Home   Forum   Help Search Calendar Links Login Register   **
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 25, 2012, 09:24:21 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Program
EduWebTVLatih TubiLINUSManaging Challenging SchoolsGerakan Memperkasakan SekolahLDPICTL SMICTL SRMalaysian Grid for Learning (MyGfL)ProtimPPSMISIP
Recent
[Today at 07:37:11 PM]

[Today at 05:41:21 PM]

[Today at 11:36:49 AM]

[Today at 11:07:06 AM]

[Yesterday at 11:56:50 PM]

[Yesterday at 10:23:08 PM]

[Yesterday at 08:34:38 PM]

[Yesterday at 05:51:30 PM]

[Yesterday at 11:53:44 AM]

[Yesterday at 09:14:15 AM]
 

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ANALISIS ITEM UJIAN PRA-1 GEOGRAFI PMR 2010  (Read 1041 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Lee Chai Yong
SMK Jalan Arang

Senior Member
*

Fame: 12
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 314



WWW
« on: March 17, 2010, 11:58:39 PM »

Saya tidak arif tentang statistik, tetapi saya cuba "testing" dengan masukkan formula-formula indeks diskriminasi item (d) dan indeks kesukaran item (p) untuk menguji soalan yang dijawab oleh 2 kumpulan pelajar saya:
(a)  kumpulan pelajar cemerlang (upper quartile) dengan pelajar buta huruf (lower quartile)
(b)  kumpulan pelajar cemerlang (upper quartile) dengan pelajar lemah (lower quartile)

Hairan, didapati analisis item adalah lebih kurang sama.  Item yang didapati kurang baik dan perlu diubahsuai adalah seperti soalan No. 2, 9, 18, 41, 57 dan 58.  Ubahsuai di sini bermaksud mengubah distraktor supaya dapat menarik pelajar menjawabnya.

There are 2 attachment(s) in this post which you cannot view or download
item analisis pelajar buta huruf.xls
item analisis pelajar lemah.xls
« Last Edit: August 28, 2010, 10:21:57 AM by Lee Chai Yong » Logged
Ting Sing Kiu
SMK Kwong Hua Middle

Novice Member
*

Fame: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2010, 07:21:08 AM »

sudah download. Thank you.
Logged

SMK Kwong Hua Middle
Lee Chai Yong
SMK Jalan Arang

Senior Member
*

Fame: 12
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 314



WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2010, 11:22:47 AM »

From the item analysis of my students, it shows that Q. 2, 9, 18,  57 & 58 have a low discriminate index (d < 0.05).   The actual answers are coloured red, while ** shows the answer good students wrongly picked.  Coincidentally, the poor students also picked the answers marked **.  What makes this happened?

There are 3 attachment(s) in this post which you cannot view or download
2.jpg
58.jpg
9.jpg
Logged
Lee Chai Yong
SMK Jalan Arang

Senior Member
*

Fame: 12
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 314



WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 18, 2010, 08:25:01 PM »

Sorry, got some mistakes in the formula, so I uploaded the 2 files again (edited version).
Logged
Wilter Hawell
PPD Kanowit

Super Member
*

Fame: 534
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3790


Sebuah kebenaran kadangkala mengandungi kesilapan


« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2010, 08:52:35 PM »

Sorry, got some mistakes in the formula, so I uploaded the 2 files again (edited version).
Terima kasih cikgu
Logged

Wilter Hawell
UPA, PPD Kanowit
"Manusia mampu mengemukakan 1000 alasan mengapa mereka gagal tetapi mereka sebenarnya hanya perlukan satu sebab yang kukuh untuk berjaya"
Macduff Ak Goyang
SK Ng Menyebat
Teacher
Veteran Member
*

Fame: 5
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 513


give da best to get da best....GBU


« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2010, 09:02:35 PM »

thank for sharing da info...GBU
Logged

SK Ng Menyebat
Bong Guo Shu
SMK Bandar Samariang
Teacher
Senior Member
*

Fame: 4
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 442



« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2010, 11:39:40 AM »

thank you, will look into so i can use in my own analysis
Logged

Guru Akademik Biasa
SMK Bandar Samariang
smkbsk@gmail.com
Lee Chai Yong
SMK Jalan Arang

Senior Member
*

Fame: 12
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 314



WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2010, 08:47:32 PM »

Ya, Mr. Bong.  I'm looking forward to the result of your analysis.  Hope somebody out there could help to explain, for the item analysis below, is it true that the distractors needed to be change?  It seems that the distractors below are too powerful.  What do you think?  Or good distractors are the one d > 0.3?

There are 5 attachment(s) in this post which you cannot view or download
12.jpg
18.jpg
40.jpg
41.jpg
57.jpg
« Last Edit: March 19, 2010, 08:49:16 PM by Lee Chai Yong » Logged
Tiong Siew Jen
SMT Betong
Teacher
Junior Member
*

Fame: 15
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 82



« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2010, 01:37:28 PM »

Thanks a lot.
Logged

Tiong Siew Jen
Guru
SM Teknik Betong
Lee Chai Yong
SMK Jalan Arang

Senior Member
*

Fame: 12
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 314



WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2010, 03:13:06 PM »

Selepas diteliti, saya dapati analisis item boleh dibahagi kepada :
1.  analisis item tentang kesesuaian soalan yang dibina -  dibuat selepas ujian rintis (fail ini sesuai untuk kumpulan/guru yang membina item tersebut)
2.  analisis item tentang pencapaian pelajar -  tindakan susulan dengan mengubah strategi P&P (fail ini lebih sesuai untuk kegunaan guru di sekolah)

Maka, di sini saya sertai 2 jenis fail analisis item utk dikongsi bersama.  Sila maklumkan saya sekiranya ada bahagian yang perlu penambahbaikan.

There are 2 attachment(s) in this post which you cannot view or download
analis kesesuaian item.xls
analisis item pelajar.xls
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

PIPPBahagian Pembangunan Kurikulume-Paymente-Hasil
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.529 seconds with 25 queries.