Differences of Half-Split Equations on Estimating Test-Reliability Coefficient

Background/purpose. This study aimed to investigate the differences among the equations used in estimating the reliability coefficient using the half-split method. These equations demonstrate Spearman-Brown’s, Rulon’s, Guttman’s, Mosier’s, Flanagan’s, and Horst's.

Materials/methods. The study instrument was a 43-item scale for evaluating the computerized mathematics curriculum for the tenth grade in southern Jordan. It was applied to a sample of 303 male and female teachers and educational supervisors.

Results. The results showed that all values of the reliability coefficients estimated in the six equations were acceptable. In addition, the best equation for estimating the half-split reliability coefficient was the Spearman-Brown equation, followed by two equations by Flanagan and Rulon.

Conclusion. Considering the results of the current study, the researchers do not recommend using Mosier’s equation because it gave the lowest reliability-coefficient value.

Keywords: half-split, reliability, tests

References

Abu-Saree’, R. A. (2004). Data analysis using SPSS. Amman, Dar Al Fikr.

Aiken, R. (2003). Psychological testing and assessment. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Al-Ghareeb, R. (1998). Psychological and educational evaluation and measurement. Anglo-Egyptian Library.

Allam, S. A. D. (2010). Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation: Its basics, applications, and contemporary trends. House of Arab Al-Fikr.

Al-Majeed, S. (2010). Psychological tests (models). Safa’s House for Publishing and Distribution.

Al-Majeed, S. (2013). Foundations of the construction of psychological and educational tests and scales. Debono Center for Teaching Thinking.

Al-Nabhan, M. (2004). Fundamentals of measurement in behavioral sciences. Dar Al Shorouk for Publishing and Distribution.

Al-Qatawna, A. (2015). Reliability in the tests is a spoken reference in mathematics for the tenth grade according to the classical theory and the theory of item response according to the two-teacher model: A comparative study (Unpublished Master Thesis). Mu’tah University, Karak, Jordan.

Al-Tarawneh, S., & Al-Qadi, H. (2016). Evaluation of the 10th grade computerized mathematics curriculum from the perspective of the teachers and educational supervisors in the Southern Region in Jordan. Journal of Education and Practice, 7 (2), 39–47.

Al-Tarawneh, S. (2022). Principles of measurement and evaluation.

Al-Turairi, A. (1997). Psychological and educational measurement: Its theory, foundations, and applications. Riyadh: Al-Rushed Library for Publishing and Distribution.

Al-Zahrani, S. (2000). Comparison of methods for estimating reliability in fun-telling measurement. Makah, Saudi Arabia: Umm Al-Qura University.

Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Holt Rinehart and Winston.

Feldt, L. S., Woodruff, D. J., & Salih, F. A. (1987). Statistical inference for coefficient Alpha. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11(1), 93-103. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168701100107

Hakstain, A. R., & Whalen, T. E. (1976). A k-sample significance test for independent Alpha coefficients. Pyschometrika, 41(2)19-231. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291840

Ismail, B. (2004). Reference in psychological measurement. Anglo-Egyptian Library.

Ismail, H. (2014). Extracting the psychometric properties of the teacher quality standards scale on a sample of teachers in the state of El Oued (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Blida.

Kim, S., & Feldt, L. (2008). A comparison of tests for equality of two or more independent Alpha coefficients. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45(2), 179-193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2008.00059.x

Melhem, S. M. (2002). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology (2nd ed.). Dar Al-Masirah.

Onn, D. (2013). Classical test theory versus item response theory: An evaluation of the comparability of item analysis result, Retrieved from https://ui.edu.ng/sites/default/files.

Saeed, M. (2015). Modern trends in educational measurement and evaluation: Achievement file. Dar Al Nahda Al Arabiya, Cairo.

Saeed, M. (2019). Actuality of secondary school exam scores in predicting the achievement of first-year students at the Faculty of Education, Beni Suef University. Arab Journal of Measurement and Evaluation,1(2) -84. https://doi.org/10104 10.21608/AJME.2020.200201

Saeed, M. (2023). Shifting from learning assessment to assessment for learning. Journal of the Faculty of Education, Beni Suef University, 20(11), 1–11. https://doi.org/10 10.21608/JFE.2023.337355.

Stanley, J. C., & Hopkins, K. D. (1998). Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation. Prentice-Hall.

Thompson, B., Green, S., & Yang, Y. (2010). Assessment of the maximal half-split coefficient to estimate reliability. Educational and Psychological, 70(2) 232–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164409355688.

Trevisan, S., Sax, G., & Michael, W. (1991). The impact of student’s ability on test actuality and reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51, 829- 837.

Walker, D. (2006). A comparison of the Spearman-Brown and Flanagan-Rulon formulas for half-split reliability under various variance parameter conditions. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 5(2), 443–451. http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/jmasm/vol5/iss2/18

Zare’, N. (2021). Comparison of the coefficients of the reliability of the test scores under sets of conditions: Monte Carlo simulation study. Educational journal, 2(88), 1108- 1174.

Zimmerman, D. W., Williams, R. H., & Symons, D. L. (1984). Empirical estimates of the comparative reliability of matching tests and multiple-choice tests. Journal of Experimental Education, 52(3), 179–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1984.1101189

Announcement

EDUPIJ Citation Metrics

EDUPIJ News!

► Educational Process International Journal has changed to publish in article number order instead of in page range order beginning with Volume 14 (2025).