International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences
Int. j. adv. appl. sci.
Print ISSN: 2313-626X
Volume 4, Issue 3 (March 2017), Pages: 154-159
Title: Using G-theory in developing performance assessment of the physical domain of children
Author(s): M.R. Nor Mashitah 1, 2, *, M.N. Mariani 1
1Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2Department of Early Childhood and Education, Faculty of Education and Human Development, Sultan Idris Education University, Perak, Malaysia
Full Text - PDF XML
This study investigates potential applications of Generalizability theory (G-theory) in the development of performance-based assessment procedure. 77 kindergarten children were assessed as participants in this study. Analysis of variance showed that nested rater variance component in person and item (r:pi) component accounted for the highest percentage of the total variance, i.e. by σ²r:pi= 0.12208; 33.1% and the smallest, variance of person σp = 0.05879; 15.9%. Secondly, through analysis in G-study, 74% of the overall variance can be explained by the design. Next, based on optimization analysis in D-study that the overall absolute Coefficient G reading phi (Ф) remains at 0.86 which was an acceptable value. Lastly, for reliability test from G-facets analysis, the overall physical domain reliability was recorded at 0.85 as the reliability of the 25 items was ranging from 0.84 to 0.85. This study base on Theory-G had an impact on minimizing the error of measurement and determining the appropriateness use of items in the administration of the assessment.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by IASE.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Keywords: Physical domain, Performance-based assessment, G-Theory
Article History: Received 3 November 2016, Received in revised form 21 January 2017, Accepted 22 January 2017
Digital Object Identifier:
Mashitah MRN and Mariani MN (2017). Using G-theory in developing performance assessment of the physical domain of children. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(3): 154-159
|Ary D, Jacobs LC, and Razavieh A (1996). Introduction to research in education. Harcourt Brace College Publishers, Florida, USA.|
|Barnwell D (1989). 'Naive'native speakers and judgements of oral proficiency in Spanish. Language Testing, 6(2): 152-163.
|Cardinet J, Johnson S, and Pini G (2009). Applying generalizability theory using EduG: Quantitative methodology series. Routledge, New York, USA.
|Gardner H (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. Basic Book, New York, USA.|
|Harrington HL, Meisels SJ, McMahon P, Dichtelmiller ML, and Jablon JR (1997). Observing, documenting, and assessing learning: The work sampling system handbook for teacher educators. Rebus, Michigan, USA.|
|Hills TW (1993). Assessment in context: Teachers and children at work. Young Children, 48(5): 20-28.|
|Kleinert H, Greene P, and Harte M (2002). Creating and using meaningful alternative assessments. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(4): 40-47.
|McNamara TF and Adams RJ (1991). Exploring rater behaviour with Rasch techniques. In the Annual Language Testing Research Colloquium, Princeton, USA. Available online at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED345498.pdf|
|Pollitt A and Hutchinson C (1987). Calibrating graded assessments: Rasch partial credit analysis of performance in writing. Language Testing, 4(1): 72-92.
|Shavelson R and Webb N (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. SAGE, California, USA.|
|Shohamy E (1983). The stability of oral proficiency assessment on the oral interview testing procedures. Language Learning, 33(4): 527-540.
|Shohamy E (1984). Does the testing method make a difference? The case of reading comprehension. Language Testing, 1(2): 147-170.
|Thompson B and Crowley S (1994). When classical measurement theory is insufficient and generalizability theory is essential. In the Annaual Meeting of the Western Psychological Association, Kailaukona, Hawaii. Available online at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED377218.pdf|
|Wehlage GG, Newmann FM and Secada WG (1996). Standards for authentic achievement and pedagogy. In: Fred MN (Ed.), Authentic Achievement: Restructuring Schools for Intellectual Quality: 21-48. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, USA.|