REPORT ON DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AND ITEM ANALYSIS OF A DRAMA

TEST

M E MOKOENA

2009
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My greatest gratitude goes to the following people and institution:

• The Gauteng Department of Education for their financial support in my

studies,

• My colleagues at the Tshwane South District for their advice and

encouragement,

• My family and friends for their support and interest.

i
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Introduction 1
2 Procedure followed 1
3 Descriptive statistics 1
4 Item analysis 3
5 Discrimination index 4
6 Summary 4
7 Reference list. 5
8 Appendices 6

ii
TABLE OF TABLES PAGE

Table 1: Grouped frequency distribution of the drama test scores 1

Table 2: The mean, mode, median and standard deviation 2
Table 3: Difficulty indices of the questions 3
Table 4: Discrimination indices for the questions 4

iii
TABLE OF FIGURES PAGE

Figure 1 Frequency Polygon for drama test 1

iv
TERMINOLOGY LIST

Term Definition and reference

Descriptive statistics - Mathematical techniques for organizing, summarizing,
and displaying a set of numerical data.

Meredith, D.G. (1996). Educational Research: An

Introduction. USA: Longman Publishers. p 757
Difficulty index - The percentage of a specified group, such as students of
a given age or grade, who answer a test item correctly.

Tuckman, B.W. (1975). Measuring Educational

Outcomes, Fundamentals of Testing. New York: Harcourt
Discrimination index - The ability of a test item to differentiate between persons
possessing much or little of a certain trait, skill, or
proficiency.

Tuckman, B.W. (1975). Measuring Educational

Outcomes, Fundamentals of Testing. New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, Inc. p 477.

Item analysis - The process of identifying items that may not be suitable
for use in the instrument.

Maree, K. (2007).First Steps in Research. Pretoria. Van

Schaik Publishers. p 218
- Is the most commonly used measure of location and is
Mean calculated as the arithmetic average of all the values.

Maree, K. (2007).First Steps in Research. Pretoria. Van

Schaik Publishers. p 187
Median - Is the middle value of a distribution – it splits the
distribution into two halves.

Maree, K. (2007).First Steps in Research. Pretoria. Van

Schaik Publishers. p 187

Mode - Is the score that occurs most frequently.

Salkind, N.J. (2003). Exploring Research. New Jersey:

Pearson Education Inc.p106

- Is the difference between the highest and the lowest

scores in a distribution.
Range
Salkind, N.J. (2003). Exploring Research. New Jersey:
Pearson Education Inc.p106
 - Is a value that approximates the average distance of a
Standard deviation score from the mean.

Shaughnesey, J.J. (1997). Research Methods in

Psychology. New York: MacGraw Hill, p105.

vi
1. Introduction

The purpose of this report is to disseminate information on a drama test consisting of

twenty questions. A total of twenty five learners participated in the test.

2. Procedure followed

Twenty five learners were given a drama test composed of twenty questions. The
data of the scores was tabulated and the scores recoded. The scores for each
learner were calculated in terms of the total number of questions answered, the
number correct as well as the percentage obtained. The scores were then sorted in
descending order according to percentage. The learners were then divided into two
groups namely the upper and the lower group. The upper group was composed of
thirteen learners whereas the lower group had only twelve. The difficulty as well as
the discrimination indices of each question were calculated and recorded. Thereafter
the data was summarized in terms of its central tendency i.e. the mean, median and
the mode. The ranges as well as the standard deviation were also determined. An
interval and frequency column was then constructed. A polygon to represent the test
scores was drawn using Microsoft Excel 2003.

3. Descriptive statistics

3.1. Tabulation of data

Data represented in table 1 one contains intervals and frequency values of the
distribution.

Table 1: Grouped frequency distribution of the drama test scores

Interval Frequency
105-110 0
98-104 2
91-97 0
84-90 3
77-83 1
70-76 3
63-69 3
56-62 2
49-55 4
42-48 1
35-41 3
28-34 2
21-27 0
14-20 1
7-13 0

1
From table 1, it is clear that 56% of the learners obtained a score greater than
56%.Only 44% of them got a score less than 56%.

3.2 Frequency polygon

The frequency polygon in figure 1 shows the shape of the distribution of drama test
scores.

Figure 1: Frequency polygon

Frequency polygon for drama test results

4.5
4
3.5
3
Frequency

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Midpoint

The polygon indicates that the highest point in the frequency distribution is 4 where
as the lowest is 0.

3.3 The mean, mode, median, range and standard deviation

The data in table 2 indicates the descriptive statistics based on the score of twenty
five learners.

Table 2: The mean, mode, median, range and standard deviation

Descriptive statistic Value

Mean 65
Mode 65
Median 65
Range 85
STDEV 22.7

From the table it is clear that the mode, the mean and the median share the same
value. Due to the fact that the mode, the median and the mode are equal, the test
results will therefore represent a normal distribution.
2
4. Item analysis

The data in table 3 is a summary of the difficulty indices of the questions.

Table 3: Difficulty indices of the questions

P VALUE MEANING QUESTIONS

p≥0 and p<20 Unacceptable Q13,15
p≥20 and p< 30 Too difficult -
p≥ 30 and p<70 Acceptable Q3,4,6,7,8,9,10,17,18,19,20
p≥70 and p<80 Too easy Q12,
p≥80 Unacceptable Q1,2,5,11,14,16

The table clearly indicates that 55% of the questions were unacceptable, 40% were
unacceptable and only 5% were too easy.

3
5. Discrimination index

The data in table 4 describes the discrimination of the distracters of each question.

Table 4: Discrimination indices for the questions

Question Discrimination index Meaning

1 0.38 Acceptable
2 0.31 Acceptable
3 0.54 Acceptable
4 0.31 Acceptable
5 0.38 Acceptable
6 0.23 Acceptable
7 0.38 Acceptable
8 0.62 Acceptable
9 0.54 Acceptable
10 0.62 Acceptable
11 0.77 Acceptable
12 0.38 Acceptable
13 0.38 Acceptable
14 0.38 Acceptable
15 0.31 Acceptable
16 0.31 Acceptable
17 0.38 Acceptable
18 0.15 Acceptable
19 0.69 Acceptable
20 0.46 Acceptable

The table indicates that 100% of the questions were acceptable, meaning that they
all had a positive discrimination.

6. Summary

This small exercise in my opinion constituted and attempt to prove that computer
integrated assessment has come as a major breakthrough in the world of education.
Through the use of the computer it has now become relatively easy to organize and
interpret large volumes of data.

Through graphical representations of data, e.g on the histogram or frequency

polygon, educationists are able to process data with ease. This also shows how
imperative it has become that all educator training programmes should include
computer literacy.

4
7. Reference list.

1. Maree, K. (2007).First Steps in Research. Pretoria. Van Schaik Publishers.

2. Meredith, D.G. (1996). Educational Research: An Introduction. USA: Longman

Publishers.

3. Salkind, N.J. (2003). Exploring Research. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.

4. Tuckman, B.W. (1975). Measuring Educational Outcomes, Fundamentals of

Testing. New York: Harcourt

5
 Appendix A : Tabulation of test scores

Key C B D D B C D A C B A C B D A A C D B C #Correct #Answered % Groups

St
No Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20

11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 20 100 UG
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 20 100 UG
2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 20 90 UG
25 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 20 90 UG
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 18 20 90 UG
14 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 17 19 85 UG
13 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 17 20 85 UG
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 20 85 UG
5 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 15 20 75 UG
4 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 14 20 70 UG
12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 14 20 70 UG
18 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 13 20 65 UG
8 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 13 20 65 UG
23 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 13 20 65 LG
9 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 13 20 65 LG
10 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 12 20 60 LG
6 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 11 20 55 LG
21 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 11 20 55 LG
7 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 10 20 50 LG
22 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 10 20 50 LG
15 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 20 45 LG
17 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 8 17 40 LG
24 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 6 19 30 LG
1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 6 19 30 LG
19 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 20 15 LG