Asian Journal of Education and Training ISSN(E) : 2519-5387 Vol. 3, No. 1, 6-17, 2017 http://www.asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/EDU 6 Development and Validation of Economics Achievement Test for Secondary Schools Lydia Ijeoma Eleje1  Chidiebere Christopher Abanobi2 Emma Obasi3 ( Corresponding Author) 1 Department of Educational Foundations, Faculty of Education, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Awka, Nigeria 2 Department of Educational Psychology, Federal College of Education (T), Asaba, Nigeria 3 Department of Social Science Education, Faculty of Education, Imo State University, Owerri Nigeria Abstract Economics achievement test (EAT) for assessing senior secondary two (SS2) achievement in economics was developed and validated in the study. Five research questions guided the study. Twenty and 100 mid-senior secondary (SS2) economics students was used for the pilot testing and reliability check respectively. A sample of 250 students randomly drawn was used to subject initial 80 objective test items for the test try-out that yielded the data for item analysis. 50 items with difficulty indices ranged from 0.25 to 0.79 and discrimination indices of 0.20 to 0.58 where retained. Face and content validation of EAT was ensured by constructing items in line with the test blue print, the use of subject experts in SS2 economics and two experts in test construction. The test reliability established through Kuder- Richardson formula 20 gave a coefficient of 0.81. The test was found to be of good quality, valid and highly reliable. The EAT is therefore recommended for use in assessing SS2 students’ achievement in economics and to determine/predict students that will do well in economics in their final class (SS3) as well as those that will have good performance in economics external examinations (WAEC and NECO). Keywords: Development, Economics, Achievement test, Validation, Reliability, Item analysis, Senior secondary two. Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 7 2. Results .................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 3. Discussion ............................................................................................................................................................................. 13 4. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................ 13 5. Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................................ 13 References ................................................................................................................................................................................ 14 Appendix-1. .............................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Appendix-2. .............................................................................................................................................................................. 17 Citation | Lydia Ijeoma Eleje; Chidiebere Christopher Abanobi; Emma Obasi (2017). Development and Validation of Economics Achievement Test for Secondary Schools. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 3(1): 6-17. DOI: 10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 ISSN(E) : 2519-5387 Licensed: Contribution/Acknowledgement: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License All authors contributed to the conception and design of the study. Funding: This study received no specific financial support. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests. Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study was reported; that no vital features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. History: Received: 2 November 2016/ Revised: 28 December 2016/ Accepted: 10 January 2017/ Published: 23 January 2017 Ethical: This study follows all ethical practices during writing. Publisher: Asian Online Journal Publishing Group http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Lydia Ijeoma Eleje https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Chidiebere Christopher Abanobi https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Emma Obasi http://search.crossref.org/?q=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Lydia Ijeoma Eleje https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Chidiebere Christopher Abanobi https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Emma Obasi http://search.crossref.org/?q=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Lydia Ijeoma Eleje https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Chidiebere Christopher Abanobi https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Emma Obasi http://search.crossref.org/?q=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Lydia Ijeoma Eleje https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Chidiebere Christopher Abanobi https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Emma Obasi http://search.crossref.org/?q=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Lydia Ijeoma Eleje https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Chidiebere Christopher Abanobi https://orcid.org/orcid-search/quick-search?searchQuery=Emma Obasi http://search.crossref.org/?q=10.20448/journal.522/2017.3.1/522.1.6.17 Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 7 1. Introduction Economics as a subject is part of the senior secondary curriculum which is expected of students to study for three years starting from senior secondary one till senior secondary three (SS1, SS2 and SS3). Economics in secondary school is aimed at bringing about desirable behavioral changes which may be overt or covert (Dike, 2002). Such behavioral changes which are the products of the objectives of the teaching/learning situations need to be quantified and qualified using achievement test. Achievement test- a test given to assess how far a student has learnt what was taught Onunkwo (2002) plays an important role in the school program. Achievement tests measure knowledge of facts, concepts and principles. They are primarily used in making classroom-level decisions and are designed with particular reference to the course objectives/learning goals of a specific course, study program or class (Mahajan, 2015). It indicate present, not future, proficiency. Such tests evaluates students’ understanding of a particular instructional domain in order to make decisions regarding the advancement or capability of the students. Decisions made on students by using achievement tests can be biased if the achievement test used is not valid and reliable. Thus, it is expected that the schools should have enough valid and reliable economics achievement tests for assessing how far their students at each level have learnt what was taught as well as to prepare them for external examinations such as West African School Certificate Examination (WASCE) and National Examination Council (NECO). Inadequate valid achievement test according to Allen (2005) is a reason many teachers continue to assign invalid grades to students. If the grades are not accurate measures of the student’s performance, then they do not communicate the truth about the level of the student’s academic achievement. Since important decisions are often based on a student’s grade, invalid achievement tests, hence grades may result in dire consequences for the student. If students receive grades lower than ones that accurately depicts their true level of economics academic achievement, it may lead students to believe they lack the ability to succeed academically in economics and lower their sense of self-efficacy as well as their motivation to do well in WAEC and NECO economics examinations (Osadebe, 2012). Also, with high grades in (WAEC and NECO) economics examinations, students get admitted to colleges and universities of their choice, study courses of their choice like Economics, Banking, Finance, Accounting and other related courses and receive scholarships and tuition assistance, since grades are a major selection criterion in tertiary schools admission process in West African countries like Nigeria, Ghana and Liberia (Pintrich and Schunk, 2002). The reverse is also true. It is very difficult for students to get admitted to some schools if their grades are not sufficiently high. Invalid grades that understate the student’s knowledge as a result of invalid assessment tool may prevent a student with ability to pursue certain educational or career opportunities (Pintrich and Schunk, 2002). Esomonu and Agbonkpolo (2010) and Osadebe (2012) observed that most teachers are not good in constructing valid and reliable test in their various subject areas. Teachers find it easy to construct test items in the lower cognitive levels (knowledge and comprehension) than the higher cognitive levels (application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation). This constitutes an educational problem. So, a valid and reliable items for evaluating students’ achievement in economics secondary school are rare and the possibility of constructing such items by the classroom teacher is limited because it is an art that only experts in test construction does. It involves a couple of steps scrupulous analysis, and substantial time (Esomonu and Agbonkpolo, 2010). Therefore, there is a dire need for experts to construct enough valid and reliable achievement tests for use in senior secondary levels. However, previous effort have been made by researchers to construct achievement test in economics. Mahajan (2015) constructed and standardized achievement test in economics for standard XI but only on few selected topics without covering all the topics. Also Osadebe (2014) constructed a multiple choice objective economics achievement test which should be administered only to senior secondary three (SS3) students when they have covered the WAEC or NECO economics syllabus. The two researchers did not explore on the development of achievement test for SS2 (mid-senior secondary level) economics. Therefore, there is an educational need for the development and validation of an achievement test in economics for mid-senior secondary level students covering all the topics in their curriculum. Consequently, the researcher focused on the development and validation of economics achievement test for senior secondary two (SS2) students using various types of objective tests. The items constructed in this study covers only the topics in SS2 curriculum, to make achievement test for SS2 available to teachers. This test will enable teachers evaluate SS2 students’ proficiency/competency in economics before entering SS3, thereby identify students that can perform well in WAEC and NECO economics examination. The constructed test will serve as a major contribution to the need of valid and reliable economics achievement test in senior secondary two. To the best of our knowledge, no achievement test has been done on the subject of economics for the mid-senior secondary levels. The objective of this study therefore, is the development and validation of an economic achievement test for mid-senior secondary level. 1.1. Research Questions The study sought answers to the following research questions. 1. What are the difficulty indices of the EAT items? 2. What are the discrimination indices of the EAT items? 3. What are the distracter indices of the EAT items? 4. How valid is the EAT? 5. To what extent is the EAT reliable? Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 8 Table-1. Economics Achievement Test Table of Specification OBJECTIVE K N O W L E D G E 4 1 % C O M P R E H E N S IO N 9 % A P P L IC A T IO N 7 % A N A L Y S IS 1 9 % S Y N T H E S IS 9 % E V A L U A T IO N T O T A L TOPICS Demand and Supply 17% 9 0 0 4 0 0 13 Meaning 1 - - - - - 1 Demand and Supply Curves 4 - - - - - 4 Law of demand and Supply 2 - - - - - 2 Factors affecting demand and supply - - - 1 - - 1 Equilibrium Price and Quantity 1 - - 2 - - 3 Types of Demand and Supply 1 - - 1 - 2 Production (PPC) 7% 2 1 1 0 1 1 6 Meaning 1 1 - - - - 2 Basic Concept (TP, AP and MP) 1 - 1 - 1 - 3 Laws of variable Proportion - - - - - 1 1 Revenue/Cost 10% 3 1 2 0 1 1 8 Basic Concepts (cost) 1 - 2 - - - 3 Shot and Long run Cost 1 - - - - - 1 Eco and Acc. View of cost 1 - - - - 1 2 Revenue Concept - 1 - - 1 - 2 Economic System 9% 4 0 0 1 1 1 7 Capitalism 3 - - 1 - - 4 Socialism - - - - - 1 1 Mixed Economy 1 - - - 1 - 2 Un-employment 12% 2 1 2 2 1 2 10 Meaning - 1 2 - - - 3 Types - - - 1 - 1 2 Causes 2 - - - - 1 3 Effect - - - - 1 - 1 Solution - - - 1 - - 1 Utility Theory 10% 2 1 1 1 1 2 8 Meaning 2 - - - - - 2 Basic Concepts - - 1 - - - 1 Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility - - - - - 1 1 Utility Maximization - 1 - 1 - 1 3 Derivation of demand Curve - - - - 1 - 1 Public Finance 12% 5 1 0 2 0 2 10 Objective 1 - - - - - 1 Direct and Indirect taxation 4 - - 1 - 1 6 Budgets - 1 - 1 - 1 3 Financial Institution 7% 2 0 0 3 0 1 6 Types - - - 2 - - 2 Functions 2 - - 1 - 1 4 Inflation 8% 2 1 0 1 1 1 6 Meaning 1 1 - - - - 2 Cause - - - 1 - - 1 Effects 1 - - - - - 1 Control - - - - 1 1 2 Industrialization 8% 2 1 0 1 1 1 6 Types 2 1 - - - - 3 Localization - - - 1 1 1 3 Total 33 7 6 15 7 12 80 Source: Lydia Ijeoma Eleje 1.2. The Test Development Process The stages of achievement tests development used in this study as listed by Ohuche and Akeju (1988); Mahajan (2015) and Osadebe (2014) comprises of planning the test, constructing the test items, pilot testing, trial testing, item analysis, and assembling of final test. The following describes each of the stages. Planning the test: In this section, the sample and sample technique, content and table of specifications are described. The sample for the test try-out consisted of 250 randomly selected senior secondary two (SS2) economics students from 6 secondary schools and the sample for establishing the reliability consisted of 100 SS2 economics students from 3 secondary schools. All in Anambra State of Nigeria, for the 2015/2016 academic session. The content area of the study is based on the SS2 economics curriculum. The test table of specifications consisted of 80 items in the content area of SS2 economics curriculum. Various units of the test content were listed along the rows while different educational objectives to be tested were listed along the columns (See Table 1). Constructing the test: Various formats of the objective test was used in the construction of the EAT because of its being objectively scored and versatility in content coverage (Winarni, 2002). Following the guidelines stipulated by Olubodum (2009) and Suen and McClellan (2003) eighty (80) items that are in line with the table of Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 9 specifications were constructed using economics text books recommended by the Ministry of Education (Anyaele, 2003; Anyanwuocha, 2006). The constructed items in its initial draft were given to two experts in educational measurement and evaluation, and two experienced SS2 teachers of economics for face and content validation. Their expert observations, comments and suggestions were incorporated in the modifications of the test. Pilot testing: Pilot testing was done on 20 SS2 economics students of a secondary school in Anambra State to check grammatical error and compatibility of the EAT test items (Winarni, 2002). The test try-out: The test try-out was administered to 250 SS2 economics students during third term of 2015/2016 academic session when subject teachers and SS2 students had completed the teaching and learning of the test content. The test try-out was for the purpose of item analysis. Item analysis: It is done to ensure the quality of the items. It involved seven (6) main steps. Step 1- Identify the higher and lower achievers. Step 2- Process test responses. Step 3- Calculate item difficulty index. Step 4- Calculate item discrimination index. Step 5- Calculate the distracter indices. Step 6- Selection of good items. An item was considered good for inclusion in the final output of the test if it had difficulty index of 0.30 to 0.70, discrimination index greater than 0.20 and a positive distracter index. However, items with appropriate difficulty indices but with discrimination indices of less than 0.20 were not accepted as good. Also items with appropriate discrimination index but have difficulty index of less than 0.20 or more than 0.80 were rejected (See Table 2). This according to Esomonu and Agbonkpolo (2010) is to ensure the content validity of the test. Fifty (50) items that mate the criteria were selected as the final draft of the EAT. Assembly of final test: The final version of the EAT (50 items) were arranged in-line with the content area. 1.3. Validity of the Test The 80 items of the test was face and content validated by two experts in educational measurement and evaluation, and two experienced senior secondary two teachers of economics. These experts were requested to scrutinize the items (stems, options, keys and distracters) of the DET in terms of clarity, relevance, adequacy and comprehensiveness of the items. To guide the experts in the validation exercise, the topic of this study and table of specifications together with the draft test were given to the experts. After examining the test, they made some corrections on some of the items. Their expert observations, comments and suggestions were used in the modifications of the test. 1.4. Reliability of the Test To estimate the reliability of the economics achievement test EAT Kuder-Richardson formula 20(K-R20) were employed. Final version of the EAT wear given to 100 randomly selected SS2 students. The computation of K-R20 is to ensure the internal consistency. 2. Results The results of the study were presented and analyzed below. Research Question One and Two What are the difficulty and discrimination indices of the EAT items? Table-2. The difficulty and discrimination indices obtained after EAT item analysis Summary Table of Difficulty and Discrimination indices Item Key (K) No of correct responses among Higher achievers (H) N=83 No of correct responses among Lower achievers (L) N=83 Difficulty index H + L 2N Discrimination index H - L N Remark 1. Correct 35 14 0.30 0.25 Retain 2. False 40 18 0.35 0.27 Retain 3. D 66 38 0.63 0.34 Retain 4. Correct 17 8 0.15 0.11 Reject 5. A 66 31 0.58 0.42 Retain 6. Correct 74 41 0.69 0.40 Retain 7. C 25 11 0.22 0.17 Reject 8. True 79 69 0.90 0.12 Reject 9. B 43 24 0.40 0.23 Retain 10. D 65 53 0.71 0.14 Reject 11. B 60 35 0.57 0.30 Retain 12. D 66 42 0.65 0.29 Retain 13. True 61 71 0.80 -0.12 Reject 14. B 57 27 0.51 0.36 Retain 15. Correct 62 14 0.46 0.58 Retain 16. Correct 75 50 0.75 0.30 Retain 17. D 62 15 0.46 0.57 Retain 18. B 68 33 0.61 0.42 Retain 19. Continue Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 10 20. D 75 50 0.75 0.30 Retain 21. A 66 31 0.58 0.42 Retain 22. C 58 22 0.48 0.42 Retain 23. Correct 32 10 0.25 0.27 Retain 24. False 16 13 0.17 0.04 Reject 25. D 77 43 0.72 0.41 Retain 26. C 58 30 0.55 0.34 Retain 27. C 41 34 0.45 0.08 Reject 28. C 25 28 0.32 -0.04 Reject 29. C 20 10 0.18 0.12 Reject 30. B 36 35 0.43 0.01 Reject 31. Correct 73 54 0.77 0.23 Retain 32. Correct 70 53 0.74 0.20 Retain 33. Correct 60 22 0.49 0.46 Retain 34. Correct 71 50 0.73 0.25 Retain 35. A 50 13 0.38 0.45 Retain 36. D 59 23 0.49 0.43 Retain 37. B 42 20 0.37 0.27 Retain 38. C 56 35 0.55 0.25 Retain 39. C 50 35 0.51 0.18 Reject 40. A 51 36 0.52 0.18 reject 41. A 78 42 0.72 0.43 Retain 42. Correct 79 66 0.87 0.16 Reject 43. B 59 34 0.56 0.30 Retain 44. C 32 38 0.42 -0.07 Reject 45. Correct 69 15 0.51 0.65 Retain 46. B 32 10 0.25 0.27 Retain 47. C 42 37 0.48 0.06 Reject 48. A 45 13 0.35 0.39 Retain 49. C 42 23 0.39 0.23 Retain 50. D 47 30 0.46 0.20 Retain 51. B 13 23 0.22 -0.12 Reject 52. A 40 25 0.39 0.18 Reject 53. D 54 37 0.55 0.20 Retain 54. Correct 82 80 0.98 0.02 Reject 54. Correct 83 81 0.99 0.02 Reject 55. B 52 41 0.56 0.13 Reject 56. D 70 44 0.69 0.31 Retain 57. D 53 32 0.51 0.25 Retain 58. A 65 26 0.55 0.47 Retain 59. D 68 57 0.75 0.13 Reject 60. A 67 19 0.52 0.58 Retain 61. A 65 30 0.57 0.42 Retain 62. C 39 28 0.40 0.11 Reject 63. True 82 70 0.92 0.14 Reject 64. D 73 34 0.64 0.47 Retain 65. A 61 31 0.55 0.36 Retain 66. C 32 21 0.32 0.13 Reject 67. B 54 37 0.55 0.20 Retain 68. A 76 49 0.75 0.33 Retain 69. A 4 8 0.07 -0.05 Reject 70. C 35 21 0.34 0.17 Reject 71. B 29 23 0.31 0.07 Reject 72. A 37 25 0.37 0.14 Reject 73 True 79 52 0.79 0.33 Retain 74. A 68 39 0.64 0.35 Retain 75. C 8 16 0.14 -0.10 Reject 76. D 66 48 0.69 0.22 Retain 77. A 47 41 0.53 0.07 Reject 78. C 59 24 0.50 0.42 Retain 79. A 76 43 0.72 0.40 Retain 80 B 51 16 0.37 0.49 Retain Source: Lydia Ijeoma Eleje Research Question Three What are the distracter indices of the EAT? Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 11 Table-3. The distracter indices obtained after EAT item analysis Item No of respondents who choose option True, Correct No of respondents who choose option B, False, Incorrect No of Respondents who choose option C No of respondents who choose option D Omit Total Distractibility L – H U Index N = 83 Remarks NO L H L H L H L H A B C D 1 14 35 64 49 4 166 0.18 A good item 2 62 35 18 40 11 “ 0.33 K A good item 3 3 4 12 1 27 12 38 66 3 “ -0.01 0.13 0.18 K Option A replaced 5 31 66 14 4 18 - 9 10 18 “ K 0.30 0.22 -0.01 Option D replaced 6 41 74 27 9 15 “ K 0.22 A good item 9 44 25 24 43 4 10 5 - 11 “ 0.23 K -0.07 0.06 Option C replaced 11 16 10 8 1 13 6 42 66 4 “ 0.07 0.08 0.08 K Distracters are ok 12 5 3 35 60 12 2 13 14 22 “ 0.02 K 0.12 -0.01 Option D replaced 14 28 10 27 57 7 - 15 8 21 “ 0.22 K 0.08 0.08 Distracters are ok 15 14 62 35 41 14 “ K -0.07 Item amended 16 50 75 20 7 14 “ K 0.16 A good item 17 8 10 15 1 24 4 15 62 27 “ 0.02 0.16 024 K Distracters are ok 18 10 1 33 68 13 4 9 3 25 “ 0.11 K 0.13 0.07 Distracters are ok 19 23 3 4 1 4 4 50 75 2 “ 0.24 0.04 0 K Distracters are ok 20 31 66 20 - 10 4 12 8 15 “ K 0.24 0.07 0.05 Option Camended 21 8 7 23 14 22 58 18 2 14 “ 0.01 0.12 K 0.19 Distracters are ok 22 10 32 42 35 47 “ K 0.08 Distracters are ok 24 2 1 16 2 12 2 43 77 11 “ 0.01 0.17 0.12 K A good item 25 12 5 18 10 30 58 10 - 23 “ 0.08 0.10 K 0.12 Distracters are ok 30 54 73 25 10 4 “ K 0.18 Distracters are ok 31 3 70 27 12 4 “ K 0.18 A good item 32 22 60 59 23 2 “ K 0.43 A good item A good item 33 50 71 29 12 4 “ K 0.20 A good item 34 13 50 31 18 18 6 9 3 18 “ K 0.16 A good item 35 14 8 11 5 20 9 23 59 17 “ 0.07 0.07 0.13 K A good item 36 22 15 20 43 16 16 10 2 23 “ 0.08 K 0 0.12 Distracters are ok 37 13 14 26 13 35 56 3 - 6 “ -0.01 0.16 K 0.04 Option D replaced 40 42 78 17 1 4 2 11 2 9 “ K 0.19 0.02 0.12 Option A amended 42 26 18 34 59 6 1 11 4 7 “ 0.01 K 0.06 0.08 Distracters are ok 44 15 69 17 9 56 “ K 0.10 Distracters are ok 45 55 43 10 32 9 4 4 1 8 “ 0.14 K 0.06 0.03 A good item 47 13 45 20 11 30 6 10 16 15 “ K 0.11 0.29 -0.07 Distracters are ok 48 13 17 15 10 23 42 24 11 11 “ -0.04 0.06 K 0.16 Option D replaced Continue Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 12 Source: Lydia Ijeoma Eleje 49 27 27 5 2 11 3 30 47 15 “ 0.01 0.04 0.10 K Option A replaced 52 21 21 5 11 11 2 37 54 18 “ 0.12 -0.07 0.11 K Distracters are Ok 56 13 13 16 2 8 4 44 70 6 “ 0.12 0.17 0.05 K Replace Option B 57 20 20 15 14 14 5 32 53 2 “ 0.11 0.01 0.11 K Distracters are Ok 58 26 26 9 3 7 7 24 3 22 “ K 0.07 0 0.25 Option Camended 60 19 67 23 4 14 5 15 6 13 “ K 0.23 0.11 0.11 Distracters are ok 61 30 65 26 16 10 1 6 1 11 “ K 0.12 0.11 0.06 Distracters are ok 64 24 5 10 1 4 2 34 73 13 “ 0.23 0.11 0.02 K Distracters are ok 65 31 61 6 - 10 6 28 10 14 “ K 0.07 0.05 0.22 Distracters are ok 67 5 9 37 54 5 6 28 14 8 “ -0.05 K -0.07 0.17 OptionA&Creplaced 68 49 7 7 1 17 4 3 3 6 “ K 0.07 0.16 0 OptionD amended 73 52 79 23 4 - - - - 8 “ K 0.23 A good item 74 39 68 23 8 4 2 3 3 16 “ K 0.18 0.02 0 OptionD amended 76 4 3 3 - 12 13 48 66 17 “ 0.01 0.04 -0.01 K Option C replaced 78 10 9 9 2 24 59 17 2 26 “ -0.08 0.08 K 0.18 Option A replaced 79 43 11 11 1 5 3 8 2 17 “ K 0.12 0.02 0.07 Distracters are ok 80 11 12 10 51 20 5 24 11 22 “ -0.01 K 0.18 0.16 Option A replaced Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 13 Research Question 4 How valid is the EAT? Validity of the test was done by matching the test items from the objectives (See Table 1) and presenting the whole test to two experts in the test construction and two experienced teachers in the content areas of SS2 economics for item review. These experts guaranteed that the instrument had strong content validity in which each item represented the content area being investigated, rather than asking unrelated questions. Research Question 5 To what extent is the DET reliable? Estimate of EAT reliability using Kuder-Richardson formula 20(K-R20) gave an index of 0.81. 3. Discussion The quality of a test is evident in the appropriateness of the test item parameters (difficulty, discrimination and distracter indices) obtained from item analysis. As shown in this study, 50 items that were found to be good with appropriate difficulty and discrimination indices were retained. Items numbers 4, 23, 28, 69 and 75 had difficulty indices that were less than 0.20. This means that they were very difficult items. Items numbers 8, 41, 53, 54 and 63 in the current study was found to be very easy. In this study, six (13, 27, 43, 50, 69, 75) items had negative discrimination indices. This indicated that low ability students performed better on those items than high ability students as previously described by Eleje et al. (2016). Such items discriminated but in the negative (wrong) direction. On the other hand, 24 items had low but positive discrimination values (0.0 ≤ 0.20). This implied that students who incorrectly answered these items also scored high on the test overall, while students who correctly answered the items scored low on the test overall. Also observed in the It was also observed in Table 3 that out of 50 EAT items retained, 33 items have good/positive distracters and some distracter indices of the 17 items were either negative or zero. The positive value indicated that the distracters are good. It also implied that more of the students in the low ability group chose the distracter than those in the high ability group. The negative or zero value of the indices indicated that the distracters were bad or poor. The distracters with negative or zero values were reviewed then replaced or amended for improvement and ease of the test takers. Other items were also improved by restructuring the manner of questioning to lesson confusions in answering this is also in line with a study conducted by Eleje et al. (2016) and Esomonu and Agbonkpolo (2010). Validity of the test was done by matching the test items from the objectives (See Table 1) and presenting the whole test to two experts in the test construction and two experienced teachers in the content areas of secondary economics for item review. These experts guaranteed that the instrument had strong content validity in which each item represented the content area being investigated, rather than asking unrelated questions. This implied that all the objectives and content areas were well covered in the table of specifications. Thus the economics achievement test has a good content validity. The reliability estimate of EAT was done through Kuder-Richardson formula 20 analysis. The result shows that a reliability estimate of 0.81 was obtained. That is, there is 0.81 degree of consistency with which the item of EAT evaluates economics achievement of SS2 students. A reliability index of 0.81 implied that the EAT is highly reliable. According to Ceniza and Cereno (2012) the reliability coefficient within the range of 0.81 to 1.0 signified high reliability, 0.61 to 0.80 signified a moderate reliability, 0.41 to 0.60 signified fair reliability, 0.10 to 0.40 signified slight reliability, and less than 0.10 signified no reliability. Therefore, the test reliability was high and could be used by teachers to assess senior secondary two (SS2) students’ achievement in economics. The use of KR20 in this study was appropriate. Since this study involves development of a test instrument that is dichotomously scored and where scores for the various items will be added or aggregated to produce a single or composite score/grade (Nworgu, 2006; Osadebe, 2014). 4. Conclusion A good, valid and reliable economics achievement test for SS2 students’ was developed in this study. This is evident in the results of reliability and item analysis of the test conducted. The item analysis conducted on the test items showed that the test overall difficulty were within the range of 0.25 to 0.79 and the discrimination indices were within the range of 0.20 to 0.58. This means that the EAT has a moderate level of difficulty and the discrimination indices, a moderate one (Ceniza and Cereno, 2012; Eleje et al., 2016). The validity of the instrument was determined through the use of test blue print or table of specifications and expert judgment. This helped to establish high face and content validity. A reliability estimate of the EAT through the use of Kuder-Richardson formula 20 gave an index of 0.81. This implied that the currently developed economics achievement test (EAT) is high reliability. Hence, it could be concluded that the economics achievement test developed in this study is of good quality, valid and highly reliable. Thus, the developed, validated and reliable EAT can now be used in assessing SS2 students achievement in economics and to predict students that can do well in economics in their SS3. It is an instrument that can measure the desired trait of senior secondary two economics in Nigeria. 5. Recommendations Since the findings of this study revealed that the EAT is valid, reliable and of good quality, the researchers’ recommend that the test be used by the teachers to assess mid-senior secondary (SS2) students’ achievement in economics. Teachers should also use the test to determine/predict students that will do well in economics in their final class (SS3) as well as those that will have good performance in economics external examinations (WAEC and NECO). Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 14 References Allen, J.D., 2005. Grades as valid measures of academic achievement of classroom learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 78(5): 218-223. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher Anyaele, J.U., 2003. Comprehensive economics for senior secondary schools. Kwara: A. Johnson Publishers Limited. Anyanwuocha, R.A.I., 2006. Fundamentals of economics for senior secondary schools. Owerri: Africana First Publishers Limited. Ceniza, J.C. and D.C. Cereno, 2012. Development of mathematic diagnostic test for DORSHS. Retrieved from http://www.doscst.edu.ph/. Dike, V., 2002. The state of education in Nigeria and the health if the nation. Retrieved from www.africaeconomicanalysis. Eleje, L.I., N.P.M. Esomonu, N.N. Agu, R.O. Okoye, E. Obasi and F.E. Onah, 2016. Development and validation of diagnostic economics test for secondary schools. World Journal of Education, 6(3): 90. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher Esomonu, N.P.M. and U.M. Agbonkpolo, 2010. Construction and validation of achievement test in senior secondary school economics. International Journal of Educational Research and Development, 4(1): 68-79. Mahajan, G., 2015. Construction and validation of achievement test in economics. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies, 1(6): 54-60. View at Google Scholar Nworgu, B.G., 2006. Educational research: Basic issues and methodology. 2nd Edn., Enugu: University Trust Publishers. Ohuche, R.O. and S.A. Akeju, 1988. Measurement and evaluation in education. Onitsha: African –Fep Publishers Ltd. Olubodum, O.J., 2009. Principles and techniques of test construction. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/ojolubodun/principles-and- techniques-of-test-construction. Onunkwo, G.I.N., 2002. Fundamentals of educational measurement and evaluation. Owerri: Cape Publishers International Ltd. Osadebe, P.U., 2012. Procedures for construction, validation and standardization of test. A Seminar Paper Presented at Delta State University, Abraka. Osadebe, P.U., 2014. Construction of economics achievement test for assessment of students. World Journal of Education, 42(2): 58. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher Pintrich, P.R. and D.H. Schunk, 2002. Motivation in education. 2nd Edn., Upper Saddler River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Suen, H.K. and S. McClellan, 2003. Item construction principles and techniques. Encyclopedia of Vocational and Technological Education, 1: 777-798. View at Google Scholar Winarni, I., 2002. The development of a diagnostic reading test of english for the students of medical faculty. Malang: Brawijaya University. Appendix-1. ECONOMICS ACHIEVEMENT TEST (EAT) FOR SENIOR SECONDARY TWO (SS2) 1. (1) The means of production in a free economic system is owned and controlled by ___________________ 2. (2) In capitalist economic goods are not produced to yield profits. True false 3. (3) The Major types of economic system includes (a) Socialism (b) Capitalism (c) Mixed economy (d) All of the above 4. (5) Socialism is different from capitalism in that government participation is (a) high (b) low (c) moderate (d) absent 6. (6) A mixed economic system has a mixture of the elements of both _____________ and _____________ (9) The downward slope of production possibility curve indicates or illustrates (a)Marginal product (b)Opportunity cost (c) Marginal revenue (d) Money cost 7. (11) If the number of the labourers is increased from 30 to 32 and production 3000kg to 3300kg of corn, generate the MP. (a)100kg (b)150kg (c)30kg (d)300kg 8. (12) Which of the following best describe total product (TP)? (a) TP = MP + AP (b) AP + L = TP (c) TP = Mp x AP (d) TP = AP x L 9. (14) Cost of production is known as (a) variable cost divided by the total unit of output (b) various expenses incurred in the use of the four factors of production (c) money cost divided by the total unit of output (d) real cost incurred in the use of production plants unit of output 10. (15) In the long-run all factors of production ______________ 11. (16) The two view in cost are_____ and______ 12. (17) Given that fixed cost is N500.00, variable cost is N1,500 and output is 50units, find the cost of producing one. (a) N2.00 (b)N60.00 (c) N50.00 (d.)N40.00 13. (18) Calculate for TC (a) N50.00 (b)N2000.00 (c) N5000.00 (d) N40.00 14. (19) Which of the following best describe revenue (a) Marginal Revenue from a firm’s sale of its commodities (b) income earned from government sale of its commodities (c) average and fixed revenue from firm’s sale of its commodities (d) income earned from a firm’s sale of it’s commodities. 15. (20) Profit can be divided by (a) subtracting total cost from total revenue (b)subtracting average revenue from total cost (c)dividing total revenue by total output (d)dividing marginal revenue by marginal cost 16. (21) Economics argues that cost must be viewed in terms of (a) money cost (b) amount of money spent (c) alternative forgone (d) total cost 17. (22) The two schools of thought in the analysis of utility are ____ and ____ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Grades%20as%20valid%20measures%20of%20academic%20achievement%20of%20classroom%20learning http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/tchs.78.5.218-223 http://www.doscst.edu.ph/ http://www.africaeconomicanalysis/ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Development%20and%20validation%20of%20diagnostic%20economics%20test%20for%20secondary%20schools https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Grades%20as%20valid%20measures%20of%20academic%20achievement%20of%20classroom%20learning https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Grades%20as%20valid%20measures%20of%20academic%20achievement%20of%20classroom%20learning https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Grades%20as%20valid%20measures%20of%20academic%20achievement%20of%20classroom%20learning https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Construction%20and%20validation%20of%20achievement%20test%20in%20economics http://www.slideshare.net/ojolubodun/principles-and-techniques-of-test-construction http://www.slideshare.net/ojolubodun/principles-and-techniques-of-test-construction https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Construction%20of%20economics%20achievement%20test%20for%20assessment%20of%20students https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Construction%20of%20economics%20achievement%20test%20for%20assessment%20of%20students http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wje.v4n2p58 https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Item%20construction%20principles%20and%20techniques Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 15 18. (24) If the last naira spent on each commodity by a consumer gave him equal satisfaction it means the consumer has been able to (a) cut cost (b) maximize costs (c)increase profits (d)maximize utility 19. (25) A rational consumer utility maximization can be illustrated thus (a) MUX > MUY (b) MUX = MUY PX PY PY PY (c) MUX = MUY (d) MUX < MUY PX PY PX PY Match the following items according to the expression given in A-E (30) Demand curve slopes. (A)Effective demand (31) Supply curve slopes. (B) Demand Schedule (32) The higher the price the higher the quantity. (C) Upwards (D) Downwards (33) Demand curve is a diagrammatical representation of. (E) Demanded (F) Supplied Use the diagram below to answer questions 34-36 24. (34) At price OP1 (a) demand exceeds supply (b) supply exceeds demand (c)demand equal supply (d) OQ1 is the quantity demand. 25. (35) The equilibrium price is (a) Op1 (b) OP2 (c) P1 Po (d) OPo 26. (36) At price Op2 (a)demand exceeds supply (b)supply exceeds demand (c)demand equal supply (d)OQ2 is the quantity demand. 27. (37) Demand in economics is synonyms with (a) needs not backed up with ability to pay (b) wants backed up with ability to pay at different time (c) wants supported with ability to pay at the same time (d) desire not supported with ability pay at the same time. 28. (40) Which of the following is derived demand (a) labour (b)butter (c) television (d) bread 29. (42) A demand schedule is described as a table containing the (a) Price and quantity of a commodity (b) relationship between price and quantity demanded of a commodity (c) relationship between quantity demanded and supplied of a market (d) quantity of goods the consumer is prepared to buy. 30. (44) A proportional tax is a tax whose percentage rate remains constant as the tax base _______________ 31. (45) Which of the following best explains the budget? (a) plan of government financial operation for a year (b) detailed estimate of government financial operation for a year (c) satisfactory balance between income and expenditure for a year (d) plan for importation of essential goods and services for a year 32. (47) Budget deficit is an economy can be solved with the use of (a) former reserves (b) full employment (c) trade unions (d) low price 33. (48) If demand is perfectly inelastic, the effective incidence of an indirect tax will be transferred to (a) employer (b) employee (c) consumer (d) civil servants. 34. (49) All the following are specific examples of indirect tax except (a)purchase tax (b) import duty (c) export duty (d) poll tax 35. (50) Regressive tax is not a good tax system because it (a)is not convenient to pay Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 16 (b)is not certain what to pay (c)is not economical to collect (d)does not ensure equity in payment. 36. (56) An effect of unemployment include (a)population control (b) technological progress (c)earning capacity (d)escalation of crime 37. (57) To solve the problem of unemployment, government should do all except (a) restructure the educational curricula at all levels (b)encourage education beyond primary and secondary schools (c)develop the rural areas (d)use capital intensive method of production 38. (58) If there is 20million people in the working class age group and 5 million of them are unemployed, compute the rate of unemployment (a)25% (b)50% (c)20% (d)5% 39. (60) Voluntary unemployment differs from structural unemployment because (a)it is deliberate refusal of labour to work (b)it involves immobility of labour (c) there is increase in dependants (d)people are partially unemployed 40. (61) The concept of unemployment could be used in relation to any of the factors of production which is (a)idle and not being utilized for production (b)not fully implemented in work (c)fully utilized for production (d)used part time in work 41. (64) Examples of financial institutions include all except (a) finance house (b) central bank (c) stock exchange (d) trade by barter 42. (65) Money market is made up of institutions which provide (a) short-term loan (b) long-term loan (c) capital-term loan (d) money-term loan 43. (67) One of this is an example of capital markets (a)discount houses (b)finance companies (c) saving banks (d)central banks 44. (68) Development bank as a capital market is important because it (a)provide medium and long term loans to investors (b)develop money and capital market (c)acts as banker’s bank (d)acts as financial adviser to government 45. (73) The use of monetary policy to control, inflation is good because it reduces the rate at which commercial bank lend to the public. True False 46. (74) Inflation in an economy can be recognized through a (a) persistent rise in the general price level b) rise in the general price level (c) fall in the general price level (d) persistent fall in the general price level 47. (76) Examples of an industry include all except (a) manufacturing industry (b)construction industry (c)transport industry (d)galloping industry 48. (78) Which of these does not encourage industrial development? (a)Tax exemption (b) Government direct participation (c)Limitation of market for industrial products (d)Provision of infrastructural facilities 49. (79) Which of the following should be considered in the plan to locate an industry? (a)Nearness to the market (b)A pool of skilled labour (c)High prices of inputs (d)Nearness of pollution 50. (80) Localization of industry is criticized in that it leads to (a) pool of skilled labour (b) high prices of inputs (c) improvement in infrastructure (d) co-operation among firms Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2017, 3(1): 6-17 17 Appendix-2. ECONOMIC ACHEIVEMENT TEST ANSWER (KEY) FIFTY (50) OBJECTIVE TEST ITEMS 1 (1) Private individuals 26 (36) B 2 (2) False 27 (37) C 3 (3) D 28 (40) A 4 (5) A 29 (42) B 5 (6) Capitalism and Socialism 30 (44) Varies 6 (9) B 31 (45) B 7 (11) D 32 (47) A 8 (12) B 33 (48) C 9 (14) B 34 (49) D 10 (15) Varies 35 (52) D 11 (16) Economics and Accountants 36 (56) D 12 (17) D 37 (57) D 13 (18) B 38 (58) A 14 (19) D 39 (60) A 15 (20) A 40 (61) A 16 (21) C 41 (64) D 17 (22) cardinal and ordinal 42 (65) A 18 (24) D 43 (67) B 19 (25) C 44 (68) A 20 (30) Downwards 45 (73) True 21 (31) Upwards 46 (74) A 22 (32) Supplied 47 (76) D 23 (33) Demand Schedule 48 (78) C 24 (34) A 49 (79) A 25 (35) D 50 (80) B Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article.