A Simple Sorting Selection Method for Picking Results from an Automatic Item Generator
Keywords:
Automatic Item Generation, AIG, Item SelectionAbstract
Automatic Item Generation (AIG) is an extremely useful tool to construct many high-quality exam items more efficiently than traditional item writing methods. A large pool of items, however, presents challenges like identifying a particular item to meet a specific need. For example, when making a fixed form exam, best practices forbid item stems that are too similar, have identical keys, and have too many similar or identical distractors. This paper introduces the Simple Sorting Selection algorithm for selecting a subset of dissimilar AIG items. This algorithm will select a set of items with the maximum possible variety of features as defined by the user. The method is labelled as simple because it does not require advanced syntactical techniques such as language processing and can be implemented in numerous software platforms. Results of a trial using the output of an AIG model template demonstrate that the algorithm can find a smaller set of the most unique items in an AIG set. Simple Sorting Selection's performance in finding the most unique items was notably better than individual trials of random selection. Performance was somewhat better when selecting a small number of items and notably better when selecting numerous items compared to a maximum dissimilarity index calculated from dummy-coded representations of the AIG-produced items.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
References
Arendasy, M. E. & Sommer, M. (2012). Using automatic item generation to meet the increasing item demands of high-stakes educational and occupational assessment. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 112−17. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.005
Canny, S. (2022). docx 0.2.4. Available from: https://pypi. org/project/docx/
Cole, B. S., Lima-Walton, E., Brunnert, K., Vesey, W, B., & Raha, K. (2020). Taming the firehose: Unsupervised machine learning for syntactic partitioning of large volumes of automatically generated items to assist automated test assembly. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 21, 1-11. Available from: http://www.jattjournal.com/index.php/atp/article/view/146483
Embretson, S. E., & Kingston, N. M. (2018). Automatic item generation: A more efficient process for developing mathematics achievement items? Journal of Educational Measurement, 55, 112-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12166
Gierl, M. J. & Haladyna, T. M. (2012). Automatic item generation: Theory and practice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203803912 PMCid:PMC3336114
Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., Gommers, R., Virtanen, P., Cournapeau, D., … Oliphant, T. E. (2020). Array programming with NumPy. Nature, 585, 357-362. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 PMid:32939066 PMCid:PMC7759461
Hunter, J. D. (2007). Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Computing in Science and Engineering, 9(3), 90-95. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2007.55
Kuhn, M. (2021). Caret: Classification and regression training. R package version 6.0-90. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=caret
McKinney, W. et al. (2010). Data structures for statistical computing in Python. In Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference (Vol. 445, pp. 51-56). https://doi.org/10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a
R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from: https://www.R-project.org/
Royal, K. D. & Hedgpeth, M.-W. (2017). The prevalence of item construction flaws in medical school examinations and innovative recommendations for improvement. EMJ Innovations, 1, 61-66. https://doi.org/10.33590/emjinnov/10312489
Van Rossum, G., & Drake, F. L. (2009). Python 3 reference manual. Scotts Valley, CA: CreateSpace.
Wainer, H. (2002). On the automatic generation of test items: Some whens, whys, and hows. In S. H. Irvine & P. C. Kyllonen (Eds.) Item Generation for Test Development (pp. 287−314). Routledge.
Willet, P. (1999). Dissimilarity-based algorithms for selecting structurally diverse sets of compounds. Journal of Computational Biology, 6, 447-457. https://doi.org/10.1089/106652799318382 PMid:10582578
Interested users can download this spreadsheet at
https://evolve.elsevier.com/education/expertise/faculty-development/ aigsupplementaldata/ or by navigating to Elsevier's Expertise website (https://evolve.elsevier.com/education/expertise/) and searching for the term AIG.