Developing Achievement Test: A Research for Assessment of 5th Grade Biology Subject
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to prepare a multiple-choice achievement test with high reliability and validity for the “Let’s Solve the Puzzle of Our Body” unit. For this purpose, a multiple choice achievement test consisting of 46 items was applied to 178 fifth grade students in total. As a result of the test and material analysis performed during the test development process, difficulty, distinctiveness, and item-total correlation coefficients of the materials were calculated. For the validity study, a table of specifications was prepared and the Content Validity Index (CVI) was found to be 0.95 by taking an expert opinion. As a result of the analysis, 8 items were removed from the test and the KR-20 reliability coefficient of the final test consisting of 38 items was calculated as 0.87. As a result of the item analyses, while item difficulty indices were valued between 0.30 and 0.74, item distinctiveness indeces were valued between 0.31 and 0.71. The average difficulty of the test was calculated as moderate (0.56) and its distinctiveness was calculated as very good (0.49).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".