Development and Validation of the Achievement Test on Body Systems

Year 2017, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 68 - 76, 01.06.2016

Aslı Yerlikaya , M. Handan Güneş

Abstract

This paper presents evidence for the development
and validation of an “Achievement Test on Body Systems” which is a unit in 7th
class Science Education lesson. The test was conforming the acquisitions
described in the Turkish National Science Education Program for 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
and 8th classes. At the same time, number of the acquisitions, step of the
acquisitions according to Bloom's taxonomy, number of lessons to finish all
units and formerly learned concepts were taken into account for creating items.
The content validity of the test was reviewed and ensured by 1 expert and 2
science teachers. One of the teachers was doing her PhD degree and one of them
was doing his master’s degree. The pilot test was made up of 48 items selected
from initial 78 items and the sample consisted of 245 7th grade students.
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Test (which is a measure of how suitable the data are for
Factor Analysis) was done. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value was 0.89, and the result
indicated that the sampling was adequate. Analyses based on classical test
theory used 33% of the upper and lower classes for item difficulty and
discrimination indices. And the KR-20 was used for the reliability. After
omitting 3 items; the item difficulties were between 0.36 and 0.81, the item
discrimination indices were between 0.40 and 0.89 and the internal consistency
of the test (KR-20) was found as 0.898. Results indicate that Achievement Test
of Body Systems has satisfactory psychometric properties and it can be accepted
as appropriate for future use.

Keywords

achievement test, validity and reliability, body systems

References

• Atılgan, T. L., Doğan, N., Kan, A., (2006). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. (Editör: Hakan Atılgan). Anı Yayıncılık, 480 s. Ankara.
• Balaban, M. and Güneş, M. H. (2012). Portfolio assessment in cooperation with teachers, students and parents in a science and technology course. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, Issue 49/A, 289-310.
• Bezir Akçay, B. (2014). Bilimde Paradigmalar ve Bilimin Doğası. Şengül S. Anagün ve Nil Duban (Ed.) içinde Fen bilimleri Öğretimi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Brennan, R. L. (1972). A Generalized Upper-Lower Term Discrimination Index. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 32 (2), 289-303.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E.K., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• Çepni,S., Ayas, A., Akdeniz, A. R., Yiğit, N., Özmen, H., Ayvacı, H. Ş. (2007) Kuramda Uygulamaya Fen ve Teknoloji Öğretimi.(Editör: Salih Çepni), Pegem A. Yayıncılık, 431 s., Ankara.
• Coştu, B. (2012). Ölçme ve Değerlendirmeyle İlgili Temel Kavramlar. Mehmet Küçük ve Yılmaz Geçit (Ed.) içinde Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme, Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
• Demir, M. Y. (2009). Öğrenme: Giriş, Sorunlar ve Tarihsel Bakış Açıları. Muzaffer Şahin (Çev. Ed.). içinde Öğrenme Teorileri. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• Demir, S., Gürer, C.,Köksal, T. & Dolu, O. (2009). Kavram Oluşturma ve Ölçüm. (Ed.) Kaan Böke. Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri. İstanbul: Alfa Yayıncılık.
• Demirel, Ö. (2002). Planlamadan Değerlendirmeye Öğretme Sanatı. Pegem A Yayıncılık, 431. s., Ankara.
• Ding, L., Chabay, R., Sherwood, B. & Beichner, R. (2006). Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: Brief electricity and magnetism assessment. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research 2, 010105, 2 (1),
• Durmuş, S. (2005). Öğrenme: Perspektifler. Anakara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• Erdoğan, İ. (2012). Pozitivist Metodoloji ve Ötesi. Ankara:ERK Yayınları.
• Erkuş, A. (2011). Davranış Bilimleri İçin Bilimsel Araştırma Süreci. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Geçit, Y. (22012). Geleneksel Ölçme Araçları ve Özellikleri. Mehmet Küçük & Yılmaz Geçit (Eds.) içinde Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme.
• Izard, J. (1993). Challenges to the Improvement of Assessment Practice, In M. Niss (Ed.). Investigations Into Assessment in Mathemetics Education, Kluver Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
• Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second generation little jiffy. Pschometrika, 35 (4), 401-415.
• Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factor simplicity. Pschometrika, 39 (1), 31-36.
• Karasar, N. (2010). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• Kelley, T. L. (1939). The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30 (1), 17-24.
• Masters, G. N. (1988). Item Discrimination: When More Is Worse. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25 (1), 15-29.
• Mayo, P., Donnelly, M. B., Nash, P. P., & Schwartz, R. W. (1993). Student Perceptions of Tutor Effectiveness in a Problem-Based Surgery Clerkship. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 5 (4), 227-233.
• Mertens, Donna M. (2015). Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity (4th edition). Sage Publications.
• McCowan, R. J. & McCowan, S. C. (1999). Item Analysis for Criterion-Referenced Tests.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB] (2013). İlköğretim Kurumları Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı, Ankara: Talim Terbiye Kurulu. Sönmez, V. (2009). Eğitim Felsefesi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.