COGNITIVE DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT: CONCEPTS FOR APPLICATION IN DIAGNOSIS READING COMPREHENSION ABILITY
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Cognitive diagnostic assessments have two important purposes: 1) to identify areas in which students are not yet well-versed and 2) to provide suggestions about the causes or possible reasons for the student's lack of knowledge. Teachers can use the results of the diagnosis to develop students in the areas where they are lacking. There is a method for synthesizing diagnostic information with statistical analysis using Cognitive Diagnostic Models (CDMs). Analyzing respondents' responses to exams according to IRT Response Theory through complex statistical models characterized as models. A latent layer that can classify test takers into the latent layer. It specifies those who are knowledgeable and non-knowledgeable in each ability attribute.
A cognitive diagnostic assessment is a type of assessment used to explore the relationship between mental processes and the strategies test takers use to solve problems or answer questions on a test. The information obtained is feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of each test taker's sub-skills or characteristics. Therefore, it is appropriate in the context of assessing reading, which is a brain process according to cognitive theory. There are many ways to apply cognitive diagnostic assessments to language abilities, but one that provides high construct validity is by designing assessments using a cognitive design system (CDS). The relationship between questions and ability characteristics is used to create a cognitive diagnostic test used in cognitive assessment.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The owner of the article does not copy or violate any of its copyright. If any copyright infringement occurs or prosecution, in any case, the Editorial Board is not involved in all the rights to the owner of the article to be performed.
References
Chen, H., & Chen, J. (2015). Exploring reading comprehension skill relationships through the G-DINA model. Educational Psychology, 36, 1049-1064. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1076764
Chen, C. (2016). Cite Space: A practical guide for mapping scientific literature. Nova Science Publishers.
Deenang, E. (2016). Cognitive Diagnostic Models. Udonthani Rajabhat University Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences, 5(1), 1-9.
de la Torre, J. (2011). The Generalized DINA Model Framework. Psychometrika, 76, 179-199. DOI: 10.1007/s11336-011-9207-7
Embretson, S. E. (1994). Cognitive Assessment: A multidisciplinary perspective. New York: Plenum Press.
Finocchiaro, M., & Sako, S. (1983). Foreign Language Testing: A Practical Approach. New York: Regents.
Gao, L. (2006). Toward a cognitive processing model of MELAB reading test item performance. In J. S. Johnson (Ed.), Spaan fellow working papers in second or foreign language assessment (vol. 4, pp. 1-39). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
Huff, K., & Goodman, D. P. (2007). The demand for cognitive diagnostic assessment. In J. P. Leighton & M. J. Gierl (Eds.), Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education: Theory and applications (pp. 19–60). Cambridge University Press.
Jang, E. E. (2009). Cognitive diagnostic assessment of L2 reading comprehension ability: Validity arguments for Fusion Model application to Language Assessment. Language Testing, 26(1), 031-073. DOI: 10.1177/0265532208097336
Kanjanawasee, S. (2009). Modern Test Theory. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Khamyoo, T. (2014). Diagnosis of English reading skills by applying the trait hierarchy model & computer adaptive testing. Journal of Research Methodology & Cognitive Science, 10(2), 55-70.
Lee, Y., & Sawaki, Y. (2009). Application of Three Cognitive Diagnosis Models to ESL Reading and Listening Assessments. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6, 239-263. DOI: 10.1080/15434300903079562
Leighton, J. P., Gierl, M. J., & Hunka, S. M. (2004). The attribute hierarchy method for cognitive assessment: A variation on Tatsuoka's rule-space approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41(3), 205-237.
Leighton J. P., & Gierl M. J. (2007). Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment for Education: Theory & Applications. US: Cambridge University Press.
Li, H. (2011). A Cognitive Diagnostic Analysis of the MELAB Reading Test. Spaan Fellow Working Papers in Second or Foreign Language Assessment, 9(1), 17-46.
Ma, W., & de la Torre, J. (2020). GDINA: An R Package for Cognitive Diagnosis Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 93(14), 1–26. DOI: 10.18637/jss.v093.i14.
Mckee, S. (2012). Reading Comprehension, What We Know: A Review of Research 1995 to 2011. Language Testing in Asia, 2, 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-2-1-45
Moradi, E., Ghabanchi, Z., & Pishghadam, R. (2022). Reading comprehension test fairness across gender and mode of learning: insights from IRT-based differential item functioning analysis. Lang Test Asia, 12, 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00192-3
Ravand (2012). Exploring diagnostic capacity of a high stakes reading comprehension test: A pedagogical demonstration. Iranian Journal of Language Testing, 3(1), 11-37.
Rupp, A. A., Templin, J., & Henson, R. A. (2010). Diagnostic measurement: Theory, methods, and applications. Guilford Press.
Snow, R. E., & Lohman, D. F. (1989). Implications of cognitive psychology for educational measurement. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 263–331). Macmillan Publishing; American Council on Education.
Somrat, K. (2023). The Development of English competence diagnostic tests for preservice teachers by applying the G-DINA model (Dissertation dissertation). Phitsanulok: Naresuan University.
Sun, H., & Hwang, Y. (2023). Enhancing EFL Learners’ English Reading Performance through the Diagnostic Feedback of CDA. Korean Journal of English Language & Linguistics, 23(1), 535-553. DOI: 10.15738/kjell.23.202307.535
Shahmirzadi, N., & Marashi, H. (2023) Cognitive diagnostic assessment of reading comprehension for high-stakes tests: Using GDINA model. Language Testing in Focus: An International Journal, 8, 1-16. DOI: 10.32038/ltf.2023.08.01
Tatsuoka, K. K. (1983). Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 345-355. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1983.tb00212.x
Templin, J., & Henson, R. A. (2006). Measurement of Psychological Disorders Using Cognitive Diagnosis Models. Psychological Methods, 11(1), 287-305.
Tinnamas, S. (2020). Biometric analysis of research articles written by Naresuan University professors in Scopus & Web of Science databases. The 10th PULINET National Conference (pp. 260-270). Chiang Rai: University of Mae Fah Luang.
Tonekaboni, F. R., Ravand, H., & Rezvani, R. (2021). The Construction and Validation of a Q-matrix for a High-stakes Reading Comprehension Test: A G-DINA Study. International Journal of Language Testing, 11(1), 58-87.
Ueabunpradit, P. (2020). Development of Mathematical literacy diagnostic test with feedback for ninth grade students using Attribute Hierarchy Method (Doctoral dissertation). Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University.
Zhan, P., Li, X., Wang, W. C., Bian, Y., & Wang, L. (2015). The multidimensional test let-effect cognitive diagnostic models. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 47(1), 689–701. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2015.00689.
Nolen, Jeannette L., & Duignan, Brian. (2024). “No Child Left Behind”. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/No-Child-Left-Behind-Act
Templin, J. (2011). Conceptual foundations of diagnostic measurement. Retrieved from https://www.jonathantemplin.com