NUR-648E Sample Item Analysis

Analyzing Assessment Data
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Code and Name
Professor’s Name
Date
Analyzing Assessment Data
Reliability entails how consistently or dependable a test measures students’ performance. In particular, examiners should ask themselves whether learners would get approximately the same scores if given time to repeat the test. If the scores obtained have a significant difference, it means that the test is not reliable. Reliable tests have consistent standards and produce comparable outcomes (Billings & Halstead, 2019). The “NUR-648E Sample Item Analysis” test is reliable. Sixty-eight examinees took multiple-choice questions, and their performance was evaluated. Exam takers had a mean score of 61.06 (81.41%), and the highest score was 70 (“NUR-648E Sample Item Analysis,” n.d.). The reliability of this test appears from the way questions and answers were structured. For example, in every question, exam takers were given choices from which to choose. The test was standard in that no question did not have the correct answer. Moreover, the questions were comprehensible, which means that exam takers gave their answers based on their understanding.
The raw scores show a particular trend that an instructor can use the information to improve students’ performance. For example, question ID/Rev: 20998/2 had 67 correct answers, 1 incorrect, and 0.99 difficulty. Question ID/Rev: 19436/1 had 40 correct answers, 28 incorrect, and 0.59 difficulty. Additionally, question ID/Rev: 17708/2 had 27 correct answers, 41 incorrect, and 0.4 difficulty. Question ID/Rev: 11301/1 had 19 correct answers, 49 incorrect, and 0.28 difficulty. The last question ID/Rev: 11269/2 had 35 correct answers, 33 incorrect, and 0.51 difficulty (“NUR-648E Sample Item Analysis,” n.d.). The information available in the raw scores is crucial, and an instructor can use it to benefit students. First, the instructor can understand the areas that students did not comprehend in the syllabus and repeat them. Second, the individual can revisit the format of questions with a high “difficulty” score to see whether they were ambiguous. Finally, the educator can develop activities that would help students to comprehend topics that appeared difficult to exam takers based on their performances. Based on the scenario at hand, oral health screenings and factors that increase the risks of oral cancer are among the topics that should be reviewed since they were performed poorly.
The range for the sample item analysis was 4.5 for standard deviation, 81.41% for the mean, 61 for the median, 51 for the minimum score, 70 for the maximum, and 75 for the total points. Moreover, exam takers were 68, and KR20 was 0.55 (“NUR-648E Sample Item Analysis,” n.d.). The information is crucial and summarizes students’ performance in various multiple-choice questions. For example, the mean can be used to determine the reliability of a test. In an excellent test, the performance should be comparable. As such, not all students should score 100% or 0. There should be learners with close to a 100% score, others at the middle, and others with below-average performance. In ...