Abstract Course achievement evaluation is very important because it will determine students’ level of understanding with regards to the course. Each course offered at UniversitiKebangsaan Malaysia has its own pre-determined Learning Outcomes (LOs) which were published to students at the start of the semester. These LOs were evaluated at the end of the semester end in process to determine LO's achievement by the students. Current learning evaluation consists of analyzing students’ grades accumulated from the final exam marks, assignments, projects, class participation and others. However, this evaluation does not realistically represent the students’ understanding of the course. Therefore, an evaluation based on Difficulty Index (DI) approach is proposed as an accompanying method to evaluate the LOs’ achievements. DI can be used as an indicator to identify the level of difficulty for each question or task assigned to students. DI values were measured for the objective and subjective types of final examination's questions and also any assignments and group projects completed by the students. These items also contribute towards the final evaluation for each student. DI values were mapped to the LOs and also the BLOOM taxonomy classification as stated in the course syllabus. The mapping reveals the relationship between the evaluation items and the students’ achievement of the LOs. The case study usesdata for the Management Information System (MIS) course which is offered to second year undergraduates at the Faculty of Information Science and Technology. The result revealed the role DI for this course as a possible transformation agent that is able to improve the course contents and delivery. DI also shows the relationship between the student achievement and the LOs. Hence, modification for future assessment methods can be proposed based on the DI values for the current assessment.
[1]
S. Sim,et al.
Relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in true/false-type multiple choice questions of a para-clinical multidisciplinary paper.
,
2006,
Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore.
[2]
E J Gracely,et al.
Comparison of “fact‐recall” with “higher‐order” questions in multiple‐choice examinations as predictors of clinical performance of medical students
,
1990,
Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.
[3]
L. Crocker,et al.
Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory
,
1986
.
[4]
Wan Ariffin Bin Abdullah,et al.
Annals Academy of Medicine
,
1993
.
[5]
Dorothy Christina Adkins,et al.
Test construction; development and interpretation of achievement tests
,
1974
.
[6]
Eduardo Backhoff Escudero,et al.
The Level of Difficulty and Discrimination Power of the Basic Knowledge and Skills Examination (EXHCOBA)
,
2000
.
[7]
John P. Hubbard,et al.
Multiple-choice examinations in medicine : a guide for examiner and examinee
,
1961
.