A Comparative Study on Item Characteristics of
2014 – 2016 Mathematics Objective Tests in
Junior Secondary School Certificate
Examination Questions in Rivers State

Joe-Kinanee; Josephine Nkem Bosede; Dr. (Mrs.) Goodness W. Orluwene

doi:https://doi.org/10.14445/22315373/IJMTT-V52P576

International Journal of Mathematics Trends and Technology

Research Article | Open Access | Download PDF

Volume 52 | Number 8 | Year 2017 | Article Id. IJMTT-V52P576 | DOI : https://doi.org/10.14445/22315373/IJMTT-V52P576

A Comparative Study on Item Characteristics of 2014 – 2016 Mathematics Objective Tests in Junior Secondary School Certificate Examination Questions in Rivers State

Joe-Kinanee, Josephine Nkem Bosede, Dr. (Mrs.) Goodness W. Orluwene

Citation :

Joe-Kinanee, Josephine Nkem Bosede, Dr. (Mrs.) Goodness W. Orluwene, "A Comparative Study on Item Characteristics of 2014 – 2016 Mathematics Objective Tests in Junior Secondary School Certificate Examination Questions in Rivers State," International Journal of Mathematics Trends and Technology (IJMTT), vol. 52, no. 8, pp. 545-551, 2017. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/22315373/IJMTT-V52P576

Abstract

The study analyzed and compared the item characteristics of Mathematics Junior Secondary School Certificate Examination (JSSCE) questions from 2014 to 2016 academic sessions. Three research questions were answered in the research study. The research adopted the evaluation and descriptive survey designs. A sample of 1,068 was randomly drawn from 8 Local Government Areas, using multistage sampling approach of purposive, proportionate stratified techniques, but only 1,035 Junior Secondary School 3 students participated in the examination, representing 97% of the sample. The instrument for the study were past 2014 to 2016 JSSCE scripts for Mathematics, each having 60 objective test items.. For data analysis, statistical techniques for calculating item analyses item difficulty, discrimination and distracter indices, we are employed. It was found that based on the criteria set for item analyses, all of the tests had good item difficulty and discrimination indices except 2014 Mathematics test item that had just 23% pass on the difficulty indices criteria and 43% on the discrimination criteria. All of the tests items passed the distracter indices criteria. It was recommended among others, that questions that failed to meet the difficulty, discrimination and distracter indices should be eliminated.

Keywords

item characteristics, item difficulty, item discrimination, distracter indices.

References

1) Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National Policy on Education (4th ed.). Lagos: NERDC Press.
2) Federal Republic of Nigeria (2008). 9-tier Universal Basic Education Programme. Lagos: NERDC Press.
3) Igbokwe, C. O. (2015). Recent curriculum reforms at the basic education level in Nigeria aimed at catching them young to create change. American Journal of Educational Research. 3 (1), 31 -37.
4) Iweka, F. (2014). Comprehensive guide to test construction and Administration. Omoku: Chifas Nig.
5) Mozaffer, R. H. & Farhan, J. (2012). Analysis of one-best MCQs: the difficulty index, discrimination index and distracter efficiency. Journal of Pakistan Medical Association. (n.p).
6) Olutola, A.T. (2015). Empirical Analysis of item difficulty and discrimination indices of senior school certificate multiple choice Biology test in Nigeria. A paper presented at the 41st Annual conference of international Association of Educational Assessment (IAEA) held on 11th - 15th October, 2015 at University of Kansas, Lawrence Kansas USA.
7) Onunkwo, G. I. N. (2002). Fundamentals of educational measurement and evaluation. In Iweka, F. Comprehensive guide to test construction and Administration. Omoku: Chifas Nig.
8) Orluwene, G. W. (2012). Introduction to test theory and development process. Port Harcourt: Chris-Ron integrated services.
9) Orluwene, G. W. & Igwe, B. N. (2016). Psychometric properties of WASSCE questions in Civic Education (2015) using Rivers State students. International Journal of Psychology and Counselling, 8 – 15 (1), 92 – 115.
10) Sidhu, K. S. (2005). New approaches to measurement and evaluation. New Delhi; sterling publishing private limited.
11) Soyemi (1999). Factors responsible for students’ poor performance in Mathematics in senior secondary school: retrieved December 14, 2016. Available online at https://enisplus.com/product.php?id=727. 14/12/2016.
12) Ugodulunwa, C. A. (2008). Fundamentals of educational measurements and evaluation. Jos: Fab Anieh Nig. Ltd.
13) Wiersma, W. & Jurs, S. (1990). Educational measurement and testing. Needham Heights, MA Allyn and Bacon.
14) Wikipedia (The free online encyclopedia) (2016). Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Examination_Council_(Nigeria, 18/12/2016.