Individual test item analysis (e.g., difficulty and discrimination) #220
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Collaborator
|
hmm. Tough question. Of course, there is some overlap with the regular reliability analysis, and also with the descriptives module. My 2c:
I think this could either be a section within the "unidimensional reliability analysis", that section would then be something like "individual item analysis", if I remember correctly, Andries van der Ark was also asking for something similar. Or the analysis itself would be named "individual item analysis", but then I wonder if leaving it inside IRT would not be better. Maybe @vandenman has better ideas? |
koenderks
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@vandenman just had a meeting with Dylan today discussing a new IRT module, which had this analysis in it. We figured that it was maybe more suitable for the reliability module.
@juliuspfadt @vandenman What are your thoughts on this analysis? Should we even offer this analysis to users? Is there anything that you would add or remove? Everything can still be changed of course.