MOUNT KENYA UNIVERSITY
(MAY – AUG 2022/2023)
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIT CODE : BEP3101
UNIT NAME: EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION RESOURCES
NAME: SAMSON ONDICHO
REG NO: BEDA/2021/83181
DATE OF SUBMISSION :14/07/2023
QUESTION ONE
i.
Lack of parental support
The main issue with CBC is that some parents of students currently enrolled in competencebased education were graduates of outcome-based education (8:4:4 curriculum).
Due to their lack of familiarity with the new curriculum, some parents find it extremely
challenging to comprehend what is happening.
As a result, parents find it challenging to help their kids with their homework and other
household responsibilities.
ii.
Curriculum Structure.
The CBC curriculum is structured so that the majority of the activities take place virtually
simultaneously.
This implies that it would be extremely difficult for a student to catch up with those who were in
class while they were absent, just in case they were absent from school for whatever reason.
iii.
The majority of teachers are lacking in communication, information, and
technology (ICT) abilities.
Many teachers find it difficult to incorporate information, communication, and technology (ICT)
into their lessons and instruction in competency-based subjects.
When used appropriately, technology helps students and teachers gain access to fresh concepts
and assignments.
They can also use it to study new areas of knowledge and come up with fresh ways to approach
previously recognized jobs.
This indicates that it is difficult for instructors to execute the curriculum in this era of
technological growth if they lack these ICT skills.
iv.
Inadequate educational and instructional materials.
The government books for some classes, particularly grade 7, have not yet been completely
supplied to JSS, which has had a severe impact on how this curriculum is being implemented.
v. Increased Chances Of Procrastination
One of the biggest disadvantages of competency-based learning is that it may lead to
Procrastination amongst unenthusiastic students. Since there is no fixed schedule or time frame
For the completion of the course, it may lead to laziness among the students. For the success of
A competency-based learning program, it is essential that the students be self-disciplined, and
Self-motivated to be able to plan and work independently. This is not possible for all students.
Competency-based education does not suit subject areas where new skills and new
Knowledge need to be rapidly accommodated within a specific timeline. Additionally,
Competency-based educational programs tend to focus on developing skills that are needed at
Present and are less focused on preparing learners with the flexibility needed for a more
Uncertain future.
QUESTION TWO
Item Analysis: Difficulty Index and Discrimination Index
There are two important characteristics of an item that will be of interest to the teacher. These
are: (a) item difficulty and (b) discrimination index. We shall learn how to measure these
characteristics and apply our knowledge in making a decision about the item in question.
The difficulty of an item or item difficulty is defined as the number of students who are able to
answer the item correctly divided by the total number of students. Thus:
Item difficulty = number of students with correct answer/ total number of students the item
difficulty is usually expressed in percentage.
Example: What is the item difficulty index of an item if 25 students are unable to answer it
correctly while 75 answered it correctly?
Here, the total number of students is 100, hence the item difficulty index is 75/100 or 75%.
Another example: 25 students answered the item correctly while 75 students did not. The total
number of students is 100 so the difficulty index is 25/100 or 25 which is 25%.
It is a more difficult test item than that one with a difficulty index of 75.
A high percentage indicates an easy item/question while a low percentage indicates a difficult
item.
One problem with this type of difficulty index is that it may not actually indicate that the item is
difficult (or easy). A student who does not know the subject matter will naturally be unable to
answer the item correctly even if the question is easy. How do we decide on the basis of this
index whether the item is too difficult or too easy?
Difficult items tend to discriminate between those who know and those who do not know the
answer. Conversely, easy items cannot discriminate between these two groups of students. We
are therefore interested in deriving a measure that will tell us whether an item can discriminate
between these two groups of students. Such a measure is called an index of discrimination.
An easy way to derive such a measure is to measure how difficult an item is with respect to those
in the upper 25% of the class and how difficult it is with respect to those in the lower 25% of the
class. If the upper 25% of the class found the item easy yet the lower 25% found it difficult, then
the item can discriminate properly between these two groups. Thus:
Index of discrimination = DU — DL (U — Upper group; L — Lower group)
Discrimination index is the difference between the proportion of the top scorers who got an item
correct and the proportion of the lowest scorers who got the item right. The discrimination index
range is between -1 and +1. The closer the discrimination index is to +1, the more effectively the
item can discriminate or distinguish between the two groups of students. A negative
discrimination index means more from the lower group got the item correctly. The last item is
not good and so must be discarded.
Theoretically, the index of discrimination can range from -1.0 (when DU =0 and DL = 1) to 1.0
(when DU
= 1 and DL = 0). When the index of discrimination is equal to -1, then this means that all of the
lower 25% of the students got the correct answer while all of the upper 25% got the wrong
answer. In a sense, such an index discriminates correctly between the two groups but the item
itself is highly questionable. Why should the bright ones get the wrong answer and the poor ones
get the right answer? On the other hand, if the index of discrimination is 1.0, then this means that
all of the lower 25% failed to get the correct answer while all of the upper 25% got the correct
answer. This is a perfectly discriminating item and is the ideal item that should be included in the
test.
From these discussions, let us agree to discard or revise all items that have negative
discrimination index for although they discriminate correctly
Between the upper and lower 25% of the class, the content of the item itself may be highly
dubious or doubtful. As in the case of the index of difficulty, we have the following rule of
thumb:
The INDEX OF DISCRIMINATION is the difference between the proportion of the
upper group who got an item right and the proportion of the lower group who got the item right.
This index is dependent upon the difficulty of an item. It may reach a maximum value of 100 for an
item with an index of difficulty of 50, that is, when 100% of the upper group and none of the lower
group answer the item correctly. For items of less than or greater than 50 difficulty, the index of
discrimination has a maximum value of less than
More Sophisticated Discrimination Index
Item discrimination refers to the ability of an item to differentiate among students on the basis
of how well they know the material being tested. Various hand calculation procedures have
traditionally been used to compare item responses to total test scores using high and low scoring
groups of students. Computerized analyses provide more accurate assessment of the discrimination
power of items because they take into account responses of all students rather than just high and
low scoring groups.
The item discrimination index provided by is a Pearson Product Moment correlation between
student responses to a particular item and total scores on all other items on the test. This index is the
equivalent of a point-biserial coefficient in this application. It provides an estimate of the degree to
which an individual item is measuring the same thing as the rest of the items.
Because the discrimination index reflects the degree to which an item and the test as a whole are
measuring a unitary ability or attribute, values of the coefficient will tend to be lower for tests
measuring a wide range of content areas than for more homogeneous tests. Item discrimination
indices must always be interpreted in the context of the type of test which is being analyzed. Items
with low discrimination indices are often ambiguously worded and should be examined. Items with
negative indices should be examined to determine why a negative value was obtained. For example,
a negative value may indicate that the item was mis-keyed, so that students who knew the material
tended to choose an unkeyed, but correct, response option.
Tests with high internal consistency consist of items with mostly positive relationships with total
test score. In practice, values of the discrimination index will seldom exceed .50 because of the
differing shapes of item and total score distributions. Classifies item discrimination as "good" if
the index is above .30; "fair" if it is between. 10 and .30; and "poor" if it is below .10.
A good item is one that has good discriminating ability and has sufficient level of difficult (not
too difficult nor too easy).
At the end of the Item Analysis report, test items are listed according to their degrees of
difficulty (easy, medium, and hard) and discrimination (good. fair, poor). These distributions
provide a quick overview of the test. And can be used to identify items which are not performing
well and which can perhaps be improved or discarded.
QUESTION THREE
The term ‘positive discrimination’ is sometimes used to refer to ‘positive measures’ or ‘special
measures’. Special measures aim to foster greater equality by supporting groups of people who
face, or have faced, entrenched discrimination so they can have similar access to opportunities as
others in the community.
The Age Discrimination Act allows for “positive measures to be taken on the basis of age”. The
Act says that it is “not against the law to provide a genuine benefit to people of a particular age
group or to do something that helps meet an identified need for people of a certain age group or
is intended to reduce a disadvantage experienced by persons of a particular age.”
Example: A hairdresser gives discounts to customers with a Seniors Card.
Other federal discrimination laws allow special measures to be taken to improve equality of
opportunity for people based on their race, disability or sex.
Example: A gym offers a women’s only exercise class as a special measure after it receives
feedback that women are less likely to participate in exercise classes with men because they feel
uncomfortable.
Special measures can also be taken ‘to achieve equality of opportunity for people based on their
sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, relationship status, pregnancy or potential
pregnancy status or family responsibilities’