Analysis of item characteristics of the Slosson Intelligence Test for British Columbia school children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated item characteristics which may affect the validity of the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) when used with school children in British Columbia. The SIT was developed as a quick, easily administered individual measure of intelligence to correlate highly with the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale as an anchor test. Use of the SIT has become widespread, but little technical information is available to support this. To examine the internal psychometric properties of the SIT for British Columbia schoolchildren, SIT responses were collected from 319 children (163 males, 156 females) in three age groups (7 1/2, 9 1/2, and 11 1/2 years). These data were subjected to a variety of item analysis procedures. Indices were produced for: item difficulty, item discrimination (item-total test score correlations), rank correlation between empirically determined item difficulties and item order given in the test, test homgeneity, and item-pair homogeneity. Results of the item analyses suggest that the SIT does not function appropriately when used with British Columbia school children. Two-thirds of the item difficulty indices were found to be outside the desired range: one-third of the items did not discriminate effectively; and many items are not in correct order of difficulty in administration of the SIT. The thesis discusses effects of these findings on the test's internal consistency, criterion validity, and technical utilization. Factors which may underlie the shift in item difficulties are also discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".