir ve birçok avantajları ile birlikte dezavantajları da bulunmaktadır. Bir testin uyarlanabilir formatta uygulanması istenildiğinde bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanan testlerin olumlu yönleri kadar olumsuz yönlerinin de dikkate alınması gerekmektedir. Eğitim sistemindeki sınavlarda bu tür testlerin de kullanılması, mili test sistemlerinin bu standartlara göre yapılandırılması, uygulama becerisi, teknik donanım, pedagojik anlayış ve politik desteğin bir arada olması önerilmektedir. Bu çalışma ortaya koyduğu sonuçlarla akademik literatüre birçok katkı sağlarken, politika yapıcılara ve uygulayıcılara da rehberlik edebilecektir.

Keywords

Test, Uyarlanmış Test, Bilgisayar Ortamında Bireye Uyarlanmış Test

A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW OF COMPUTER ADAPTED TESTS (CAT): DEVELOPMENT, METHODS, ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES

Abstract

Technological developments have progressed rapidly in the last quarter century, and with the development of information and communication technologies, computers have become the most useful facilitators in achieving most of our goals. These developments have affected every sector, as well as causing changes in the educational environment, especially in areas such as learning, testing and evaluation. Accordingly, tests and test application methods have also developed and diversified. Due to the increasing convenience and computational ability of computers, computerized assessment has gained a more prominent role in tests. With the increasing use of computer technology in education, computer adapted tests (CAT) have been used for various purposes such as selection, placement and determination of talent level in the recent period. Due to the effects of computer technology on the field of assessment and testing, this study aims to conduct a conceptual research on computer-adapted tests and to examine the development, method, advantages and disadvantages of these tests. Within the scope of this purpose, a conceptual research was conducted by examining the conceptual and theoretical structure of the characteristics and application of computer-adapted tests. The use of computer-adapted tests has different effects and has many advantages as well as disadvantages. When a test is to be applied in an adaptive format, the negative aspects of computer-adapted tests should be taken into consideration as well as their positive aspects. While this study contributes to the academic literature with its results, it will also guide policy makers and practitioners.

Keywords

Test, Adaptive Test, Computerized Adaptive Test

References

• Akyıldız, M. (2014). Online ölçme ve değerlendirme, bireye uyarlanmış testlerde imkanlar, ufuklar. Anadolu Üniversitesi, Açıköğretim Fakültesi, Yaygın Öğretim Bölümü.
• Alam, A. (2022). Cloud-based e-learning: scaffolding the environment for adaptive e-learning ecosystem based on cloud computing infrastructure. In Computer Communication, Networking and IoT: Proceedings of 5th ICICC 2021, Volume 2 (pp. 1-9). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
• Ali, U. S., & Chang, H. (2014). An item‐driven adaptive design for calibrating pretest items. ETS Research Report Series, 2014(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12044
• Baker, F.B. (2001). The basics of item response theory (2nd ed.). College Park, MD: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation, University of Maryland
• Baykul, Y. (2000). Eğitimde ve psikolojide ölçme: Klasik test teorisi ve uygulaması. ÖSYM Yayınları.
• Bennett, R. E. (2002). Inexorable and inevitable: The continuing story of technology and assessment. The Journal of technology, Learning, and Assessment, 1(1), 1-23.
• Bulut, O., & Kan, A. (2012). Application of computerized adaptive testing to entrance examination for graduate studies in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 49, 61-80.
• Büyükkıdık, S., & Yörü, F. G. A. (2024). Çok Aşamalı Testlerin Panel Deseni, Modül Uzunluğu, Örneklem Büyüklüğü ve Yetenek Parametresi Kestirim Yöntemleri Açısından Farklı Koşullar Altında Karşılaştırılması. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 41(2), 9-27.
• Collares, C. F., & Cecilio-Fernandes, D. (2019). When I say ... computerised adaptive testing. Medical Education, 53(2), 115–116.
• Davey, T. (2011). A guide to computer adaptive testing systems. Council of Chief State School Officers.
• Davey, T., & Pitoniak, M. J. (2011). Designing computerized adaptive tests. In Handbook of test development (pp. 557-588). Routledge.
• Doğan, A. G. (2022). Zihinsel hız: Kavramsal gelişimi ve önemine dair bir derleme çalışması. Journal of Social Sciences Research/Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12(3).
• Downing, S. M. (2005). The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: The consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice, 10, 133–143.
• Drasgow, F. (2002). The work ahead: A psychometric infrastructure for computerized adaptive tests. In C. N.
• Mills, M. T. Potenza, J. J. Fremer, & W. C. Ward (Eds.), Computer-based testing: Building the foundation for future assessments (pp. 67–88). Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Dumas, H. M., Fragala-Pinkham, M. A., Haley, S. M., Ni, P., Coster, W., Kramer, J. M., ... & Ludlow, L. H. (2012).
• Computer adaptive test performance in children with and without disabilities: Prospective field study of the PEDI-CAT. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34(5), 393-401.
• Economides, A. A., & Roupas, C. (2007). Evaluation of computer adaptive testing systems. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 2(1), 70-87.
• Fergadiotis, G., Casilio, M., Hula, W. D., & Swiderski, A. (2021). Computer adaptive testing for the assessment of anomia severity. In Seminars in Speech and Language (Vol. 42, No. 03, pp. 180-191). Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc..
• Fetzer, M., Dainis, A., Lambert, S., & Meade, A. (2008). Computer adaptive testing (CAT) in an employment context. PreVisor’s PreView.
• Fleming, S. & Hiple, D. (2004). Foreign language distance education at the University of Hawai'i. In C. A.
• Spreen, (Ed.), New technologies and language learning: issues and options (Tech. Rep. No.25) (pp. 13-54). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
• Gao, I., Ilharco, G., Lundberg, S., & Ribeiro, M. T. (2023). Adaptive testing of computer vision models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (pp. 4003-4014).
• Gür, R., & Hamide, D. G. (2020). The effect of item exposure control methods on measurement precision and test security under different measurement conditions in computerized adaptive testing. Egitim ve Bilim, 45(202).
• Gür, R., & Karabay, E. (2018). Motorlu taşıtlar sürücü kursiyerleri sınavının simülatif bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanmış test uygulaması. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 11(2), 201-228.
• Kalender, İ. (2004). Bilgisayar ortamında bireyselleştirilmiş testlerin eğitimde kullanımı. XIII. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kurultayı. İnönü Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Malatya, 6-9.
• Kezer, F. (2013). Bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanmış test stratejilerinin karşılaştırılması (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi.
• Kezer, F., & Koç, N. (2014). Bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanmış test stratejilerinin karşılaştırılması. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 145-174.
• Kim, D. H., & Huynh, H. (2007). Comparability of computer and paper-and-pencil versions of algebra and biology assessments. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 6(4).
• Koller, I., Levenson, M. R., & Glück, J. (2017). What do you think you are measuring? A mixed-methods procedure for assessing the content validity of test items and theory-based scaling. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(126).
• Kuzucu, R.E. (2024). Türkiye'de bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanmış test (bobut) çalışmaları: sistematik bir derleme (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Harran Üniversitesi, Şanlıurfa.
• Larson, J. (1999). Considerations for testing reading proficiency via computer-adaptive testing. Studies in language testing, 10, 71-90.
• Larson, J. W., & Madsen, H. S. (1984). Computerized adaptive language testing: Moving beyond computer-assisted testing. Calico Journal, 2(3), 32.
• Linacre, J. M. (2000). Computer-adaptive testing: A methodology whose time has come. . In S. Chae, U. Kang, E. Jeon & J. M. Linacre (Eds.), Development of computerized middle school achievement test (in Korean). Seoul, South Korea: Komesa Press
• Lord, F. M. (1971). The self‐scoring flexilevel test 1. Journal of Educational Measurement, 8(3), 147-151. Magis, D., Yan, D. A., & Davier, A. A. V. (2017). Computerized adaptive and multistage testing with R: Using packages catR and mstR. Springer.
• Martin, A. J., & Lazendic, G. (2018). Computer-adaptive testing: Implications for students’ achievement, motivation, engagement, and subjective test experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 10(1), 27–45.
• Mojarrad, H, Hemmati, F, Jafari Gohar, M, & Sadeghi , A. (2013). Computer-based assessment (CBA) vs. Paper/pencil-based assessment (PPBA): An investigation into the performance and attitude of Iranian EFL learners' reading comprehension. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 4(4), 418-428.
• Montgomery, J. M., & Cutler, J. (2013). Computerized adaptive testing for public opinion surveys. Political Analysis, 21(2), 172-192.
• Özbaşı, D., & Demirtaşlı, N. (2015). Bilgisayar okuryazarlığı testinin bilgisayar ortamında bireye uyarlanmış test olarak geliştirilmesi. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 6(2).
• Özgüven, İ. E. (2007). Psikolojik testler (Dördüncü Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• Parshall, C., Spray, J., Kalohn, J., & Davey, T. (2002). Practical considerations in computerized testing. New York: Springer-Verlag.
• Pommerich, M. (2004).Developing computerized versions of paper-and-pencil tests: Mode effects for passage-based tests. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 2(6), 3-44.
• Reckase, M. D. (2011, May). Computerized adaptive assessment (CAA): The way forward. In The Road Ahead for State Assessments, Policy Analysis for California Education and Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy.
• Rezaie, M., & Golshan, M. (2015). Computer adaptive test (CAT): Advantages and limitations. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2(5), 128-137.
• Rice, N., Pêgo, J. M., Collares, C. F., Kisielewska, J., & Gale, T. (2022). The development and implementation of a computer adaptive progress test across European countries. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100083.
• Rudner, L., & Guo, F. (2011). Computerized adaptive testing for small scale programs and instructional systems. Graduate Management Admission Council-GMAC.
• Schleicher, A. (2019). PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations. oecd Publishing.
• Segall, D. O. (1993). Score equating verification analyses of the CAT-ASVAB. Briefing presented to the Defense Advisory Committee on Military Personnel Testing, Williamsburg, VA
• Şenel, S. (2024). Comparison of CAT procedures at low ability levels: A simulation study and analysis in the context of students with disabilities. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 13(3), 547-559.
• Thorndike, R. M., Cunningham, G. K., Thorndike, R. L., ve Hagen, E. P. (1991). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education. Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc.
• Tian, J., Miao, D., Zhu, X., &Gong,J. (2007). An introduction to the computerized adaptive testing. US-China Education Rewiew, 4(1), 72-81.
• Tonidandel, S., Quiñones, M. A., & Adams, A. A. (2002). Computer-adaptive testing: The impact of test characteristics on perceived performance and test takers' reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 320.
• Turgut, M. F., & Baykul, Y. (2010). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme (Vol. 2). Pegem Akademi.
• van der Linden, W. J. (2005). A comparison of item-selection methods for adaptive tests with content constraints. Law school admission council computerized testing report: 04-02. Newtown, PA: Law School Admission Council.
• Veldkamp, B. P., & van der Linden, W. J. (2009). Designing item pools for adaptive testing. In Elements of adaptive testing (pp. 231-245). New York, NY: Springer New York.
• Wainer, H., Dorans, N. J., Flaugher, R., Green, B. F., & Mislevy, R. J. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Routledge.
• Wang, T., & Kolen, M. J. (2001). Evaluating comparability in computerized adaptive testing: Issues, criteria and an example. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38 (1), 19-49.
• Weiss, D. J. (1983). Latent trait theory and adaptive testing. In David J.Weiss (ed.), New horizons in testing (ss. 5-7). New York: Academic Press.
• Weiss, D. J. (2004). Computerized adaptive testing for effective and efficient measurement in counseling and education. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 37(2), 70-84.
• Wise, S. L., & Kingsbury, G. G. (2000). Practical issues in developing and maintaining a computerized adaptive testing program. Psicológica, 21(1), 135-155.
• Zickar, M. J., Overton, R. C., Taylor, L. R., & Harms, H. J. (1999). The development of a computerized selection system for computer programmers in a financial services company. In Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 7-33). Psychology Press.