Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

Assessment data is a tool instructors can use to determine if students are meeting course or learning outcomes. Assessments can be utilized in many ways, such as student practice, student self-assessment, determining readiness, determine grades, etc. The purpose of this assignment is to analyze sample test statistics to determine if student learning has taken place. Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

ORDER NOW FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

To address the questions below in this essay assignment, you will need to use sample statistics provided in the textbooks. For Questions 1-4, use the sample test statistics in Chapter 24 of Teaching in Nursing: A Guide for Faculty. For Questions 5-9, use Chapter 11 in The Nurse Educator’s Guide to Assessing Learning Outcomes.

In a 1,000-1,250 word essay, use the sample statistics data from the textbooks to respond on the following questions:

  1. Explain what reliability is. Based on the sample statistics, is this test reliable? What evidence from the statistics supports your answer?
  2. What trends are seen in the raw scores? How would an instructor use this information?
  3. What is the range for this sample? What information does the range provide and why is it important?
  4. What information does the standard error of measurement provide? Based on the data provided, does the test have a small or large standard error of measurement? How would an instructor use this information?
  5. Explain the process of analyzing individual items once an instructor has analyzed basic concepts of measurement.
  6. If one of the questions on the exam had a p value of 0.76, would it be a best practice to eliminate the item? Justify your answer.
  7. If one of the questions on the exam has a negative PBI for the correct option and one or more of the distractors have a positive PBI, what information does this give the instructor? How would you recommend the instructor adjust this item?
  8. Based on the sample statistics, has student learning taken place? Justify your answer with data.
  9. Based on the sample statistics, what steps would you take to improve learning?

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

  • attachment

    Rubric_Print_Format1.xlsx

    Rubic_Print_Format

    Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
    NUR-648E NUR-648E-O501 Analyzing Assessment Data 50.0
    Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory 0-75% (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%) Satisfactory 81-88% (88.00%) Good 89-92% (92.00%) Excellent 93-100% (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
    Criteria 100.0%
    Reliability 8.0% Paper does not explain what reliability is and whether the test is reliable. Evidence to support claims is not present. Paper explains what reliability is and whether the test is reliable. Evidence to support claims is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper explains what reliability is and whether the test is reliable. Evidence to support claims is present. Paper explains what reliability is and whether the test is reliable. Evidence to support claims is well developed. Paper explains what reliability is and whether the test is reliable in a comprehensive manner. Evidence to support claims is exceptional.
    Trends in Raw Scores 8.0% Paper does not explain trends in raw scores and explanation of how an instructor would use this information is not present. Paper explains trends in raw scores and includes and explanation of how an instructor would use this information, but lacks details or is incomplete. Paper explains trends in raw scores. Explanation of how an instructor would use this information is present. Paper explains trends in raw scores. Explanation of how an instructor would use this information is well developed. Paper explains trends in raw scores in a comprehensive manner. Explanation of how an instructor would use this information is exceptional.
    Range for Sample 8.0% Paper does not determine the range for the sample. Explanation of what information the range provides and why it is important is not present. Paper determines the range for the sample. An explanation of what information the range provides and why it is important is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper determines the range for the sample. An explanation of what information the range provides and why it is important is present. Paper determines the range for the sample. An explanation of what information the range provides and why it is important is well developed. Paper determines the range for the sample. An explanation of what information the range provides and why it is important is thorough.
    Standard Error of Measurement 8.0% Paper does not explain what standard error of measurement is and what the standard of measurement is for the sample data. Explanation for how the instructor would use this information is not present. Paper explains what standard error of measurement is and what the standard of measurement is for the sample data, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Explanation for how the instructor would use this information is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper explains what standard error of measurement is and what the standard of measurement is for the sample data. Explanation for how the instructor would use this information present. Paper explains what standard error of measurement is and what the standard of measurement is for the sample data and is well developed. Explanation for how the instructor would use this information is well developed. Paper explains what standard error of measurement is and what the standard of measurement is for the sample data in a comprehensive manner. Explanation for how the instructor would use this information is exceptional.
    Analyzing Individual Test Items 8.0% Paper does not explain analysis of individual test items. Paper explains analysis of individual test items, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper explains analysis of individual test items. Paper explains analysis of individual test items, and explanation is well developed. Paper explains analyzing individual test items in a comprehensive manner.
    p Value 8.0% Paper does not explain best practices on test items based on p value. Paper explains best practices on test items based on p value, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper explains best practices on test items based on p value. Paper explains best practices on test items based on p value, and explanation is well developed. Paper explains best practices on test items based on p value in a comprehensive manner.
    PBI 8.0% Paper does not explain information regarding PBI on a test question or discuss what information it gives the instructor. Paper does not include recommendations for adjustments. Paper explains information regarding PBI on a test question and discusses what information it gives the instructor, but lack detail or is complete. Paper includes recommendations for adjustments, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper explains information regarding PBI on a test question and discusses what information it gives the instructor. Paper includes recommendations for adjustments. Paper explains information regarding PBI on a test question and discusses what information it gives the instructor and is well developed. Paper includes recommendations for adjustments and explanations are well developed. Paper explains information regarding PBI on a test question and discusses what information it gives the instructor and is thorough. Paper includes recommendations for adjustments in a comprehensive manner.
    Learning Assessment 7.0% Paper does not explain whether student learning has taken place. Paper explains whether student learning has taken place. Evidence to support claims is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper explains whether student learning has taken place. Evidence to support claims is present. Paper explains whether student learning has taken place. Evidence to support claims is well developed. Paper explains whether student learning has taken place. Evidence to support claims is exceptional.
    Improving Learning 7.0% Paper does not include an explanation of what steps would be taken to improve learning. Paper includes an explanation of what steps would be taken to improve learning, but lacks detail or is incomplete. Paper includes an explanation of what steps would be taken to improve learning. Paper includes a well developed explanation of what steps would be taken to improve learning. Paper includes a thorough explanation of what steps would be taken to improve learning.
    Thesis Development and Purpose 7.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
    Argument Logic and Construction 8.0% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
    Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
    Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
    Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
    Total Weightage 100%
  • attachment

    DFF5AD38-B304-4939-B782-240A2B57F0D6.png
  • attachment

    B0FE165D-5DE2-43CB-A689-3D426C7777E7.jpeg
  • attachment

    910B0B46-5DD3-48FB-AF62-0E988952F85A.png
  • attachment

    68ADB765-0F1A-4FAA-97BA-97C5FB07C1D5.png
  • attachment

    2B66A99A-C89E-477A-95BE-4A897990766A.jpeg
  • attachment

    ReportPDF.pdf

    Submission Ide: 06f1c5d2-0cae-476a-bc8e-ba726be7dacc

    77% SIMILARITY SCORE 12   CITATION ITEMS 13   GRAMMAR ISSUES 0   FEEDBACK COMMENT Internet Source   0% Institution   77%

    Leena Kuruvila

    ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA 4.docx

     

    Summary

     1208 Words

    ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA 2

    ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA 3

    Analyzing Assessment Data

    Reliability is “the capability of an analysis to give to administer steady and persistent

    scores” (Billing & Halstead, 2015, p. 436). It is troubled with the test’s ability to yield accurate  accurate: accurate  right

    Analyzing Assessment Data

    Leena Kuruvila

    Grand Canyon University NUR: 648E

    February 22nd 2021

     

     

    results. Test-retest is the most basic clarification of reliability, well-defined by the applicability

    of results. Reliability is measured on a scale of 0 to 1 where a reliability coefficient of 1 indicates

    that there is a 100% communication between two methods or tests. Greater than 0.80 should well

    test reliability be, whilst 0.70 to 0.80 is the acceptable test reliability. Test reliability is

    considered poor when it is less than 0.70. The test reliability is 0.844 in the sample test statistics

    in Chapter 24 of Teaching in Nursing. implying that the test has a good interior consistency.

    Raw score is the amount of test questions which were responded correctly. The raw

    scores in the test statistics in Chapter 24, shows that a majority of students score between 70.0

    and 74.4 with the mean score being 72.69. The raw score’s trend also shows that most of the

    students are collected at scores of between 65.6 and 83.2. Only a few students score below 65.6

    and above 83.2. To instructors, this evidence is of great importance as it benefits them to make

    assumptions about teaching or instructing and to measure or attempt to describe the performance

    of students (Casabianca et al., 2015). Nonetheless, raw scores have petite meaning by themselves

    and need to be converted to other types of scores in order to manage crucial evidence on process

    and relation with other students taking exact tests among others. Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

    The meekest measure of variability strongminded by removing lowest score from the

    highest score is where the range is predictable. The sample test statistic’s range is 44 (92 – 48).

    The range is a measure of variability, which in this case indicates high variability from the

    average value (Billing & Halstead, 2015).

    ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA 4

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Checks that a sentence …: implying  Implying

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     majority (most, usually) wh…: majority  most

     Spelling mista…: strongminded  strong minded

     Grammatical p…: removing lowe…  removing the …

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Three successive sentences begin wit…: The

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Spelling mistake: Ilola  Lola

     in the case of (abou…: In the case of  About

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Spelling mistake: biserial  bi serial

     accurate: accurate  right

     in the process of: in the process of

     Spelling mistake: distractors  dis tractors

    A standard error of quantity provides an approximation of how the difference among the

    observed score and the true score (Billing & Halstead, 2015). It measures the exactness of a

    sample distribution’s depiction of a population using the standard abnormality. For a given

    sample, the standard error can be computed by dividing the standard abnormality by the square

    root of the sample size (Ilola, 2018). In the case of the provided sample test statistics, the

    standard error is 1.822 (9.813÷√29). This is a small standard error that indicates that the sample

    is more representative of the overall student population. To check student’s true score from the

    observed score, teachers can use standard error (Frey, 2018). According to Billing and Halstead

    (2015), instructors and faculty members can give a student the help of doubt, adding the standard

    fault to each raw before assigning the grades. Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

    Beginning with, testing the essence of a test, it is indispensable to look at analyzing each

    of the fragments. Analytical analysis of each test item comprises the point biserial index (PBI)

    the p-value (item difficulty index) for the accurate answers and the ploys to each item

    (McDonald, 2018). Nevertheless, an upgrading can be made to individual item analysis multiple

    choice classroom tests and statistical evidence administered can be used to expand the items and

    illuminate test results for future use. Assessing the p-value of each item and testing the PBI of

    each item is encompassed in the process of analyzing individual items. The right answers of the

    PBI and p-value correspond to the p-value and PBI of an item. Recognize that correct options

    have a positive PBI and identify whether any distractors have a positive PBI to ensure that the

     

     

    ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA 5

    eliminating them or to ensure that their difficulty level is desirable. Likewise, it is of great

    essence to consider gain or abandon items that come out to be shocked. Revise the items based

    on the data and the study evaluation before considering entering them in the item bank.

    When determining the benefit of items, that p-value that is less than 0.30 is measured

    very difficult items whilst those whose p-value is greater than 0.90 are considered easy items

    (McDonald, 2018). Very easy items cannot be detached from a test but those with very high p

    ethics should be examined carefully and revised before being entered into the item bank. Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

    Nonetheless, difficult questions with a p-value less than 0.30 can be excepted from a test or

    maintained if their difficulty level is treated as needed. From these, we find that a p-value of 076

    is neither very high nor very low, therefore, there is no course to eliminate the item.

    An essential stage in the individual item is watching thoroughly at the PBI of each option

    analysis. One or more ploy having a positive PBI and another a negative PBI implies that

    students who reached low on the test selected the correct option more time and again than those

    that talented high on the test (McDonald, 2018). It illustrates an aspect of item uncertainty that

    wronged or deceived the high-achieving students. It may also be an indication that all the

    students had experienced confusion on the item that they were guessing. A teacher should check

    these items judiciously to either eradicate them from the test or revise them for future use.

    To know that learning has taken place we custom tools like tests by computing the

    performance of the students (Center for Teaching Innovation, n.d.). We can say that learning has

    taken place based on the model test statistics, admitting partly, given most scores of the

    checking are near to the mean score, assuming that the passing score is 75%. The mean score, in

    this case, is 75.4 and the median is 77 viewing that both are close demonstrating that scores are

    distributed around the mean and as such, most students have performed well. Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

    ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA 6

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Student: Submitted to Grand Canyon University

     Spelling mistake: examinees  examines

    options do not complicate the students. Furthermore, it is of great kernel to identify the ploy that

    was not chosen since this means they did not work as prepared. Likewise, review the items that

    have intruded minimum standards where items with a p-value of less than 0.30 normally

    illustrate that they were too problematic for the group and it may be necessary to consider

    While the model statistics show that examinees performed well on the test, more can be

    done to close the gap among the highest score of 93 and the lowest score of 52, by confirming

    that more students perform high scores. These steps include denoting to individual learner

    assessment data and using recall question and answer sessions to check prior learning. Assignment: Analyzing Assessment Data

     

     

    ANALYZING ASSESSMENT DATA 7

    References

    Billings, D. M. G., & Halstead, J. A. (2015). Teaching in nursing: A guide for faculty (5th ed.).

    St. Louis, MO: Saunders. ISBN-13: 9780323290548

    Casabianca, J. M., Lockwood, J. R., & McCaffrey, D. F. (2015). Trends in Classroom

    Observation Scores. Educational and psychological measurement, 75(2), 311–337.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164414539163

    Center for Teaching Innovation (n.d.). Measuring Student Learning.

    https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/assessment-evaluation/measuring-student-

    learning

    Frey, B. (2018). The SAGE encyclopedia of educational research, measurement, and evaluation

    (Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: 10.4135/9781506326139

    Ilola, E. (2018, Sept 26). A beginner’s guide to standard deviation and standard error.

    https://s4be.cochrane.org/blog/2018/09/26/a-beginners-guide-to-standard-deviation-and-

    standard-error/

    McDonald, M. E. (2018). The nurse educator’s guide to assessing learning outcomes.