تاثیر مدل وزن دهی بر نمره کل سازی سوابق تحصیلی و رتبه بندی داوطلبان ورود به دانشگاه ها و مراکز آموزش عالی کشور

ﻫﺪف از ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﯾﯽ وزن ﻫﺮﯾﮏ از دروس ﺳﻮاﺑﻖ ﺗﺤﺼﯿﻠﯽ و ﻧﻤﺮه ﮐﻞ ﺳﺎزی ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس روﯾﮑﺮد رواﻧﺴﻨﺠﯽ ﻣﺪل ﭘﯿﻮﺳﺘﻪ irt و روﯾﮑﺮدﻫﺎی ﻣﺒﺘﻨﯽ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺘﺨﺼﺼﺎن ﺗﺎﭘﺴﯿﺲ و ahp، و ﻫﻤﭽﻨﯿﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ اﺛﺮ ﻣﺪل وزن دﻫﯽ ﺑﺮ رﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻨﺪی داوﻃﻠﺒﺎن ﺑﻮد. روش ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ آزﻣﺎﯾﺸﯽ ﺑﻮد. ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﺟﺮای ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ در ﺑﺨﺶ اول 11 آﯾﺘﻢ (دروس) ﺳﻮاﺑﻖ ﺗﺤﺼﯿﻠﯽ ﮔﺮوه ﻋﻠﻮم اﻧﺴﺎﻧﯽ از ﮔﺮوه ﻣﺘﺨﺼﺼﺎن رﺷﺘﻪ ﻫﺎی روان ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ و ﻣﺸﺎوره ﻣﻮرد ﻧﻈﺮﺧﻮاﻫﯽ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺖ و ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﺗﮑﻨﯿﮏ ﻫﺎی ﺗﺎﭘﺴﯿﺲ و ahp وزن دﻫﯽ و اوﻟﻮﯾﺖ ﺑﻨﺪی ﺷﺪ. در ﺑﺨﺶ دوم اﺑﺘﺪا ﻧﻤﺮات دروس ﻧﻬﺎﯾﯽ ﺳﺎل ﺳﻮم ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻄﻪ ﭘﺬﯾﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﮔﺎن رﺷﺘﻪ ﻫﺎی روان ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ و ﻣﺸﺎوره در داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﻫﺎی ﺳﺮاﺳﺮ ﮐﺸﻮر در ﮔﺮوه ﻋﻠﻮم اﻧﺴﺎﻧﯽ از ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن ﺳﻨﺠﺶ آﻣﻮزش ﮐﺸﻮر درﯾﺎﻓﺖ ﺷﺪ و ﺟﻬﺖ ﺑﺮآورد ﻧﻤﺮات ﺗﺘﺎ در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻣﺪل ﭘﯿﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده ﺷﺪ. در ﺑﺨﺶ ﺳﻮم و ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮر ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ ی ﻣﺪل ﻫﺎی ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ وزن دﻫﯽ و ﻧﻤﺮه ﮐﻞ ﺳﺎزی، اﺑﺘﺪا ﮔﺮوه ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻧﻤﺮات ﺣﺎﺻﻞ از ﻫﺮ ﺳﻪ روﯾﮑﺮد رﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻨﺪی ﺷﺪه، و از ﻟﺤﺎظ ﺷﺎﺧﺺﻫﺎی ﭘﺮاﮐﻨﺪﮔﯽ و ﻣﯿﺰان ﺗﻔﺎوت رﺗﺒﻪ ﻫﺎ ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ ﺷﺪ. ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ ﺳﻪ روﯾﮑﺮد ﻧﺸﺎن داد ﺑﯿﺸﺘﺮﯾﻦ وارﯾﺎﻧﺲ ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ روش ﻧﻤﺮه ﮐﻞ ﺳﺎزی ﺑﺎ ﻣﺪل ﭘﯿﻮﺳﺘﻪ irt اﺳﺖ. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﯿﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ آﻣﺎری ﻣﺒﻨﯽ ﺑﺮ آزﻣﻮن وﯾﻞ ﮐﺎﮐﺴﻮن ﺟﻬﺖ ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ رﺗﺒﻪ ﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎن داد در ﺣﺠﻢ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ی ﮐﻢ روش وزن دﻫﯽ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺳﻪ روش ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ روش وزن ﻫﺎی ﯾﮑﺴﺎن ﺗﻔﺎوت ﻣﻌﻨﺎدار در رﺗﺒﻪ ﻫﺎ اﯾﺠﺎد ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ و ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﯾﻦ ﻣﺪل وزن دﻫﯽ در رﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻨﺪی داوﻃﻠﺒﺎن در ﺣﺠﻢ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﮐﻢ ﺗﺎﺛﯿﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮔﺬارد. اﻣﺎ ﺑﯿﻦ ﺳﻪ ﻣﺪل وزن دﻫﯽ ﺗﻔﺎوت ﻣﻌﻨﺎداری در رﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻨﺪی داوﻃﻠﺒﺎن ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪه ﻧﻤﯽ ﺷﻮد. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﯿﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ ﻧﺸﺎن داد در ﺣﺠﻢ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﻻ (2000 ﻧﻔﺮ) روش وزن دﻫﯽ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺳﻪ روش ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ روش وزن ﻫﺎی ﯾﮑﺴﺎن ﺗﻔﺎوت ﻣﻌﻨﺎدار در رﺗﺒﻪ ﻫﺎ اﯾﺠﺎد ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ و وزن دروس در رﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻨﺪی داوﻃﻠﺒﺎن ورود ﺑﻪ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﺎﺛﯿﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮔﺬارد. ﻫﻤﭽﻨﯿﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ داده ﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎن داد ﻧﻤﺮات ﺑﺪﺳﺖ آﻣﺪه از ﻣﺪل ﭘﯿﻮﺳﺘﻪ irt ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ دو روش دﯾﮕﺮ در رﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻨﺪی داوﻃﻠﺒﺎن ﺗﺎﺛﯿﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوﺗﯽ ﻣﯽ ﮔﺬارد وﻟﯽ دو روش دﯾﮕﺮ ﺗﻔﺎوت ﻣﻌﻨﺎداری در رﺗﺒﻪ ﺑﻨﺪی داوﻃﻠﺒﺎن ﻧﺪارﻧﺪ. ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ ﺗﻮزﯾﻊ ﻓﺮاواﻧﯽ ﻧﻤﺮه ﺗﻮاﻧﺎﯾﯽ در ﭼﺎرﭼﻮب ﻫﺮ ﺳﻪ روﯾﮑﺮد ﻧﺸﺎﻧﮕﺮ اﯾﻦ اﻣﺮ ﺑﻮد ﮐﻪ ﺗﻮزﯾﻊ ﻓﺮاواﻧﯽ در irt ﻧﺰدﯾﮏ ﺗﺮ ﺑﻪ وﺿﻌﯿﺖ ﺗﻮاﻧﺎﯾﯽ واﻗﻌﯽ ﮔﺮوه ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﻮد و داﻣﻨﻪ وﺳﯿﻊ ﺗﺮی از ﺳﻄﻮح ﺗﻮاﻧﺎﯾﯽ را در ﺑﺮ ﻣﯽ ﮔﯿﺮد و وارﯾﺎﻧﺲ ﺑﯿﺸﺘﺮی اﯾﺠﺎد ﻣﯽ ﮐﻨﺪ.

The effect of weighting model on the scoring of educational background and ranking of volunteers entering universities and higher education institutions of the Iran

The purpose of the present study was to identify the weight of each of the courses of academic record and scoring based on the psychometric approach of the IRT continuous model and approaches based on the viewpoint of the specialists of Topsis and AHP. The method of this study was a combination. In order to conduct research in the first part, 11 items (courses) of academic background were taken from the expert group and weighed and prioritized using Tapis and AHP techniques. The final third year grades of secondary school students were received from the assessment organization and accepted for psychology and counseling in the humanities group. Theta tests were used to estimate the grades. In order to compare different weighting and grading models, the sample group was first ranked based on scores derived from all three approaches, and compared in terms of dispersion indices and the degree of difference between rankings. The results of the comparison of the three approaches indicated that the most variance is related to the IRT continuous modeling method. The results of Wilcoxon’s statistical analysis to compare the average rankings showed that in the small sample size, the weighting method in all three methods produced a significant difference in the rankings compared to the same weight method, and therefore the weighting model in the ranking of the volunteers In small sample size affects. But there are no significant differences between the three weighting models in the candidate ranking. Also, the results showed that in the high sample size (2000 persons), the weighting method in all three methods compared to the same weights makes a significant difference in the rankings. IRT method scores are more reliable than expertbased approaches.However, the weighting method does not seem to have a significant effect on the reliability of the scores.