ANJHELICA P.

MAGBANUA
BSED-3C

LM 8 - Activity 1

CLASSIFYING ITEM-IMPROVEMENT APPROACH 

Below are descriptions of procedures done to review and improve items. On the  space
provided, write J if a judgemental approach is used and E if empirically-based. 

J 1. The Math Coordinator of Grade VII classes examined the periodical tests  prepared
by the Math teachers to see if their items are aligned to the target  outcomes for the
first quarter. 

J 2. The alternatives of the multiple-choice items of the Social Studies test were 
reviewed to discover if they have only one correct answer. 

E 3. To determine if the items are efficiently discriminating between the more able 
students from the less able ones, a Biology teacher obtained the  discrimination index
(D) of the items. 

E 4. A Technology Education teacher was interested to see if the criterion referenced test
has devised shows a difference in the items’ post-test and  pre-test p-values. 

J 5. An English teacher conducted a session with his students to find out if there are 
other responses acceptable in their literature test. He encouraged them to  rationalize
their answers.
ANJHELICA P. MAGBANUA
BSED-3C

LM 8 – Activity 2
Method Selection 

This component will test your ability to apply empirical procedures for item
improvement. 

1. A final test in Science was administered to a Grade IV class of 50. The teacher wants to 
improve further the items for next year’s use. Calculate a quality index that can be used 
using the given data and indicate the possible revision needed by some items. 
Item Number   Index  Revision needed to be done
getting item
correct

1  34  0.68 Very good item

2  18  0.36 Reasonably good item, but possibly subject to

improvement

3  10  0.2 Poor item, to be rejected or improved by

revision

4  46  0.92 Very good item

5  8  0.16 Poor item, to be rejected or improved by

revision

2. Below are additional data collected for the same items. Calculate another quality index 
and indicate what needs to be improved with the obtained index as a basis.
Item  Upper   Lower Index  Revision needed to be done
Group Group 

1  25  9  0.32 Reasonably good item, but possibly subject

to improvement

2  9  9  0 Poor item, to be rejected or improved by

revision

3  2  8  -0.12 Poor item, to be rejected or improved by

revision

4  38  8  0.6 Poor item, to be rejected or improved by

revision
 5  1  7  -0.12 Poor item, to be rejected or improved by
revision

3. A distracter analysis table is given for a test item given to a class of 60. Obtain the 
necessary item statistics using the given data. 
Item  Difficulty  Discriminati Group Alternatives
Index (p)
N = 30 on Index (D)
A  B  *C  D  Omit

1  0.42 0.007 Upper  2  18  5  0

Lower  0  10  20  0

Write your evaluation on the following aspects of the item:

a. Difficulty of the item –
The item is difficult for the upper class but was correctly answered by lower group

b. Discriminating power of the item –

It has a high discriminating index

c. Plausibility of options –
distractor ‘D’ is not working at all, because no one selected it.

d. Ambiguity of the answer –

Low percentage of ambiguity