@article{ijdeaor2022311,
author={{Ntumi, Simon and Agbenyo, Sheilla and Bulala, Tapela},
title={Parallelism of Test Items: Estimating the Means (米), Variances (考<SUP>2</SUP>) and Covariances (C考<SUP>2</SUP>) of Alternate Test Forms},
journal={International Journal of Data Envelopment Analysis and *Operations Research*},
volume={3},
number={1},
pages={1--7},
year={2022},
url={http://pubs.sciepub.com/ijdeaor/3/1/1},
abstract={<b>Background</b>: Within the space of classical test theory (CTT), alternate test forms are needed so that they can be applied to different groups or at different testing occasions. This CTT theoretical assumption urged the researchers to construct alternate test forms and estimate their parameters (米, 考<SUP>2</SUP> and C考<SUP>2</SUP>). <b>Methods</b>: To obtain the parameter estimates (米, 考<SUP>2</SUP> and C考<SUP>2</SUP>), three (3) alternate test forms (X1, X2 and X3) were carefully constructed and administrated to fifty-eight (58) business students at University Practice Senior High School in the Cape Coast metropolis, Ghana. One psychological test scale (DASS21) was also adopted as the form Y. The tests were administered to the students under suitable and conductive examination conditions and this ensured validity and reliability of the scores. <b>Findings</b>: After the statistical estimations, the study found that mean parameter of the four forms (X1, X2, X3 and Form Y) were unequal (米X1 ≧米X2 ≧米X3 ≧ 米Y). That is X1 (米=7.23, n=58), X2 (米=7.14, n=58), X3 (米= 8.01, n=58) and Form Y-DASS21 (米=7.92, n=58) p (0.306, CI95%) > 0.05. On the variance parameter, similar results were accrued as the test forms are not equal in their variances (考<SUP>2</SUP>X1X2≧考<SUP>2</SUP>X1X3≧考<SUP>2</SUP>X2 X3≧考<SUP>2</SUP>Y). This was reported as X1 (考<SUP>2</SUP> =6.120, n=58), X2 (考<SUP>2</SUP>=9.007, n=58), X3 (考<SUP>2</SUP>=8.040, n=58) and Form ※Y§ DASS21 recorded a variance of (考<SUP>2</SUP>=8.034, n=58) (p-value 0.121>0.05). Finally, on the covariance parameter, we found that the test forms were not equal (C考<SUP>2</SUP>X1Y≧C考<SUP>2</SUP>X2 Y≧C考<SUP>2</SUP>X3Y). The result is reported as (X1= C考<SUP>2</SUP> =5.338, n=58, p= 0.846), (X2= C考<SUP>2</SUP>=6.023, n=58, p= 0.831) (X3= C考<SUP>2</SUP>=7.898, n=58, p= 0.783). <b>Conclusions</b>: The study concluded that the constructed alternate test forms met the congeneric parallelism conditions. The estimated parameters were similar in content, where the 米, 考<SUP>2</SUP> and C考<SUP>2</SUP> were similar across all the test forms (X1, X2, X3 and Form Y).},
doi={10.12691/ijdeaor-3-1-1}
publisher={Science and Education Publishing}
}