The Comparison of Accuracy Scores on the Paper and Pencil Testing vs. Computer-Based Testing.
The Comparison of Accuracy Scores on the Paper and Pencil Testing vs. Computer-Based Testing.
复制标题
纸笔和铅笔测试与计算机测试的准确度分数比较。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
H. Retnawati
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Retnawati
本研究旨在比较基于纸笔测试（PPT）和基于计算机测试（CBT）的英语水平测试（TOEP）的测试成绩的准确性。研究者利用参与者对2008-2010年PPT的回答以及2013-2014年CBT TOEP对听力和阅读部分1A、2A和3A集的数据，利用经典测试理论和信息函数值估计了信度估计结果，并将PPT上的项目反应理论与CBT进行了比较，其具有更大的可靠性并且信息函数的值被认为是更准确的。研究表明，采用经典测验理论，PPT和CBT结果的信度系数基本相同;采用项目反应理论，虽然PPT和CBT在几个分测验中的信息函数值比较接近，但对于能力中等的被试，CBT比PPT更准确，对于低能力和高能力的被试，PPT比CBT更倾向于准确。
This study aimed to compare the accuracy of the test scores as results of Test of English Proficiency (TOEP) based on paper and pencil test (PPT) versus computer-based test (CBT). Using the participants’ responses to the PPT documented from 2008-2010 and data of CBT TOEP documented in 2013-2014 on the sets of 1A, 2A, and 3A for the Listening and Reading section, the researcher estimated the reliability estimation results using classical test theory and the value of information function and on the item response theory on PPT are then compared with CBT, which has the greater reliability and the value of information functions is said to be more accurate. The study shows that with the classical test theory approach, the reliability coefficients between the scores of the results of PPT and those of CBT are almost the same, and using the item response theory, it was found that although the value of the information function on PPT and CBT relatively similar in several subtests, there is a tendency for participants with the moderate ability that CBT is more accurate than PPT, and for the low and high ability of participants, PPT tends to be more accurate than CBT.
开发 CBT 英语水平测试
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
PC Conference 2005
影响因子：
--
作者：
Ishikawa;S.;Nakamura;Y.
通讯作者：
Y.