A TEST AND ITEM ANALYSIS REPORT

BY

JOSEPH A AZAGSIBA
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page
1 Introduction 6
1.1 Purpose of report 6
1.2 Approach 6
1.3 Report structure 7

2 Test Analysis 7
2.1 Frequency histogram 7
2.2 Descriptive statistics 9

3 Item Analysis 10
3.1 Difficulty index 10
3.2 Discrimination index 12
3.3 Item reliability 13

4 Conclusion 13

APPENDIX A: CODED DATA 15

APPENDIX B: DISCRIMINATION INDEX 17
APPENDIX C: DIFFICULTY INDEX 18
REFERENCES 19

2
 List of Tables

Table Table name Page

1 Report structure 7
2 Measurements of values of central 9
tendency, standard deviation and KR20
3 Difficulty index 10
4 Discrimination index 12
5 Reliability co-efficient 13

3
 List of Figures

Figure Figure name Page

1 Histogram of grouped frequency 8
distribution
2 Normal distribution curve 9

4
1. INTRODUCTION
This is a test and item analysis report on the variability and reliability of twenty multiple-choice
questions answered by twenty-five learners. It comprises the Introduction, the Test Analysis, the Item
Analysis and a Conclusion.

1.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to disseminate information on the measure of tendency and variability
on a set of data of twenty multiple choice questions that have been answered by twenty-five
learners.

1.2 Approach
The methodology employed to arrive at the purpose of this report consisted of the following steps:
• The relevant data was collected.

5
 • The collected data was recorded and tabulated using Microsoft Excel.
• The mean, mode, median and standard deviation of the scores obtained by learners were
calculated.
• The difficulty index and the discrimination index were then calculated.
• The reliability coefficient was also calculated using the Kuder-Richardson procedure (KR20).
• The scores of learners were grouped into upper and lower levels.
• A histogram of the data was drawn.
• Conclusions were then made based on the analysed data.

1.3 Report structure

The structure of this report comprises an introduction, a test analysis, an item analysis and a
conclusion. These sections are subdivided into subsections as shown in Table 1.
Table1: Report structure
Section Heading Subheading
1 Introduction Purpose
Approach
Report structure

6
 2 Test Analysis Frequency graph
Descriptive statistics

3 Item analysis Difficulty index

Discrimination index
4 Conclusion Conclusion

1 TEST ANALYSIS
2.1 Frequency histogram
The histogram or bar graph in Figure 1 displays statistical data about the number of learners who
answered the multiple-choice questions correctly. From the histogram, one learner each fell within
each of the score intervals of 20-28, 38- 46, 56-64, and 74-81; whilst two learners each were
represented within the score intervals of 29-37 and 100-108. Five learners fell within the score
interval of 47 and 55. No learner fell within the 91-99 score interval, whilst six learners were placed
within the score intervals of 65-73 and 82-90.
Frequency Histogram
Figure 1: Frequency histogram
7 20-28
6 29-37
Frequency

5 38-46
47-55
4 56-64
3 65-73
74-81
2 82-90
1 91-99
0 100-108
100-108
20-28
29-37
38-46
47-55
56-64
65-73
74-81
82-90
91-99

7
I ntervals
2.2 Descriptive statistics
Table 2: Measurements of values of central tendency, standard deviation and KR20.
Mean 65.99
Mode 65
Median 65
STDEV 21.90
#Upper 13
#Lower 12
STDEV2 479.39
#Question 20
k-1 19
KR20 1.04

8
The mean (M), which is a measure of central tendency, is 65.99. The mode is 65 and the median
(MDN) is 65. The mean, median and mode of this data are almost the same. This means that about
half of the learners fell on either side of these values. The data distribution is therefore normal.
Figure 2 illustrates a normal distribution curve. The standard deviation (SD) is 21.90.
Figure 2: Normal distribution curve

3. ITEM ANALYSIS

3.1 Difficulty index

The difficulty index for each item computed using the formula,
p= Number of students selecting correct answer
Total number of students attempting the item
is given in Table 3.

Table 3: Difficulty index

DIFFICULTY INDEX

9
Quest #Ans #Cor p Remarks
1 25 21 0.84 Too Easy
2 25 22 0.88 Too Easy
3 25 17 0.68 Moderate
4 25 12 0.48 Moderate
5 25 21 0.84 Too Easy
6 25 17 0.68 Moderate
7 25 11 0.44 Moderate
8 23 12 0.52 Moderate
9 25 13 0.52 Moderate
10 24 8 0.33 Moderate
11 25 23 0.92 Too Easy
12 25 19 0.76 Moderate

10
Table 3: Difficulty index

DIFFICULTY INDEX
Quest #Ans #Cor p Remarks
13 25 15 0.6 Moderate
14 25 21 0.84 Too Easy
15 25 20 0.8 Moderate
16 24 22 0.92 Too Easy
17 24 15 0.63 Moderate
18 24 8 0.33 Moderate
19 25 13 0.52 Moderate
20 25 16 0.64 Moderate

From this information the level of difficulty or easiness of each item was determined. Items that have
p values less than 0.20 are relatively difficult and those that have p values above 0.80, relatively
easy. Thus six items or 30% of the items were relatively easy and 14 or 70% were moderately
difficult.

11
3.2 Discrimination index
The discrimination index for each item is provided in Table 4.
Table 4: Discrimination index

DISCRIMINATION INDEX

Quest U L D Remarks
1 15 6 0.69 Desirable
2 15 7 0.54 Desirable
3 14 3 0.85 Desirable
4 8 4 0.31 Desirable
5 15 6 0.69 Desirable
6 12 5 0.54 Desirable
7 9 2 0.54 Desirable
8 10 2 0.62 Desirable
9 10 3 0.54 Desirable
10 8 0 0.62 Desirable
11 14 9 0.38 Desirable
12 14 5 0.69 Desirable
13 12 3 0.69 Desirable
14 15 6 0.69 Desirable
15 14 6 0.62 Desirable
16 17 7 0.62 Desirable
17 12 3 0.69 Desirable
18 5 3 0.15 Desirable
19 12 1 0.85 Desirable
20 11 5 0.46 Desirable

12
A positive discrimination index (D) indicates that the item’s discrimination is adequate. All these
items show positive discrimination index values implying that all items have adequate
discrimination.

3.3 Item reliability

The item reliability coefficient was calculated using the Kuder-Richardson procedure. The resulting
coefficient ( KR20), 1.04, is provided in Table 5.

Table 5: Reliability coefficient

KR20 1.04

The reliability coefficient of 1.04 reflects the SD value of 21.9 as being a large variability score. With
30% of the test items being too easy, the test reliability is affected to some extent as when some
items become very easy or very difficult, the test’s reliability goes down.

4. CONCLUSION
From the data analysis all the test items are desirable as they all show positive discrimination
abilities. However,of the twenty test items, six of them, items 1, 2, 5, 11, 14 and 16, have p values in
excess of 0.80 thus rendering them relatively easy items. This enabled the students who did not
even know their stuff to easily pick out the correct answers.

13
To prevent students who do not know their stuff from scoring undeserved marks therefore, it is
recommended that items 1, 2, 5, 11, 14 and 16 be reconsidered and reconstructed to improve their
difficulty levels.

14
 Data coding
Appendix A

Key C B D D B C D A C B A C B D A A C D B C
#
St Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q2 #C Inco #A G
No Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 or r ns % roup
100.0
11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 0 20 0 U
100.0
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 0 20 0 U
2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 2 20 90.00 U
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 18 2 20 90.00 U
25 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 2 20 90.00 U
14 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 17 2 19 89.47 U
13 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 17 3 20 85.00 U
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 3 20 85.00 U
5 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 15 5 20 75.00 U
4 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 14 6 20 70.00 U
12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 14 6 20 70.00 U
8 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 13 7 20 65.00 U
9 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 13 7 20 65.00 U
18 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 13 7 20 65.00 L
23 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 13 7 20 65.00 L
10 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 12 8 20 60.00 L
6 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 11 9 20 55.00 L
21 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 11 9 20 55.00 L
7 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 10 10 20 50.00 L
22 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 10 10 20 50.00 L
17 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 8 9 17 47.06 L
15 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 11 20 45.00 L

15
 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 6 13 19 31.58 L
24 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 6 13 19 31.58 L
19 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16 20 20.00 L

U
# ppe
Cor 21 23 17 12 21 17 11 12 13 8 23 19 15 21 20 22 15 8 13 16 r 13
L
#Inc owe
or 4 2 8 13 4 8 14 11 12 16 2 6 10 4 5 2 9 16 12 9 r 12
#
Ans 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 23 25 24 25 25 25 25 25 24 24 24 25 25
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
p .84 .92 .68 .48 .84 .68 .44 .52 .52 .33 .92 .76 .60 .84 0.8 .92 .63 .33 .52 .64
#U 15 15 14 8 15 12 9 10 10 8 14 14 12 15 14 15 12 5 12 11
#L 6 8 3 4 6 5 2 2 3 0 9 5 3 6 6 7 3 3 1 5
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D .69 .54 .85 .31 .69 .54 .54 .62 .54 .62 .38 .69 .69 .69 .62 .62 .69 .15 .85 .46
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
P .84 .92 .68 .48 .84 .68 .44 .52 .52 .33 .92 .76 .60 .84 .80 .92 .63 .33 .52 .64
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q .16 .08 .32 .52 .16 .32 .56 .48 .48 .67 .08 .24 .40 .16 .20 .08 .38 .67 .48 .36
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
PQ .13 .07 .22 .25 .13 .22 .25 .25 .25 .22 .07 .18 .24 .13 .16 .08 .23 .22 .25 .23 .80

16
 DIFFICULTY INDEX

Quest #Ans #Cor p Remarks

1 25 21 0.84Too Easy
2 25 22 0.92Too Easy
Discrimination index 3 25 17 0.68Moderate
Appendix B 4 25 12 0.48Moderate
5 25 21 0.84Too Easy
DISCRIMINATION
6 25 INDEX
17 0.68Moderate
7 25 11 0.44Moderate
Quest 8 U 23 L 12 D Remarks
0.52Moderate
9 1 25 15 136 0.69Acceptable
0.52Moderate
10 2 24 15 87 0.54Acceptable
0.33Moderate
11 3 25 14 233 0.85Acceptable
0.92Too Easy
12 4 25 8 194 0.31Acceptable
0.76Moderate
13 5 25 15 156 0.69Acceptable
0.6Moderate
14 6 25 12 215 0.54Acceptable
0.84Too Easy
15 7 25 9 202 0.54Acceptable
0.8Moderate
16 8 24 10 222 0.62Acceptable
0.92Moderate
17 9 24 10 153 0.54Acceptable
0.63Moderate
18 10 24 8 80 0.62Acceptable
0.33Moderate
19 11 25 14 139 0.38Acceptable
0.52Moderate
2012 25 14 165 0.69Acceptable
0.64Moderate
13 12 3 0.69Acceptable
14 15 6 0.69Acceptable
15 14 6 0.62Acceptable
16 17 7 0.62Acceptable
17 12 3 0.69Acceptable
18 5 3 0.15Acceptable
19 12 1 0.85Acceptable
20 11 5 0.46Acceptable

17
 Difficulty index Appendix C

DIFFICULTY INDEX

Quest #Ans #Cor p Remarks

1 25 21 0.84 Too Easy
2 25 22 0.92 Too Easy
3 25 17 0.68 Moderate
4 25 12 0.48 Moderate
5 25 21 0.84 Too Easy
6 25 17 0.68 Moderate
7 25 11 0.44 Moderate
8 23 12 0.52 Moderate
9 25 13 0.52 Moderate
10 24 8 0.33 Moderate
11 25 23 0.92 Too Easy
12 25 19 0.76 Moderate
13 25 15 0.6 Moderate
14 25 21 0.84 Too Easy
15 25 20 0.8 Moderate
16 24 22 0.92 Moderate
17 24 15 0.63 Moderate
18 24 8 0.33 Moderate
19 25 13 0.52 Moderate
20 25 16 0.64 Moderate

References:

18
1. Knoetze, J. (2007) Test data. Retrieved August 16, 2007, from Web site
www.eSnips.com/web/CIA7222007.
2. Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (2007). Educational Testing and Measurement: Classroom Application
and Practice 8th ed. John Wiley & Sons Inc. United States of America

19