p-ISSN 2146-796X
e-ISSN 2146-7978
Yunus Söylet

Recep Öztürk
Salih Murat Akkın
Süphan Nasır

Associate Editors
Burak Önal
Harun Serpil
Yiğit Yurder
2019 Volume 9
Deomed Publishing
Journal Logo
Volume 8, Issue 2, August 2018,
Page(s): 188-199
Original Empirical Research
Received: September 22, 2017; Accepted: April 22, 2018; Published online: August 8, 2018
doi:10.2399/yod.18.025; Copyright © 2018, Deomed
The study of classification consistency of transition to higher education examination according to the cut-off scores obtained from different methods
Erdem Boduroğlu1, Devrim Alıcı2 (E-mail)
1Center for Assessment and Evaluation, Provincial Directorate for National Education, Niğde, Turkey; 2Division of Assessment and Evaluation in Education, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey
The way in which the passing standards of the examinations that lead to the future of students and a society are determined has an important place in terms of the reliability and validity of classifications such as successful/unsuccessful or passed/failed and objective evaluation of educational outputs. It was aimed in this study to examine the consistency of decisions taken for the candidates as "can enter LYS (Undergraduate Placement Exam)/cannot enter LYS" based on the cutoff score (180.00) used in YGS (Transition to Higher Education Exam) in Turkey in comparison with the classification consistency of cutoff scores obtained from Borderline Group, Contrasting Group and Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve method. The data of the study were obtained from a group of 167 candidates who were studying in the twelfth grade participating in the 2015 YGS, and a group of seven experts who evaluated these candidates. Before the exam, the expert group asked whether these candidates could pass the second LYS successfully in the 2015 YGS and, accordingly, they were classified as successful, unsuccessful or in-borderline. After the exam, the highest of the different score types the candidates received in the 2015 YGS was selected and the level of concordance between the expert opinions was examined and later the cutoff scores were obtained separately for the different standardization methods. The findings of the research revealed that the cutoff scores obtained by different methods had similar values, that the indexes of classification consistency of cutoff points obtained by all methods according to the YGS cutoff score criteria were high, and that the classification consistency indices gave lower results when expert opinions were taken as criteria. The Higher Education Council has gone to some new regulations in the university entrance examination system to be implemented starting from 2018 and a transition to a one-stage examination with two sessions has been made. In the new system, the condition of entering the Domain Proficiency Test is again "the minimum score of 180.00" from the test in the first session. Due to the fact that the cut-off score remains unchanged, research findings are expected to present a different perspective on the debate on the preparation of new examinations.
Keywords: Borderline group, classification consistency, contrasting groups, cut-off scores, higher education examination, ROC analysis, standard setting
Recommend on Facebook...
Share on Twitter...
Open Access
Our journal promotes the development of global open access to scientific information and research...

E-Mail Alert!
Would you like to receive an e-mail alert whenever a new article is published in the journal?

Your Opinions are Important to Us!
We are waiting for your valuable opinions and contributions...

Yükseköğretim Dergisi / Journal of Higher Education (Turkey)

Yükseköğretim Strateji ve Araştırma Derneği (YÖSAD) yayın organıdır. Deomed Yayıncılık tarafından yayımlanmaktadır. / Official Publication of the Higher Education Strategy and Research Association (YÖSAD). Published by Deomed Publishing. Copyright © 2019, Deomed.
Creative Commons License
Yükseköğretim Dergisi çevrimiçi (online) sürümünde yayımlanan akademik içeriğin kullanım hakları, ilgili içerikte tersi belirtilmediği sürece Deomed Yayıncılık tarafından Creative Commons Attribution-NoCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND3.0) lisansı aracılığıyla bedelsiz sunulmaktadır. / Except where otherwise noted, academic content of this online version of the journal by Deomed Publishing is licensed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NoCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND3.0) License.