No mathematical formula is needed t

No mathematical formula is needed to tell you that this item successfully attracts seven of the ten high-ability students toward the correct response, while only two of the low-ability students get this one right. As shown above, its ID is .50, which is acceptable, but the item might be improved in two ways: (a) Distractor D doesn't fool students. No one picked it, and therefore it probably has no utility a revision might provide a distractor that actually attracts a response or two. (b) Distractor E attracts more responses (2) from the high-ability group than the low-ability group (O).Why are good students choosing this one? Perhaps it includes a subtle reference that entices the high group but is "over the head" of the low group, and therefore the latter students don't even consider it. The other two distractors (A and B) seem to be fulfilling their function of attracting some attention from lower-ability students.

Hasil (Inggris) 1:

No mathematical formula is needed to tell you that this item successfully attracts seven of the ten high-ability students toward the correct response, while only two of the low-ability students get this one right. The u.s. is shown above, its ID is 50, which is acceptable, but the items might be improved in two ways: (a) the Distractor D doesn't fool students. No one picked it, and therefore it probably has no utility a revision might provide a distractor that actually attracts a response or two. (b) the Distractor E attracts more responses (2) from the high-ability group than the low-ability group (O). Why are good students choosing this one? Perhaps it includes a subtle reference that entices the high group but is "over the head" of the low group, and therefore the latter students don't even consider it. The other two distractors (A and B) seem to be fulfilling their function of attracting some attention from lower-ability students.

Hasil (Inggris) 2:

No mathematical formula is needed to tell you that this item successfully attracts seven of the ten high-ability students toward the correct response, while only two of the low-ability students get this one right. As shown above, its ID is .50, the which is acceptable, but the item MIGHT be improved in two ways: (a) distractor D does not fool students. No one picked it, and therefore it probably has no utility a revision MIGHT provide a distractor that actually attracts a response or two. (B) distractor E attracts more responses (2) from the high-ability group than the low-ability group (O) .Why are good students Choosing this one? Perhaps it includes a subtle reference that entices the high group but is "over the head" of the low group, and therefore the latter students do not even Consider it. The other two distractors (A and B) seem to be fulfilling Reviews their function of attracting some attention from lower-ability students.