User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
 Views 30
 Downloands 7
A Comparison of Different Designs in Scoring of PISA 2009 Reading Open Ended Items According to Generalizability Theory
2023
Journal:  
Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi
Author:  
Abstract:

This study compares the different designs obtained through four raters’ scoring the open-ended items used in PISA 2009 reading literacy altogether or alternately according to the Generalizability Theory. The sample of the research was composed of 362 students (out of 4996 students participating in PISA 2009) who responded to the items of reading skills and who were scored by more than one rater. Two designs were created so as to be used in generalizability theory in the study. One of them was the crossed design symbolized as “s x i x r” (student x item x rater), in which students are scored by each rater in terms of the same skills. The second was the nested design symbolized as “(r:s) x i”, where each rater scored only a group of students and raters are nested in students and the items were crossed with these variables. On comparing the s x i x r design with (r:s) x i design, it was found that the relative and absolute error variances estimated for (r:s) x i design were smaller than those for s x i x r design and that therefore the G and Phi coefficients took on bigger values. On increasing the number of raters in both designs, the G and Phi coefficients also increased in the D study. While acceptable values of G and Phi coefficients were reached on reducing the number of raters by half in Booklet 2, raising the number of raters seemed more appropriate in Booklet 8.

Keywords:

0
2023
Author:  
Citation Owners
Information: There is no ciation to this publication.
Similar Articles






Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi

Field :   Eğitim Bilimleri

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 347
Cite : 2.349
2023 Impact : 0.356
Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi