The purpose of study is to examine the reliability of analytical rubrics and checklists developed for the assessment of story writing skills by means of generalizability theory. The study group consisted of 52 students attending the 5th grade at primary school and 20 raters in Mersin University. The G study was carried out with the fully crossed hxpxg (story x rater x performance task) design, where the scoring keys were determined as fix facet. Decision Study was carried out by changing the task facet conditions. As a result, it was observed in both scoring keys that the sources of variance related to the stories had a high variance percentage in the main effects while "hp (story and rater interaction effects)" a high variance percentage in the interaction effects. The highest variance in the design belongs to the interaction effect "hpg (story, rater and performance task interaction effects)". This can be an indicator for the existence of different sources of variability and error, which are not included in the design. Examining the G and phi coefficients calculated for both scoring keys, it was determined that scoring with analytic rubrics is more reliable and generalizable. According to the decision studies, it was decided that the number of tasks used in this study is to be most appropriate.

This study aimed to develop a valid and reliable instrument that measures the functional vision of students with low vision. Thus, an assessment tool and performance activities were developed for three vision skill groups (near vision skills, distance vision skills, and visual field) that include functional vision skills. The universe was 1485 students studying in various primary and middle schools (from 2nd to 7th grades) affiliated to the Ministry of National Education, and simple random sampling was used to select 310 students. The data were collected using the Gazi Functional Vision Assessment Instrument developed by the researchers. Many-facet Rasch model and generalizability theory were used for the rater reliability of the measurements obtained from the instrument, while discriminant analysis was used for the validity of the measurements. The analysis showed that the measurements were reliable, and the inferences based on these measurements were valid. Thus, this instrument can be used to identify and assess the functional vision status of students with low vision.

This research aimed to develop a historical thinking assessment for students' skills in analyzing the causality of historical events. The development process of Gall and colleagues and Rasch analysis models were used to develop an assessment instrument consisting of two processes, including the analysis of the framework of cause and consequence, the validity, reliability, and difficultness test. This research involved 150 senior high school students, with data collected using the validation sheet, tests, and scoring rubric. The results were in the form of an essay test consisting of six indicators of analyzing cause and consequence. The instruments were valid, reliable, and suitable for assessing students’ skills in analyzing the causality of historical events. The developed instruments were paired with a historical thinking skills assessment to improve the accuracy of the information about students' level of historical thinking skills in the learning history.

This study explored the effects of collaborative writing strategies on students' writing skills and self-efficacy. The study used a mixed methods design combining quantitative and qualitative approaches. Several instruments were used in data collection, including questionnaires, writing tests, writing assessment rubrics, and semi-structured interviews. The participants were randomly divided into two groups: the experimental group and the control group, which comprised 62 students. Data from the questionnaire and writing tests were analyzed using one-way MANOVA and MANCOVA tests, while interview data were explored using thematic analysis techniques. Participants were randomly divided into two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The results showed that collaborative writing strategies could improve students' writing skills and self-efficacy. Moreover, the qualitative results showed that most students responded positively to using these strategies to improve their writing skills and self-efficacy.