Pre-Assessment

ITEM ANALYSIS
 Higher D rate
= Effective
rate Lower
of correct P=
of More Difficult
students
responses in a
Properly Item
Scored Post-reviewed
among high performers
group who Item answered
Lower D =
Higher P = Easier Item
compared to that of the
Evaluating
in an
Questionable
low performers
item
in the testthe
(Garcia,
correctly
2008)

Objective-Type of
(Garcia, 2008)
ITEM ANALYSIS
Test
Difficulty
Test difficulties Test deficiencies
Discrimination
Index (P)
detected Index (D)
identified
ITEM ANALYSIS (Garcia, 2008)
Procedure:
1.Arrange the scored papers from highest
to lowest.
2.Group the upper 27% and the lower
27%.
3.Record separately the number of times
each option was chosen by the students
per item in both groups.
4.Add the number of correct answers to
each item by the upper and lower
groups combined
ITEM ANALYSIS (Garcia, 2008)

Procedure:
5. Compute the difficulty index (P) using:

P = Nc x 100
T
where:
Nc = no. of correct responses
T = combined total of students in
the upper & lower groups
ITEM ANALYSIS (Garcia, 2008)

Procedure:
6. Compute the discrimination index (D) using:

D = CU - CL
T
where:
CU = no. of correct responses, upper grp.
CL = no. of correct responses, lower grp.
T = no. of 27% of the students
 Difficulty of Items
P value range Interpretation
0.00 to 0.20 Very Difficult
0.21 to 0.40 Difficult
0.41 to 0.60 Moderately Difficult
0.61 to 0.80 Easy
0.81 and above Very Easy
 Discrimination by the options
D value range Interpretation
-1.00 to -0.60 Questionable
-0.59 to -0.20 Not Discriminating
-0.19 to 0.20 Moderately Discriminating
0.21 to 0.60 Discriminating
0.61 to 1.00 Very Discriminating
Keri?
 Let’s try the
ITEM ANALYSIS
in Excel® template