Evaluating Quality and Reliability of Final Exam Questions for Probability and Statistics Course Using Rasch Model

  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract

    Evaluation of the questions’ level of complexity for the statistical course was proposed using the revised version of Bloom’s taxonomy. The use of Bloom's taxonomy in statistical examination papers allows the degree of difficulty to be pseudo-objectively assessed. Well-constructed questions in the final examination will help in measuring students' abilities based on comprehensive cognitive skills. Therefore, this study used Rasch Model to evaluate the quality and reliability of final exam questions for probability and statistics course. According to research findings, five out of 30 questions are considered as misfit items. It is therefore recommended that these items be removed or rephrased to better suit the students’ ability level in a course. Whereas, nine questions have significant differences between taxonomy level and Rasch level that require further analysis. Overall, students view the set of exam questions as simple due to the unavailability of difficult items. Based on this result, it is suggested that the exam questions should undergo verification process from the expert and students should be exposed early to various types of questions with different level of difficulty.


  • Keywords

    Probability and Statistics Reliability; Students’ ability; Quality; Questions’ difficulty.

  • References

      [1] Marriott J, Davies N & Gibson L (2009), Teaching, learning and assessing statistical problem solving. Statistics Education 17(1), 1-18.

      [2] Garfield J & Ben-Zvi D (2014), Developing students’ statistical reasoning: Connecting research and teaching practice. Springer.

      [3] Baharun N, Mohd Razi NF, Zainal Abidin R, Musa NAC & Mahmud Z (2017), Measuring students’ understanding in counting rules and its probability via e-learning mode: A Rasch measurement. Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences 9(65), 429-441.

      [4] Schau C & Mattern N (1997), Assessing students' connected understanding of statistical relationships. In I. Gal & J. B. Garfield (Eds.), The Assessment Challenge in Statistics Education. Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 91-104.

      [5] Bloom BS, Furst MD, Hill EJ, WH & Krathwohl (1956), Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. David McKay Co Inc.

      [6] David L (2018), Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom). https://www.learning-theories.com/blooms-taxanomy-bloom.html

      [7] Othman H, Asshaari I, Bahaludin H, Nopiah ZM & Ismail NA (2012), Application of rasch measurement model in reliability and quality evaluation of examination paper for engineering mathematics courses. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 60, 163-171.

      [8] Saidfudin M, Azrilah AA, Rodzo'An NA, Omar MZ, Zaharim A & Basri H (2010), Easier learning outcomes analysis using Rasch Model in engineering education research. Proceedings of the 7th WSEAS International Conference on Engineering Education, pp. 442-447.

      [9] Creswell JW (2005), Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

      [10] Anderson LW (Ed.), Krathwohl DR (Ed.), Airasian PW, Cruikshank KA, Mayer RE, Pintrich PR, Raths J, & Wittrock MC (2001), A Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A Revision of bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

      [11] Zulkifli F, Zainal Abidin R, Mansor Z, Mohammad Hamzah MH, & Zulkipli F (2017), A+ Stat. In Creative Innovation Without Boundaries, pp. 125-129.

      [12] Zulkifli F, Zainal Abidin R, Mansor Z, Mohammad Hamzah MH & Zulkipli F (2018), Use of learning aids on advancing students’ thinking ability. Jurnal Inovasi Malaysia 1(2), 1-22.

      [13] Zulkifli F, Fadhlullah A, Abu Bakar N & Zainal Abidin R (2018), An investigation on multiple intelligence of students from the faculty of Business Management (FPP) and Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences (FSKM), Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). Insight Journal 1(1), 41-48.

      [14] Zulkifli F, Fadhlullah A, Abu Bakar N, Jahya A, Ismail NF, Hashim H & Ahmad Ridzuan ANA (2014), A comparative analysis on learning preferences of students at Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences (FSKM) and Faculty of Business. Proceedings of the Kolokium Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran UiTM Ke-2.

      [15] Zulkifli F, Zainal Abidin R, & Abdullah MN (2016), Mathematical statistics. Bootstrap Resources.




Article ID: 23479
DOI: 10.14419/ijet.v7i4.33.23479

Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.