effects of administration procedures of teacher made...

EFFECTS OF ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES OF TEACHER MADE -TESTS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF TESTEES

Muhammed Alhaji Ibrahim

م2016 نوفمبر الخامس العدد –دراسات تربوية

) 104(


(Applied on three levels of Education)


ABSTRACT:

The study examined the effect of administration procedures of

Teacher-Made Tests on the performance of testees at three levels of

education. The study adopted the experimental approach. The population

of the study consisted of 900 subjects from the three levels of education:

450 subjects from tertiary institution level (Jigawa State College of

Education Gumel Nigeria), 300 subjects from Secondary School level

(May Excellent International College Hadejia Nigeria) and 150 subjects

from Primary School level (May Excellent International College Hadejia

Nigeria), all these sat for a pre-test. Three samples of 120, 120, and 100

testees were randomly selected from the three levels of education

respectively. All the selected subjects were chosen from those who scored

grades lying between (10-15) marks in the pre-tests, to ensure

homogeneity of the samples. The same pre-tests were used as post-tests to

verify the hypotheses of the study. Analysis of the data revealed the

following results:




) 105(

1. There were significant differences between the performances of

testees in good and normal testing conditions at primary school

and tertiary institution levels in favour of experimental groups, but

the difference at the secondary school level was not significant.

2. There were significant differences between the performance of

testees supervised by friendly and unfriendly personalities at

primary, secondary and tertiary institution levels, favouring the

experimental groups.

Based on the findings the following recommendations were put

forward to ensure the precision of examinations as measuring tools:

1. Testing should be conducted in a fair and conducive environment;

test administrators should reduce their level of unfairness and

discouragement.

2. Anxiety caused by unfairness and humiliation by invigilators

should be avoided during test administration.

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY:

Test administration procedures are developed for an exam program

in order to avoid measurement errors and to increase the likelihood of

fair, valid, and reliable assessment. Ebel (1965)1. Appropriate and

1 Ebel R. L., Measuring Educational Achievement, (USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc, 1965)




) 106(

standardized administration procedures improve measurement by

increasing consistency and test security. Issues of primary concern in

testing students’ mastery of a given instruction are the accuracy with

which the tests measures and should consistently measure what it is

purported to measure Anikweze (2010)1. Ebel (1965), maintains that, the

consistency of a test is the situation where by a particular test is designed

to be administering under consistent procedures so that the test-taking

experience is as similar as possible across examinees2. The similarities of

experience among the testees increase the fairness of the test and the

likelihood of improving their performance. Chase I.C., (1974), stated that

testees are likely to perform better at any endeavour, including test taking,

when they approach the experience with a positive attitude3. But it is very

unfortunate that some teachers fail to help testees to develop positive

attitudes toward tests.

Bernedette, U. Cornelius, et-al (2012), carried out a research on

“Correlation of examination malpractice and academic performance of

primary school pupils in Cross Rivers State Nigeria”. The objectives of

1 Charles M. Anikweze “Measurement and Evaluation 2nd edition” (NIG: Constellation

Publishers, 2010). P.85

2 Ebel Op-CIt

3 Chase I.C., measurement for Educational evaluation(USA:Addison-Weseley publishing

Company,1974)




) 107(

the study was to determine the extent to which examination malpractice

relate to pupil academic performance in primary science, specifically the

study seeks to examine the extent to which, the influence of self-efficacy

on pupils cheating behaviour relates to their academic performance in

primary science. A sample of 1818 pupils was selected out of the

population of 68201 pupils in 70 schools, using a proportionate stratified

random sampling technique in the three educational zones in Cross Rivers

State Nigeria. The findings revealed that, the influence of self-efficacy on

pupils cheating behaviour has a significant relationship with their

academic performance. It also reveals that, the influence of moral tone of

the invigilators on pupils cheating behaviour has significant relationship

with their academic performance1. Testees are not likely to perform at

their best, when they are excessively tense, Irwin G. (1990)2 investigated

on “Empirical findings and theoretical problems in the use of Anxiety”,

the findings reveal a negative correlation between level of ability and

level of test anxiety. Those who are capable tend to be least anxious when

facing tests, it also indicates a positive correlation between level of

anxiety and level of aspiration those who are most anxious when facing a

test tend to be those who have the greatest need or desire to do well on it.

1 Bernedette

2 Irwin G. sarason, “Empirical Findings and Theoretical problems in the use of Anxiety

Scales”, psychological bulletin, 1960. P.403-415




) 108(

It is clearly evident that stress composes of different stressors that could

force testees to make a worse decision, sometimes those who are most

anxious when facing a test tend to be those who have the greatest need or

desire to do well on it. Anikweze (2010) suggests some tips that would

assist teachers to reduce the level of test anxiety for their students as

follow:

1. Teachers should inform the student in good time to prepare

well for a test. The feeling of readiness to meet the challenges

of testing can keep test anxiety at a manageable level

2. Teachers should encourage the students to acquire good study

habits and skills; they should insist on meaningful tasks and

practical rather than rote learning.

3. In setting test items, teachers should graduate the item

difficulties to move from simple tasks to very difficult ones.

This ensures that students, however weak, should be able to

taste some measure of success.

Ebel (1965) suggested that, teachers could aid their students in

pacing themselves, by writing the statement below on the blackboard near

the beginning of the test, and they should change the statements at least

after every 10-15 minutes, so that they could help testees to consider all

the questions.




) 109(

Fig 1: Shows sample of the statement that could assist students to know their speed in

answering questions.1

No more than ---------------- Minute remain for you to work on this

test.

If you have not reach item----------------- you are working too

slowly

He maintains that typical guidelines related to the test administration

locations and sites should have good lighting and ventilation.

Interruptions’ and distractions, such as excessive noise, should be

prevented. Thorndike and Hagen (1969)2, stated that a test demand a

conducive environment for its administration. They maintain that the

desirable environment for testing is one in which examinee are;

a) Physically comfortable.

b) Free from interruptions and distractions.

c) Conveniently able to manipulate their test materials.

d) Sufficiently separated to minimized tendency to copy from one

another.

1 Ebel Op-Cit

2 Thorndike R.L and Hagen, E. Measurement and Evaluation in Education, (USA: John

Wiley and Sons Inc, 1969 )




) 110(

Ohuce and Akeju., (1988)1, they have provided the following as aspects

to test administration, which need to be considered for smooth

conductivity of test administration;

1. Environment.

a) Lighting

b) Condition of the atmosphere

c) Noise

2. Working Facilities

3. Administration instructions

a) Test manuals

b) Test materials

c) Questions

d) Instructions of test paper

4. Timing

5. Other consideration

a) Testing assistants

b) Recording of proceedings

c) Sequence of test

d) Introductory talk

1 Ohuce, R.B and akeju U.S., Measurement and Evaluation in Education, (Onisha: Africa-

Fep Publishers ltd. 1988)




) 111(

Similarly testing code of ethics for North Carolina provides that,

“When tests are properly administered and interpreted, test results provide

an independent, uniform source of valid and reliable information”1 they

maintain that, before administering any test steps should be taken in

advance to curb unforeseen obstacles, as testing code of ethics for North

Carolina pointed out that;

a. School administrators’ should develop local policy for the

implementation of fair and ethical testing practices and solving

questions concerning those practices.

b. They should ensure that, all students who should be tested are

tested

c. They should provide adequate data analyses to guide curriculum

implementation and improvement.

d. School shall design an area for the test administration that

provides an environment that minimizes distraction and

interruption for students

It is therefore agreed that procedures of test administration affect the

performance of students though often ignored by teachers; Jeffrey T.

1 Testing Code of ethics for North Carolina, Authority: G.S. 115C-12(9)C.., 115C-81(b)(4);

Aug. 2000. Or

WWW.ncpublicschool.org/accountability/testing/.Downloaded 25.oct.2015




) 112(

(1971) has concluded that “The administration and scoring of any test

may also introduce factors that have a detrimental effects on the validity

of the results”1. Edwards (1991) maintains that it is important to realize

the extent to which testing conditions may influence scores. He found that

the condition of the physical environment to be related to academic

achievement and the improvement in the condition of the physical

environment is associated with the improvement in overall achievement

scores. His study concluded that there is a predictable (8.49) percentage

point decline in achievement scores for students who attended schools in

poor condition as compared to those scores found for students at schools

in excellent condition. Thus factors must be controlled in any school

facility2.Hall, Tocco and Schwartz in Chase (1974)3 found that “stress

instruction provided scores that correlated with third final test more

highly than did scores made under relax instruction”. Similarly Gordon

1 Jeffrey T. Steedle, “Administration procedures and their possible relationship with

effort and performance on a college outcomes test”, American Educational Research

Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 2014, P.8

2 Edward., M.M. Building conditions, parental involvement and student achievement in

the D.C. public school system. District of Columbia public Schools: ERIC Document

Reproduction Service N0.ED338743,1991

3 Chase, I.C., Measurement for Educational Evaluation, (U.S.A: Addision-Weseley

Publishing Company, 1974)




) 113(

and Durea in Chase (1974)1, found that “discouragement by the

administrators was associated with clear reduction in IQs for the

experimental group, compare to none discourage control group”. In the

area of environmental conditions of school and classes, a joint research

carried by Kedley, Traxler and Hilkert (cited in Chase 1974)2, they stated

that testing conditions may influence scores as they say “such a condition

as the use of desks or of chairs with desk arms”. For example, prove to be

significant in a group testing project with high school students. The

groups using desks tend to obtain higher scores. Similarly Henry 1991

(cited in Chase 1974)3 carries out research on environmental condition,

He found District of Columbia students in poor condition had

standardized achievement scores 6% below those at schools in fair

condition and 11% below those at excellent conditions. He concluded that

testing condition can also improve the test scores of students without

disabilities.

Many other more subtle testing conditions have been shown to effect

performance on ability as well as personality test. Whether the examiner

or proctor is a stranger, unfriendly or familiar and friendly personality to

1 Ibid

2 Ibid

3 Ibid




) 114(

the test takers may make a difference in test scores, (Sack, cited in

Anastasi 1990)1. As it has been established the examiners behaviour may

influence test results, controlled investigation have yielded significant

difference in intelligence in test performance as a result of a “Warm”

versus “Cold” interpersonal relation between examiner and examinees or

a right and aloof versus a natural manner on the part of the

examiner,(Exner and Masling cited in Anastasi 1990)2. They maintain

that “it is important to test administrators to realize the extent to which

testing conditions may influence scores. Even apparently minor aspects of

the testing situations may appreciably alter performance”.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

The main objective of this study is to investigate the effects of test

administration procedures of teacher-made tests on the performance of

testees at three levels of education. This can be put forward in the

following points:-

1. Investigate whether good testing conditions affect

performance of testees at three levels of education.

1 Anastasi, A., Psychology Testing 6

th edition, (New York: Macmillan Publishing

Company 1990).

2 Ibid




) 115(

2. Find out whether normal testing conditions affect the

performance of testees at three levels of education.

3. Determine whether friendly invigilation has any effect on the

performance of testees at three levels of education

4. Find out whether unfriendly invigilation has any effect on

the performance of testees at three levels of education.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

The following research questions are derived from the objectives of the

study namely:

1. Do good testing conditions of a given test have any effect on the

performance of testees who sit for the tests at three levels of

education?

2. To what extent do normal testing conditions of a given test affect

the performance of testees who sit for the test?

3. Does friendly mode of invigilation affect the performance of

testees sitting for a test at three levels of education?

4. To what extent does unfriendly mode of invigilation of a test affect

the performance of testees at three levels of education?

RESEARCH HYPOTHESES:

The following null hypotheses are formulated based on the research

questions of the study.




) 116(

1. There are no significant differences between the performances of

testees in good and normal testing conditions at three levels of

education.

2. There is no significant difference between the performances of

testees invigilated by a friendly and unfriendly personality at three

levels of education.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design: The study adopted 2x3 experimental designs. It

involves the process of assigning subjects available for an experiment

to a treatment. In this study, the researcher manipulates independent

variables and therefore, measures the effect of the manipulation on the

dependent variables. The design has two groups: experimental and

control groups. The experimental group was further splitted into three

groups and exposed to different treatments, while control group was

not given any treatment. Both groups received a general pre-test for the

purpose of the selection of the sample under the study and a post-test

administration of the research instruments. Test administration




) 117(

procedures are independent variables of the study while performance

of testees is the dependent variable.

According to Cohen, Marion and Marrison (2008), the 2x3

experimental designs can be graphically represented as follows

Table 2 represent the research design of the study

Group Pre-test Post-

test

(R) O1 X1 O4

(R) O2 X2 O5

(R) O3 X3 O6

(R) O7 - O8

Adopted from Cohen, Marion and Marrison (2008)

The first three rows represent the experimental groups, while the

forth is the control group. R denotes random assignment into groups.

O1, O2, O3, O7 are the pre-test observations, and O4, O5, O6, O8, the

post-test observation. X1 is the test administration procedure

intervention (treatment) for tertiary education, X2 is test




) 118(

administration procedure for secondary school, and X3 is test

administration procedure for primary school.

Population and Sample: The study population consisted of 900

testees from three levels of education: 450 testees at Tertiary

Institution who sat for pre- test, 300 testees at Secondary School who

sat for pre-test and 150 testees at Primary School who sat for pre-test

in Gumel and Hadejia Local Government Area of Jigawa State

Nigeria. Out of the total population of 900 testees under the study only

120, 120 and 100 testees were selected at tertiary institution, secondary

school and primary school levels respectively. These were chosen from

the subjects who scored between (10-15) marks in the pre-tests. The

samples are comprised of 340 testees randomly selected from the three

groups who received a pre-test that contains 20 multiple-choice items

with 4 alternatives at tertiary institution and secondary school levels

and 3 alternatives at primary school level. The samples were randomly

assigned into two groups of 30, 30, 25 testees in each group. One of

these groups was assigned as experimental while the other served as a

control group in each level of education. Participants were selected

from Jigawa State College of Education Gumel, May Excellent

Secondary School Hadejia and May Excellent Primary School Hadejia.

This was done in order to see the effect of mode of testing conditions

on performance at different levels of education, and at which level is

more effective. The target groups of the study were undergraduate




) 119(

three students, Senior Secondary Class two (SS2) students and primary

grade five pupils. Stratified random sampling technique was employed

in the selection process. 120 students in tertiary institution, 120

students in secondary school and 100 pupils in primary school were

selected in mathematics through simple random sampling technique.

All subjects participated in the experiment.

Research Tools: Three instruments were used to gather data in the

study; these are Teacher-Made Tests for the three levels of education.

Three 20-item multiple-choice teacher-made tests were constructed by

the researcher for the three levels of education for the purpose of the

study and used as instruments of collecting data. The instrument at

tertiary institution level contains 20 multiple choice items with 4

alternative options prepared from Test and Measurement in faculty of

education. The subjects were asked to answer all the questions provided

in the instrument of the research. The instrument at secondary school

level contains 20 multiple choice items with 4 alternative options

prepared from the Mathematics compulsory subject for all secondary

school students across the federation of Nigeria, and testees were ask to

attain all the questions. While the instrument of testees at primary school

level contains 20 items with 3 alternative options prepared from

mathematics which is compulsory subject for all primary pupils. Testees

were asked to answer all the questions, and invigilators of the




) 120(

examinations were guiding them in filling answer script so that, they

should not duplicate their answers.

Validity of the instrument: The instruments were subjected to face

and content validity. A measure of content validity, Table of

Specifications was developed to ensure items are based on the content/

syllabus of the subjects/course being constructed or designed before

giving them to the experts in Tests and Measurements, Educational

Psychology and Thesis Supervisor, at the Department of Education

Faculty of Education, Sule Lamido University, Kafin-Hausa, Jigawa

State, Nigeria. The specialists were able to review the items in the

Tests in terms of relevance to the subject matter, coverage of the

content areas, appropriateness of the language usage and clarity of

purpose. The experts judgements revealed that the instruments had

adequate content and face validity.

Reliability of the Instrument: Thereafter, a pre-test was carried out for

the purpose of sample selection, and to determine reliability of the

instruments. As a measure of reliability Kuder and Richardson method of

estimating reliability coefficients was employed in the study. The

investigator only considered the performance of testees at each level,

whose scores lie within the range (10-15) marks as average. Any testee

who’s score below 10 marks or above 15 marks in the pre- tests were

dropped out from the sample under the study in order to control the




) 121(

extraneous variables, and get homogeneous samples, the tests

administered to the three groups provide a reliability coefficient of the

instrument administered. This procedure yielded three reliability

coefficients of: r = 0.91; p<0.05 for tertiary level, r = 0.98; p< 0.05 for

secondary level and r = 0.72 for primary school level and validity of 0.95,

0.99 and 0.85 respectively. These coefficients are good and appropriate

for research purposes at 0.05 level.

Data Collection: The researcher obtained permissions from the

authorities (The Head Master, Principal and Registrar) of the schools

and college. An outline of the treatment package is presented below.

Session One: Administration of the test at good testing conditions at

three levels of education, the mode of supervision being the same with

normal testing conditions.

Session Two: Administration of the test at normal testing conditions at

three levels of education, the mode of invigilation being the same with

good testing conditions.

Session Three: Administration of the tests supervised by a friendly

personality at three levels of education, the testing conditions being the

same normal conditions for experimental and control groups.




) 122(

Session Four: Administration of the tests supervised by unfriendly

personality at three levels of education, but the testing conditions being

the same for experimental and control groups

TREATMENT PACKAGE FOR EXPERIMENTAL GROUP ON

ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES OF TEACHER-MADE TEST

(APTMT)

Preface

The activities of the first session commenced with the provision and

arrangement of all necessary materials that would make classroom to be

very good and conducive for effective testing, with respect to lighting,

seating, ventilation, distraction and interruption, while that of control

group commenced with arrangement of the class for normal and usual

testing procedures in all schools and colleges in Nigerian setting. The

activities of three and fourth sessions commenced with the introduction of

invigilators to two groups.

ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES OF TEACHER-MADE TEST

ON THE PERFORMANCE OF TESTEES AT THREE LEVELS OF

EDUCATION

All the testees in the groups in each level were gathered in a classroom,

and the researcher was introduced to the testees by teachers who were

teaching the courses.




) 123(

SESSION 1: Experimental

Step 1: This session exposed testees to good testing conditions, with a

view to find out the effects on their academic performances

Step 2: The activities of this session commenced, by ensuring testees at

various levels of education that they were in classrooms that are free from

any interruption and distraction from outside so that, they can be able to

manipulate their skills and testing materials.

Step 3: A good daylight, electrical light and Fan/Air condition were

provided in the class.

Step 4: Each and every testee was given a desk with desk arm, and

sufficiently separated to minimize tendency of copying from one another.

Step 5: Appropriate and clearly administration instructions were given

before commencement of the tests.

Step 6: The test supervisors or invigilators were constantly alerting testees

of the time remaining for them to submit the scripts, so that they would

not waste time in answering questions that they seem difficult for answer.

Step 7: Testees were ordered to stop writing after test lasted for 30

minutes, and commanded to submit line by line, in order to restrain them

from copying from one another in the process of submitting. The scripts




) 124(

were given to the teacher who is teaching the course for marking and

recording.

SESSION 2: Control

Step 1: this session exposed testees to normal testing conditions, with a

view to find out the effects on their academic performances

Step 2: The activities of this session commenced, by ensuring testees at

various levels of education that they were in a classroom that is being

used by the schools and college in their normal administration procedure.

Step 3: The researcher and invigilators ensure that each and every testee,

at various levels of education is arranged in a normal and usual seating

arrangement procedures of examination.

Step 4: Appropriate and clearly administration instructions were given

before commencement of the tests.

Step 5: The test supervisors or invigilators were constantly alerting testees

that the time remaining for them to submit the scripts, so that they would

not waste time in answering questions that seem difficult for them.

Step 6: Testees were ordered to stop writing after test has lasted for 30

minutes, and were commanded to submit their scripts line by line, in

order to restrain them from copying from one another in the process of




) 125(

submitting. The scripts were given to the teacher who is teaching the

course for marking and recording.

SESSION 3: Experimental, in this session the testing conditions being

the same for both experimental and control groups, except for the

invigilation which here the independent variable.

Step 1: This session has exposed testees to a friendly invigilation or

supervision, with a view to find whether it has any impact in their

academic performance

Step 2: Familiarization between the invigilators and testees.

The activities of this session commenced with self-introduction by

friendly and familiar personalities who were the invigilators of the group

and pleasantries were exchanged among them.

Step 3: each testee was given a desk with desk arm, and is sufficiently

separated to minimized tendency of copying from one another.

Step 4: appropriate and clearly administration instructions were pleasantly

given before the commencement of the tests and both the invigilators and

testees were in good mood.

Step 5: The test invigilators in a friendly manner were constantly alerting

testees the time remaining for them to submit the scripts, so that they




) 126(

should not waste their time in answering questions that seem difficult for

them.

Step 6: Testees were ordered to stop writing after the test has lasted for 30

minutes, and a command was given to submit their scripts line by line, in

order to restrain copying from one another in the process of submitting.

The scripts were given to the teacher who is teaching the course for

marking and recording.

SESSION 4: Control, in this session the testing condition being the same

for both experimental and control groups, except for the invigilation

which here the independent variable.

Step 1: This session has exposed testees to unfriendly invigilation or

supervision, with a view to find whether it has any impact in their

academic performance

Step 2: Familiarization between the invigilators and testees.

The activities of this session commenced with self-introduction by

unfriendly and unfamiliar personalities who were the invigilators of the

groups

Step 3: each testee was given a desk with desk arm, and is sufficiently

separated to minimize tendency of copying from one another.




) 127(

Step 4: appropriate and clearly administration instructions were given in

unfriendly manner before the commencement of the tests, the invigilators

were not in a good mood, and they usually used word that students should

know, they were not there to have fun with them, but strictly prevent

them from any kind of examination misconduct.

Step 5: The test invigilators were constantly alerting testees the time

remaining for them to submit the answer script, so that they should not

waste their time in answering questions that seem difficult for them.

Step 6: Testees were ordered to stop writing after the test has lasted for 30

minutes, and a command was given to submit the scripts line by line, in

order to restrain copying from one another in the process of submitting.

The scripts were given to the teacher who is teaching the course for

marking and recording.

3.7 Conclusion

In conclusion testees were exposed to different modes of testing

conditions and supervision at three levels of education, in order to find

the effects of independent on the dependent variables.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS:

Table 3 presents the t-test for two independent samples on difference

in performance of testees exposed to treatment in good and normal

testing conditions at the primary school level.




) 128(

Testing

conditions

N

Mean

SD

Df

Mean

diff

Standard

error

t-cal

t-critical

at

0.05 level

Good testing

condition

(Experimental)

Normal

testing

condition

(Control)

25

25

13.40

11.76

3.15

.68

24

1.64

0.82

2.00*

1.71

*Significant; df= 24; p< 0.05

Table 3 shows that, a calculated t-value of 2.00 as the difference in

testing condition performance of pupils due to exposure to two different

testing conditions. This implies that calculated t-value between the means

was significant since it is greater than the critical t value of 1.71 at 24

degrees of freedom at 0.05 level of significance. This indicates that the

given gain in performance is due to the difference in the testing

conditions since the other effective variables are being controlled. The

gain of performance in testing condition after being exposed to good




) 129(

testing conditions is beyond the level which other testees, who were not

provided with a good and favourable testing condition, will not attain.

Consequently the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative

hypothesis was retained at 0.05 level of significance. That is to say that

the confidence level is greater than 95%.


in performance of testees exposed to two treatments under a friendly

and unfriendly supervision at the primary school level.

Supervision N Mean SD Df Mean diff

Standard

error t-cal

t-

critical

at

0.05

level

Friendly

supervision

Unfriendly

supervision

25

25

13.40

11.76

3.15

2.68

24

2.10

0.95

2.21*

1.71

*Significant; df= 24; p< 0.025, tabled t-value being 2.04

Table 4 shows that, a calculated t-value of 2.21 as the difference due to

exposure to two different modes of supervision. This implies that the




) 130(

calculated t-value between the means was significant since it is greater

than the critical t value of 1.71 at 24 degrees of freedom at 0.05 level of

significance. This indicates that the given gain in performance is due to

the mode of supervision since the other effective variables are being

controlled in supervision after being exposed to friendly supervision is

beyond the level which other testees, who were not provided or assigned

to a friendly supervisor. Consequently the null hypothesis was rejected

and the alternative hypothesis was retained at 0.05 level of significance.

That is to say that the confidence level is greater than 95%



testing conditions at the secondary school level.

Testing conditions

N

Mean

SD

Df

Mean

diff

Stand

ard

error

t-cal

t-critical

at

0.05 level

Good testing condition

(Experimental)

Normal testing

condition

(Control)

30

30

11.53

11.30

2.72

2.88

29

0.23

0.72

0.32*

1.69

* Not significant; df= 29; p> 0.10, tabled t-value being 1.31




) 131(


performance of students due to exposure to two different testing

conditions. This implies that calculated t-value between the means was

not significant since it is less than the critical t value of 1.69 at 29 degrees

of freedom at 0.05 level of significance. This indicates that the good

testing conditions provided for the experimental group did not result in

gain in performance. Consequently the null hypothesis was retained and

the alternative hypothesis was rejected at 0.05 level of significance. That

is to say that the confidence level is less than 95%. (Actually < 90%).


in performance of testees exposed to treatment under a friendly and

unfriendly supervision at the secondary school level.

Supervision

N

Mean

SD

Df

Mean

diff

Standard

error

t-cal

t-critical

at

0.05 level

Friendly

supervision

Unfriendly

supervision

30

30

12.67

10.70

2.76

2.84

29

1.97

0.72

2.74*

1.69

*Significant; df= 29; p< 0.01, the tabled t=value being 2.46

Table 6 shows that, a calculated t-value of 2.74 as the difference due to

the mode of supervision of students. This implies that calculated t-value




) 132(

between the means was significant since it is greater than the critical t

value of 1.69 at 29 degrees of freedom at 0.05 level of significance. This

indicates that the given gain in performance is due mode of supervision

since the other effective variables are being controlled. The gain of

performance of testees in mode supervision after being exposed to

friendly supervision is beyond the level which other testees, who were not

provided or assigned a friendly supervisor, will not attain. Consequently

the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative hypothesis was

retained at 0.01 level of significance. That is to say that the confidence

level is greater than 99%



testing conditions at the tertiary institution level.

Testing conditions

N

Mean

SD

Df

Mean

diff

Standard

error

t-cal

t-critical

at

0.05

level

Good testing

condition

(Experimental)

Normal testing

condition

(Control)

30

30

10.10

7.77

2.71

1.57

29

2.33

0.57

4.10*

1.69

*significant; df= 29; p< 0.005, tabled t-value being 3.66




) 133(


performance of students due to exposure to two different testing

conditions. This implies that calculated t-value between the means was

significant since it is greater than the critical t value of 1.69 at 29 degrees

of freedom at 0.05 level of significance. This indicates that the resulting

gain in performance is due to the difference in the testing conditions,

since the other effective variables are being controlled. The gain in

performance after being exposed to good testing conditions is beyond the

level which other testees, who were not provided with good and

favourable testing conditions. Consequently the null hypothesis was

rejected and the alternative hypothesis was retained at 0.005 level of

significance. That is to say that the confidence level is greater than

99.5%.


in performance of testees exposed to treatment under a friendly and

unfriendly supervision at the tertiary institution level.




) 134(

Supervision

N

Mean

SD

Df

Mean

diff

Standard

error

t-cal

t-critical

at

0.05 level

Friendly

supervision

Unfriendly

supervision

30

30

9.13

7.77

2.45

2.11

29

1.36

0.59

2.31*

1.69

*Significant; df= 29; p< 0.025, the tabled t=value being 2.04


performance due to the mode of supervision of students. This implies that

calculated t-value between the means was significant since it is greater

than the critical t value of 1.69 at 29 degrees of freedom at 0.205 level of

significance. This indicates that the resulting gain in performance is due

to the mode of supervision since the other effective variables are being

controlled. The gain in performance after being exposed to friendly

supervision is beyond the level which other testees, who were not

provided or assigned a friendly supervisors, will not attain. Consequently




) 135(

the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative hypothesis was

retained at 0.025 level of significance. That is to say that the confidence

level is greater than 97.5.

Discussion of the findings

The findings of the first hypothesis shows that there is a significant

difference between the performance of testees in good and normal testing

conditions at primary school level. These findings support those of

Anastasi (1990) Minchen (2013) and Qaiser (2014). These scholars in

their studies reported that testing conditions may influence scores as they

say: “such a condition as the use of conducive environment, lighting,

sitting arrangement and use of desks or of chairs with desk arms”. They

also reported that poor day lighting cause discomfort, which reduces

testing performance and it is detrimental to the physical and mental health

of students. They concluded that, good day light and electrical light can

improve classroom conditions and promote students performance, and

reduce the rate of disconformities.

The finding of the second hypothesis shows that there is a significant

difference between the performance of testees invigilated by a friendly

and unfriendly personality at primary school level. The finding agrees

with that of Gordon and Durea, in (Chase, 1974) they found that

discouragement by the administrator was associated with clear reduction

in IQs for the experimental group, compared to none discourage control




) 136(

group. As it has been established the examiners or invigilators behaviour

may influence test results; Controlled investigations have yielded

significant differences in intelligence test performance as a result of a

“Warm” versus “Cold” interpersonal relation between the invigilators and

testees.

The findings of the third hypothesis indicate that there are no

significant differences between the performance of testees in a good

testing condition and normal testing condition at secondary school level.

This finding disagrees with those of Seyeder Zahra Mirrahimi and Nik

Lukhman 2013. These Scholars in their studies reported that poor day

lighting causes discomfort, which reduces testing performance and it is

detrimental to the physical and mental health of students. I have already

mentioned some of the factors that may have caused this result.

The finding of the fourth hypothesis shows that there is a significant


and unfriendly personality at secondary school level. This findings agree

with Segool, Carlos and Goforth, which showed that worry is more

strongly related to impaired test (performance than emotionally in good

testing situation).

The findings of the fifth hypothesis show that there is a significant

difference between the performance of testees in a good testing condition

and normal testing condition at tertiary institution level. These findings




) 137(

agree with those of Fisher , E.S and Brian J., they came up with a

conclusion saying that, physical and environmental conditions in which

the examination is taking place has to be conducive for the examinees to

facilitate the achievement of the testing outcomes. The hypothesis also is

in agreement with that of Minchen B. J, as he found that, there is strong

correlation between performance of students and improper seating

arrangement, they conclude that, students should be helped to develop

higher self-efficacy, and school should provide a climate devoid of

cheating to enable students to perform well.

The findings of the sixth hypothesis show that there is a significant


and unfriendly personality at tertiary institution. The findings agree with

those of Exner, Masling cited in Anastasi (1960) as they established the

examiners behaviour may influence test result, controlled investigation

have yielded significant difference in intelligence test performance as a

result of “Warm” versus “Cold” interpersonal relation between examinees

and examiners or a right and a loop versus a natural manner on the part of

the examiner.

Recommendations

The followings recommendations, based on the findings of this study,

are put forward:




) 138(

1. Testing should be conducted in a fair and ethical manner; test

administrators should reduce their level of unfairness and

discouragement.

2. Test anxiety, stress and fatigue should be avoided during and after

testing process, because ‘’ those who are most capable tend to be

least anxious when facing a test”.

3. Anxiety caused by unfairness and humiliation by invigilators

should be avoided during and after test administration.

4. Schools should provide special training and Seminars for Teachers

on test administration and invigilation.

5. Testing should be conducted in a very good and conducive

environment that is free from any noise and interruption for

manipulative abilities of the testees.

6. As the study revealed that classroom physical environment plays a

crucial role in strengthening testees academic achievement

therefore, it is strongly recommended that classroom physical

environment should be well structured and physical facilities

should be provided to each school on priority basis.

Suggestions for further studies

As a result of this study, it is hereby suggested that further studies

should be carried in the following areas.




) 139(

1. Further research should be carried out on the Effect of

Administration Procedures of Teacher-Made Test on the

Performance of Testees at three levels of education with more

testees in other states.

2. Further research should be conducted on the effect of

administration procedures of Teacher-Made Test on the

performance of male and female students at three levels of

education.

3. More research should be carried on the Effect of Classroom

Physical Environment on the Academic Achievement Scores of

Testees at three levels of education.

4. More research should be carried on the Effect of Invigilators

Attitudes on the Academic Achievement of students at each level

of education.

5. A research should be carried on the effect of invigilators

personality on the performance of male and female students.

6. A separate research should be carried on the impact of temperature on

the scores of students at secondary school level, to support or repute the

result of the study concerning hypothesis no 3.




) 140(

REFERENCES

Alabi, A. O., “Effective Invigilation as a panacea for examination malpractice among

students of tertiary institution in Nigeria”, Global Journal of Human-Social Science: A

Arts & Humanities- Psychology, Vol.14, 2014.

Anastasi, A., “Psychology Testing 6th editions”,( New York: Macmillan publishing

company 1990).

Anderson, L.W, Krathhowl D. R, et-al. “A taxonomy for learning teaching, and assessing: A revision of Blooms taxonomy of educational objectives” , (Complete edition, New York: Longman, 2001).

Bloom, B.S. “Taxonomy of Educational Objectives; The Classification of Educational

Goals, Hand Book 1: Cognitive, Domain”, (New York: Longman, 1956.),

Brown, F.G, “Measuring Classroom Achievement”, (New York: Holt Reint and Wistin

Inc., 1981),

Charles M. Anikweze “Measurement and Evaluation 2nd edition” (NIG: Constellation

Publishers, 2010).

Chase, I.C., “Measurement for educational evaluation”, (USA: Addision-Weseley

Publishing Company, 1974).

Cohen Louis, Lawrence Manion and Keith Marrison,” Research Method in Education

5th Edition”, (USA New York: Routledge, 2008).

David, k. And Chukuma, O. “African Journal of Teacher Education”, Vol. 1 N0. 1

Oct.2010.

Drever, James. “Dictionary of psychology, revised by Harvey Wallerstain”, (Middle

sex, England: Penguin Books Limited 1976),

Ebel Rosco. L, “Measuring Educational Achievement” (Printice -Hall, INC, 1971).

Edwards, M.M. “Building conditions, parental involvement and student achievement in the D.C. Public school system”. District of Columbia Public Schools; ERIC




) 141(

Document Reproduction Service No. ED338743, 1991.

Fisher E. S. “The Effect of the Physical Classroom Environment on Literacy Outcome”

(Thesis presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School University of Missouri 2008).

Fives D. Donato- Barnes, “Practical Assessment”, Research and Evaluation Vol. 18,

N0 3, Table of Specifications.

Green, John A., “Teacher-Made Tests 2nd edition,” (New York: Macmillan Publishing

Company, 1975).

Gronlund, N.E, “Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching”, (New York: Macmillan

publishing Co, Inc. 1975.),

Gronlund, N.E., “Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching 3rd edition”, (New York:

Macmillan Publishing co, Inc.1971)

Harry, Schofield, “Assessment and Testing”, (London: Unwin Education Ltd), n.d

Harbor-Peters, V.F., “Noteworthy Points in Measurement and Evaluation”, (Enugu:

SNAPP press Ltd).

Hosch, Braden J.,” Time on Test, Student Motivation, and Performance of Collegiate

Learning Assessment”, Annual Research Forum, Chicago, IL, 2010.

http://ask.cie.org.uk/system/selfservice.controller

http://www.britishcouncil.org/2.-invigilators---code-of-practice-allexam.doc

http://www.education.gov.uk/nctl/examsadmin/b00197212/examcycle-/exam-

prep/invigilation-

http://www.express-invigilators.co.uk/role_6.html

http://www.weblearneng.com/invigilator

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-does-an-invigilator-do.htm

Irwin G. Sarason, “Empirical Findings and Theoretical problems in the use of Anxiety

Scales,” Psychology Bulletin 1960.

Josean Perez et al, “Impact of Temperature on Students Scores”, Environmental




) 142(

Protection Agency, Washington D.C 2016.

Kulbir Singh Sidhu., “Methodology of Research in Education 1st edition”, (INDIA:

Sterling publishers PVT. L.T.D, 2006).

Layman, B.B, “Test Score and what they mean” (London: Prentice-hall international

Inc, 1963).

Maslow, A.H. & Mintz, N.L. “Effects of aesthetic surroundings: Initial effects of three

aesthetic conditions upon perceiving, "energy", and "well-being" in faces”. Journal of

Psychology, Vol.41, 1956.

Minchen, Brian J., “Effects of classroom seating on student’s performance in a high

school science setting”, Education and Human Development Masters Theses, paper

414, College at Brockport: State University New York. 2007.

M.W. Richrd, J.M Stainaker, “Comment on Achievement Examination,” Journal of

Education Research, XXV111, 1935.

Nonyelu, R.N.,” Influence of test anxiety on students’ achievement in mathematics in

Abuja junior secondary schools” Unpublished M Ed Dissertation Nasarawa State

University Nigeria, 2011.

Ohuce, R.B, Akeju U.S., “Measurement and Evaluation in Education”, (Onitsha:

Africa-Fep publishers Ltd. 1988)

Pourrajab M., Rabbani M., K. Sara,. “Different effects of stress on male and female

students”, The Online Journal of Counselling and Education, 2014.

Qaiser Suleman, and Ishtiag Hussain., “Effects of classroom physical environment on

the academic achievement scores of secondary school students in kohat Division,

Pakistan”, International Journal of Learning and development. Vol.4, N0.1, 2014.

Rotimi Omolola Abidemi, Omonijo, D. O., Uche, O. O., “ Influence of personality type

and socio- demographical characteristics of students on examination malpractice: Case

of secondary schools in Ibadan”, European Journal of Scientific Research Vol. 124, N0

4. Sept, 2014.




) 143(

Segool, K. N., Carlson, J. S. Goforth, A. N., “Heightened test anxiety among young

children; elementary school pupils anxious responses to high-stakes testing”, Wiley

periodicals, Inc. Psychology in the schools, Vol. 50(5), 2013.

Seyedeh Zahra Mirrahimi, Nik Lukman Ibrahim, M. Surat., “Effect of daylight on

students health and performance”, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering

and Built Environment National University of Malaysia 2013.

Testing code of ethics for North Carolina, (Authority: G.S. 115C-12(9) C., 115C-81(b)(4); Aug. 2000).

WWW.ncpublicschools.org/accountablity/testing/. Downloaded 25, oct.2015.

Thorndike R.L and Hagen E. “Measurement and Evaluation in Education 3rd edition”,

(U.S.A: John Waley and Sons Inc, 1969).

Ugodulunwa, C.A. and Ugwuanyi, C.L. “Understanding Educational Evaluation”,

(Jos: Deka Publications, 1999).

Wiersma W. “Research Methods in Education”, (Illinois: F.E Peacock publishers,

1975)

www.chaminade.edu/student-affairs

www.proftesting.com/../steps_10.php

Withheld. “How to be a School Exam Invigilator.”, (London: Career path 320)

effects of administration procedures of teacher made...

Documents