Scribd
Upload
5 views3 pages

Assignmeny Quality

CTT and G-Theory

Uploaded by

mmkdesigns01
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
5 views3 pages

Assignmeny Quality

CTT and G-Theory

Uploaded by

mmkdesigns01
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Classical Test Theory (CTT) is a framework in focusing on the reliability of scores derived

from a measurement instrument, such as a test or survey. In CTT, each observed score (X) is
considered to consist of two components:
True score (T): The actual score reflecting the individual's ability, attribute, or characteristic
being measured.
Error score (E): Random errors affecting the observed score, which are assumed to be
uncorrelated with the true score.
Mathematically, this can be expressed as: X=T+E
Generalizability Theory (G Theory) is a more flexible and comprehensive framework that
extends beyond the limitations of CTT. G Theory allows for the estimation of various sources of
error variance in a measurement process, enabling more precise estimates of reliability. Instead
of assuming one error source, G Theory aims to determine how much each source of variance
contributes to the total variance in observed scores. The main advantage of G Theory is its ability
to generalize measurement results to a larger universe of potential conditions such as:
Person (p): The true score of the individual being measured.
Item (i): The particular test items or tasks used in the measurement.
Rater (r): The individuals rating or scoring the performance.
In this case, Generalizability Theory would be preferable over Classical Test Theory for the
following reasons:
Multiple Sources of Variance: G Theory allows us to partition the total variance in students'
scores into different components: person variance (true score variance), task variance, and rater
variance. CTT, by contrast, would lump all sources of error into a single undifferentiated "error"
term, providing less insight into how much each factor contributes to measurement error.
Complex Measurement Design: The measurement instrument in this scenario involves both
tasks and raters, making the design more complex. G Theory can model these multiple sources
of error variance, whereas CTT assumes a simpler design with only one source of error. In a G
Theory framework, we could examine not only the person variance but also the interactions
between persons, tasks, and raters (e.g., how consistent are raters across different tasks?).
Reliability in Different Conditions: G Theory provides estimates of reliability under different
conditions or "universes" of generalization. For example, if we want to generalize the results to a
situation with more raters or different tasks, G Theory allows us to estimate how reliable the
measurement would be under these conditions. CTT, however, provides only a single estimate of
reliability for the specific test administered, without considering how the reliability might change
under different conditions.
Optimization of Measurement Design: One of the strengths of G Theory is that it provides
guidance on how to improve the reliability of the measurement by adjusting the number of raters
or tasks. For example, if task variance is found to contribute significantly to the total error, we
might increase the number of tasks in future assessments to enhance the reliability. CTT does not
offer this kind of diagnostic information for optimizing the design of the assessment.
Generalizability Theory would be preferable to Classical Test Theory. G Theory's ability to
account for and estimate multiple sources of variance (person, task, and rater) allows for a more
detailed and accurate evaluation of the reliability of the measurement instrument. This provides
valuable insights into how the assessment can be improved and how reliable the scores would be
under different conditions, making it a superior choice for complex measurement designs
compared to CTT.

You might also like