The purposes of this research are: 1) to compare two equalizing tests conducted with Hebara and Stocking Lord method; 2) to describe the characteristics of each equalizing test method using windows’ IRTEQ program. This research employs a participatory approach as the data are collected through questionnaires based on the National Examination Administration of 2018. The samples are classified into group A and group B respectively by 449 and 502 respondents. This paper discusses how to equalize shared items using the anchor method with a set of instruments in the forms of 35 questionnaire items and 6 shared items. In addition, the researcher also uses PARSCALE to estimate each respondent’s skills and each item’s characteristics. The shared items are eventually equalized using IRTEQ program. The results show that there is a significant difference between those conducted using Haebara method (0.592) which produces bigger mean-sigma value and Stocking & Lord (0.00213). Thus, the results show that the shared testing items may improve respondents’ discrimination and increase the difficulty level (parameter b). Due to the availability of shared items, it is good and appropriate to equalize two different tests on different theta skills.

This study aims to design mathematical literacy instruments that have evidence of content and construct validity and are reliable for use as an Assessment for Learning. The research involved eight experts as instrument validators and 273 eighth-grade students of junior high school in Yogyakarta Province. The results showed that the ten mathematical literacy items developed had the V Aiken coefficient index calculated from 0.781 to 0.906 (> 0.75). The results of adequacy testing of samples with KMO and Bartlett show Chi-Square in the Bartlett test of 608,608, the p-value <0.05 and KMO value of 0.781 (> 0.5). The results of testing of the measurement model with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) produce a Root Mean Square Error of Approach (RMSEA) value of 0.049 (≤ 0.08), chi-s Square of 33.92 (<2df), the p-value of 0.05004 (≥ 0.05). Nine out of the ten items developed had t-value> 1.96, Standardized Loading Factor (SLF) was greater than the critical limit (> 0.3), and Construct Reliability (CR) of 0.78 (> 0.7). It can be concluded that the developed mathematical literacy instrument can measure what must be measured and nine items significantly reflect the construct or latent variable, as well as the level of consistency of a good score.

The study of character becomes a very important discussion in the 21st century. So that the integration of character values is very important both in the process and in educational assessment. The purpose of this study was to test the validity and reliability of the character assessment instrument for 21st-century high school students. The research approach used was quantitative with a sample of 200 high school students. Data analysis carried out includes validity and reliability tests. The test results of the instrument showed that the construct of the student character assessment instrument was declared valid and reliable. The content validity test shows the value of Aiken's > .80 in the high category. In the construct validation test with EFA, all variables have a loading factor > .5. In the CFA test, the model is declared fit with the estimated standard loading value of .40 and the t-count value > 1.96. Meanwhile, while in testing the reliability of the instrument obtained composite > .70 Cronbach's Alpha reliability > .70 which means reliable. So that this instrument is declared valid and reliable to measure the character of students in high school.

This research is a developmental research aiming at developing a good mathematical test instrument using polytomous responses based on classical and modern theories. This research design uses the Plomp model, which consists of five stages, (1) preliminary investigation, (2) design, (3) realization/construction, (4) revision, and (5) implementation (testing). The study was conducted in three vocational schools in Lampung Province, Indonesia. The study involved 413 students, consisting of 191 male and 222 female students. The data were collected through questionnaire and test. The questionnaire was used to identify the assessment instruments currently employed by teachers and to be validated by the experts of mathematics and educational evaluation. The test used an open polytomous response test numbering of 40 items. The data were analyzed using both classical and modern theories. The results show that (1) the open polytomous response test has a good category according to classical and modern theory. However, the discrimination power of test items in classical theory needs several revisions, (2) the assessment instrument using the polytomous response of open multiple choice can guarantee information on the actual competence of students. This is proven by the fact that there is a harmony between the analysis result obtained from classical and modern theory from the students' arguments when giving reasons for their choices. Therefore, the open polytomous response test can be used as an alternative to learning assessment.

We developed a Quantum Mechanics Conceptual Understanding Survey (QMCUS) in this study. The survey was conducted using a quantitative methodology. A multiple-choice survey of 35 questions was administered to 338 undergraduate students. Three experienced quantum mechanics instructors examined the validity of the survey. The reliability of our survey was measured using Cronbach's alpha, the Fergusson delta index, the discrimination index, and the point biserial correlation coefficient. These indices showed that the developed survey is reliable. The statistical analysis of the students' results using SPSS shows that the scores obtained by the students have a normal distribution, around the score of 7.14. The results of the t-test show that the students' scores are below the required threshold, which means that it is still difficult for the students to understand the concepts of quantum mechanics. The obtained results allow us to draw some conclusions. The students' difficulties in understanding the quantum concepts are due to the nature of these concepts; they are abstract and counterintuitive. In addition, the learners did not have frequent contact with the subatomic world, which led them to adopt misconceptions. Moreover, students find it difficult to imagine and conceptualize quantum concepts. Therefore, subatomic phenomena are still explained with classical paradigms. Another difficulty is the lack of prerequisites and the difficulties in using the mathematical formalism and its translation into Dirac notation.

This study aimed to find the Classical Test Theory (CTT) and Modern Test Theory (MTT) item parameters of the Differential Aptitude Test (DAT) and examined their comparability of them. The item parameters being studied are difficulty level and discrimination index. 5.024 data of the result sub-test DAT were documented by the Department of Psychology and Guidance and Counselling bureau. The parameter of classical and modern test items was estimated and correlated by examining the comparability between parameters. The results show that there is a significant correlation between item parameter estimates. The Rasch and IRT 1-PL models have the highest correlation toward CTT regarding the item difficulty level. In contrast, model 2-PL has the highest correlation toward CTT in the item discrimination index. Overall, the study concluded that CTT and MTT were comparable in estimating item parameters of DAT and thus could be used independently or complementary in developing DAT.