In this paper we illustrate the process of analyzing the responses provided by students in a computer-based multilevel adaptive test for the estimation of mathematics skills in grade 10 of the Italian education system. The estimation was carried out by means of a multilevel adaptive test 1 - 3 - 3 constructed within the framework of a doctoral research in Social Psychology, Developmental Psychology and Educational Research. In the first part of the article we describe the structure of the test and how it works, as well as the advantages it offers over a classic linear test, such as greater precision in the estimation of abilities and the possibility of directly comparing the results obtained by students who have followed different paths. Then, we analyze the students’ performance in one of the secondary pathways of the test both to highlight in which questions they encountered greater difficulties, with a view to a formative assessment, and to investigate the reasons why in a given phase of the test the students showed an unexpected drop in performance. In the analysis of the results of a multilevel adaptive test, the study of secondary paths is of particular interest because they include students for whom the estimate of ability varies in the passage from one level to another and it is therefore possible to hypothesize the partial acquisition of some knowledge and skills.
References
Astolfi, J. P. (1997). L’erreur, un outil pour enseigner. Paris: ESF éditeur.
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Edu-cational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21.1, 5-31.
Botta, E. (2021). Sperimentazione di un modello adattativo multilivello per la stima delle abilità in matematica nelle rilevazioni su larga scala, Roma: Nuova Cultura.
Choppin, B. (1976). Developments in item banking. Windsor U.K.: Monitoring Na-tional Standards of Attainment in School, 1976.
Dewey, J. (1949). Esperienza e educazione, tr. it. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
Hambleton, R. K., Zaal, J. N., & Pieters, P. (1991). Computerized adaptive testing: Theory, applications, and standards. In Hambleton, R. K. e Zaal, J. N. (Eds.). Advances in educational and psychological testing, Norwell, MA: Kluwer, pp. 341-366.
Hattie J. & Timperley H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77.1, 81-112.
Kahneman, D. (2012). Pensieri lenti e veloci. Milano: Edizioni Mondadori.
Luecht, R. M., & Nungester, R. (1998). Some practical examples of computer-adaptive sequential testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, pp. 229-249.
Luecht, R., Brumfield, T., & Breithaupt, K. (2006). A testlet assembly design for adaptive multistage tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 19.3, 189-202.
MI (2021). Focus Principali dati della scuola – Avvio Anno Scolastico 2020/2021, Direzione Generale per i sistemi informativi e la statistica.
MIUR (2019). I principali dati relative agli alunni con DSA anno scolastico 2017/2018, Ufficio Statistica e Studi.
Sands, W. A., Waters, B. K., & McBride, J. R. (Eds.) (1997). Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sireci, S. G. (2004). Computerized-adaptive testing: An introduction. In Wall, J. e Walz, G. (Eds). Measuring up: Assessment issues for teachers, counselors, and administrators, Greensboro, NC: CAPS Press, pp. 685-694.
Veldkamp, B. P. (2014). Item pool design and maintenance for multistage testing. In Yan, D., von Davier, A.A. & Lewis C., Computerized multistage testing: Theory and applications, New York: CRC Press, pp. 39-54.
Wainer, H. (Ed.) (2000). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (2nd edition). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Weiss, D. J. (1985). Adaptive testing by computer. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 53.6, 774.
