[Rasch] Rasch Digest, Vol 118, Issue 2

Parisa Daftari Fard pdaftaryfard at yahoo.com
Sun May 24 07:16:41 AEST 2015


IfI am right Guttman does not take care for correlation assumption. It is based on variance . Am I right? 
 


     On Sunday, May 24, 2015 1:05 AM, "Swank, Paul R" <Paul.R.Swank at uth.tmc.edu> wrote:
   

 It is the mean of all possible Guttman-Flanagan split halves, not Spearman-Brown split halves.

Paul Swank

Sent from my iPad

On May 23, 2015, at 3:32 PM, Dan Kindlon <dankindlon7 at gmail.com<mailto:dankindlon7 at gmail.com>> wrote:

Isn't the alpha statistic the mean of all possible split-half reliabilities?

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:00 PM, <rasch-request at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch-request at acer.edu.au>> wrote:
Send Rasch mailing list submissions to
        rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/rasch<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_listinfo_rasch&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=ZiaAxWU8--g50iRMvYUWWoofxML6lELGTwLKisJ7s50&e=>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        rasch-request at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch-request at acer.edu.au>

You can reach the person managing the list at
        rasch-owner at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch-owner at acer.edu.au>

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Rasch digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. split half reliability (Parisa Daftari Fard)
  2. Re: split half reliability (Tom Conner)
  3. Re: split half reliability (Gregor So?an)
  4. Re: split half reliability (Parisa Daftari Fard)
  5. Re: split half reliability (Parisa Daftari Fard)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 20:39:19 -0700
From: Parisa Daftari Fard <pdaftaryfard at yahoo.com<mailto:pdaftaryfard at yahoo.com>>
Subject: [Rasch] split half reliability
To: <rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>>
Message-ID:
        <1432265959.23848.YahooMailBasic at web162003.mail.bf1.yahoo.com<mailto:1432265959.23848.YahooMailBasic at web162003.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dear Friends,

I apologize to interrupt the ongoing discussion. I have been reading articles on dynamic assessment. One facial difference between such papers and others is that they reported split half reliability instead of Alpha. Is this due to the fact that DA is half NRT and Half CRT? I appreciate it if you help me with your incisive suggestion and readings.


Cordially yours
Parisa

Parisa Daftarifard
IAU (South Tehran Branch)


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 07:27:15 +0100
From: Tom Conner <connert at msu.edu<mailto:connert at msu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Rasch] split half reliability
To: <rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>>
Message-ID: <555ECC43.3060601 at msu.edu<mailto:555ECC43.3060601 at msu.edu>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed

Parisa,  I don't know the answer to your specific question.  But I do
know that split half reliability is a bogus measure.  It tells you
nothing that is not contained in the variance.  I recommend you not use
it unless a journal requires it.

tlc

On 5/22/15 4:39 AM, Parisa Daftari Fard wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> I apologize to interrupt the ongoing discussion. I have been reading articles on dynamic assessment. One facial difference between such papers and others is that they reported split half reliability instead of Alpha. Is this due to the fact that DA is half NRT and Half CRT? I appreciate it if you help me with your incisive suggestion and readings.
>
>
> Cordially yours
> Parisa
>
> Parisa Daftarifard
> IAU (South Tehran Branch)
> ________________________________________
> Rasch mailing list
> email: Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
> web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/connert%40msu.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_options_rasch_connert-2540msu.edu&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=6NLm6r8bFW2zgpSAvQLNzFZgAIQOmwdKtFzvsj-yn4c&e=>

--
Tom Conner
Professor Emeritus
Department of Sociology
Michigan State University

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." Thomas Jefferson



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 10:07:40 +0200
From: Gregor So?an <gregor.socan at ff.uni-lj.si<mailto:gregor.socan at ff.uni-lj.si>>
Subject: Re: [Rasch] split half reliability
To: <rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>>
Message-ID: <555EE3CC.8010802 at ff.uni-lj.si<mailto:555EE3CC.8010802 at ff.uni-lj.si>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed

Hello,

I do not agree with Tom. It is certainly not a bogus measure, except if
you consider the classical test theory to be a bogus measurement
paradigm. ;-)  Split-half reliability basically provides the same kind
of information as alpha, that is, a lower bound to the sample
reliability. Of course, both of them make sense only in the classical
test theory framework.
Parisa: Split-half gives more accurate results than alpha when the test
items are relatively heterogeneous and you can divide them into two
similar groups: so, I guess that in your case split-half might really be
more approapriate than alpha (although I do not know what exactly is
meant by NRT and CRT - are these measurements comparable to conventional
test items?).
The original reference is Guttman's (1945) paper in Psychometrika.

Best regards, Gregor


Dne 22.5.2015 ob 8:27 je Tom Conner zapisal(a):
> Parisa,  I don't know the answer to your specific question.  But I do
> know that split half reliability is a bogus measure.  It tells you
> nothing that is not contained in the variance.  I recommend you not use
> it unless a journal requires it.
>
> tlc
>
> On 5/22/15 4:39 AM, Parisa Daftari Fard wrote:
>> Dear Friends,
>>
>> I apologize to interrupt the ongoing discussion. I have been reading articles on dynamic assessment. One facial difference between such papers and others is that they reported split half reliability instead of Alpha. Is this due to the fact that DA is half NRT and Half CRT? I appreciate it if you help me with your incisive suggestion and readings.
>>
>>
>> Cordially yours
>> Parisa
>>
>> Parisa Daftarifard
>> IAU (South Tehran Branch)
>> ________________________________________
>> Rasch mailing list
>> email: Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
>> web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/connert%40msu.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_options_rasch_connert-2540msu.edu&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=6NLm6r8bFW2zgpSAvQLNzFZgAIQOmwdKtFzvsj-yn4c&e=>



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 01:40:22 -0700
From: Parisa Daftari Fard <pdaftaryfard at yahoo.com<mailto:pdaftaryfard at yahoo.com>>
Subject: Re: [Rasch] split half reliability
To: <rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>>
Message-ID:
        <1432284022.39650.YahooMailBasic at web162003.mail.bf1.yahoo.com<mailto:1432284022.39650.YahooMailBasic at web162003.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Thank you Tom

You mean that alpha gives a clearer picture of the test function. The article says (I came across many articles on Dynamic assessment like this)


In this study, three types of number concept achievement
tests (pre-test, parallel test, and post-test) were developed for
each age group. Each test consists of 10 sub-areas with 20
items total (See Table 3).
To make these test items, the face and content validity and
split-half reliability were examined. To establish the content
and face validity, a series of interviews were conducted with a
professor, 5 graduate level students majoring in educational
measurement and evaluation, a kindergarten principal, and 3
kindergarten teachers who have more than 3 years of
experiences. In addition, a pilot test for each test was
conducted to check the appropriateness of hints, item
difficulties, test validities, etc.



Split half revised are reported as below
Pre-test 0.73              and 0.75
Parallel-test 0.82          and  0.63
Post-test 0.78                and  0.83


The first column is the Split half for 4 year old children and the second column is for 5 years old


Best
Parisa





--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 5/22/15, Tom Conner <connert at msu.edu<mailto:connert at msu.edu>> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Rasch] split half reliability
 To: rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>
 Date: Friday, May 22, 2015, 10:57 AM

 Parisa,? I don't
 know the answer to your specific question.? But I do
 know that split half reliability is a bogus
 measure.? It tells you
 nothing that is not
 contained in the variance.? I recommend you not use
 it unless a journal requires it.

 tlc

 On
 5/22/15 4:39 AM, Parisa Daftari Fard wrote:
 > Dear Friends,
 >
 > I apologize to interrupt the ongoing
 discussion. I have been reading articles on dynamic
 assessment. One facial difference between such papers and
 others is that they reported split half reliability instead
 of Alpha. Is this due to the fact that DA is half NRT and
 Half CRT? I appreciate it if you help me with your incisive
 suggestion and readings.
 >
 >
 > Cordially yours
 > Parisa
 >
 > Parisa Daftarifard
 >
 IAU (South Tehran Branch)
 >
 ________________________________________
 > Rasch mailing list
 >
 email: Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
 > web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/connert%40msu.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_options_rasch_connert-2540msu.edu&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=6NLm6r8bFW2zgpSAvQLNzFZgAIQOmwdKtFzvsj-yn4c&e=>

 --
 Tom
 Conner
 Professor Emeritus
 Department of Sociology
 Michigan State University

 "I contemplate with sovereign reverence
 that act of the whole American people which declared that
 their legislature should 'make no law respecting an
 establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
 thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between
 Church & State." Thomas Jefferson

 ________________________________________
 Rasch mailing list
 email: Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
 web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/pdaftaryfard%40yahoo.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_options_rasch_pdaftaryfard-2540yahoo.com&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=tp1zNJBfqxbE0QTF_jH2bg0TN3xhNa5GQIe2Xd_OiT8&e=>



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 01:43:57 -0700
From: Parisa Daftari Fard <pdaftaryfard at yahoo.com<mailto:pdaftaryfard at yahoo.com>>
Subject: Re: [Rasch] split half reliability
To: <rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>>
Message-ID:
        <1432284237.16666.YahooMailBasic at web162005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com<mailto:1432284237.16666.YahooMailBasic at web162005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Thank you Gregor for you nice attention,

By NRT I mean norm reference test where data form  normal distribution, whereas CRT means criterion reference test where data may form skewed distribution.


like Pretest and Posttest we have less variation in CRT


So you think Split half is better with pretest and posttest in experimental design?

Best
Parisa
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 5/22/15, Gregor So?an <gregor.socan at ff.uni-lj.si<mailto:gregor.socan at ff.uni-lj.si>> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Rasch] split half reliability
 To: rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:rasch at acer.edu.au>
 Date: Friday, May 22, 2015, 12:37 PM

 Hello,

 I do not agree with Tom. It is
 certainly not a bogus measure, except if
 you consider the classical test theory to be a
 bogus measurement
 paradigm. ;-)?
 Split-half reliability basically provides the same kind
 of information as alpha, that is, a lower bound
 to the sample
 reliability. Of course, both
 of them make sense only in the classical
 test theory framework.
 Parisa:
 Split-half gives more accurate results than alpha when the
 test
 items are relatively heterogeneous and
 you can divide them into two
 similar
 groups: so, I guess that in your case split-half might
 really be
 more approapriate than alpha
 (although I do not know what exactly is
 meant by NRT and CRT - are these measurements
 comparable to conventional
 test items?).
 The original reference is Guttman's (1945)
 paper in Psychometrika.

 Best regards, Gregor


 Dne 22.5.2015 ob 8:27 je Tom Conner
 zapisal(a):
 > Parisa,? I don't know
 the answer to your specific question.? But I do
 > know that split half reliability is a
 bogus measure.? It tells you
 > nothing
 that is not contained in the variance.? I recommend you not
 use
 > it unless a journal requires it.
 >
 > tlc
 >
 > On 5/22/15 4:39 AM,
 Parisa Daftari Fard wrote:
 >> Dear
 Friends,
 >>
 >> I
 apologize to interrupt the ongoing discussion. I have been
 reading articles on dynamic assessment. One facial
 difference between such papers and others is that they
 reported split half reliability instead of Alpha. Is this
 due to the fact that DA is half NRT and Half CRT? I
 appreciate it if you help me with your incisive suggestion
 and readings.
 >>
 >>
 >> Cordially
 yours
 >> Parisa
 >>
 >> Parisa
 Daftarifard
 >> IAU (South Tehran
 Branch)
 >>
 ________________________________________
 >> Rasch mailing list
 >> email: Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
 >> web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/connert%40msu.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_options_rasch_connert-2540msu.edu&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=6NLm6r8bFW2zgpSAvQLNzFZgAIQOmwdKtFzvsj-yn4c&e=>

 ________________________________________
 Rasch mailing list
 email: Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
 web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/pdaftaryfard%40yahoo.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_options_rasch_pdaftaryfard-2540yahoo.com&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=tp1zNJBfqxbE0QTF_jH2bg0TN3xhNa5GQIe2Xd_OiT8&e=>



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Rasch mailing list
Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/rasch<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_listinfo_rasch&d=AwMFaQ&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=ZiaAxWU8--g50iRMvYUWWoofxML6lELGTwLKisJ7s50&e=>


End of Rasch Digest, Vol 118, Issue 2
*************************************

________________________________________
Rasch mailing list
email: Rasch at acer.edu.au<mailto:Rasch at acer.edu.au>
web: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailinglist.acer.edu.au_mailman_options_rasch_paul.r.swank-2540uth.tmc.edu&d=AwICAg&c=6vgNTiRn9_pqCD9hKx9JgXN1VapJQ8JVoF8oWH1AgfQ&r=8frmz39BMbPfozSCry7R2XF1zD3P8iT3dTcbzh5VWc8&m=xmjJfc7OQeXQizvEI7AHlkWXee3UMHirsBsJ0sLiuBw&s=D43XPZK4cNgIn8i0wCVYapunmoUJGxNfVxGUwU5CrwA&e=
________________________________________
Rasch mailing list
email: Rasch at acer.edu.au
web: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/mailman/options/rasch/pdaftaryfard%40yahoo.com


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mailinglist.acer.edu.au/pipermail/rasch/attachments/20150523/4224cf49/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Rasch mailing list