Abstract
Educational evaluation helps to improve the learning and teaching process. The learning process can be assessed by the examination system. In the examination system, the learners have to answer a set of questions. The learning assessment ensures improved performance in the educational system. The success of the learning assessment is highly dependent on the listening and understanding ability of each student. The assessment of the question paper can be at two levels—cognitive level assessment and difficulty level. The cognitive level assessment is purely based on Bloom’s Taxonomy and the difficulty level assessment is purely based on the examination marks of each student. This article presents a technical method called Question Paper’s Difficulty Level (QPDL) that helps to identify the difficulty level of each question in the question paper. The QPDL method is incorporate in the implementation of ‘QAUDIT’ web application to assess the difficulty level of the question paper systematically. The systematic analysis to identify the difficulty level of the question paper is made for 239 question papers. Each question paper can be recognized based on three difficulty levels such as High, Moderate and Low.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Backhoff E, Larrazolo N, Rosas M (2000) The level of difficulty and discrimination power of the Basic Knowledge and Skills Examination (EXHCOBA). Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 2 (1). http://redie.uabc.mx/vol2no1/contents-backhoff.html
Johari J, Sahari J, Abd Wahab D, Abdullah S, Abdulla S, Omar MZ, Muhamad N (2011) Difficulty index of examinations and their relation to the achievement of Programme outcomes. Proc Soc Behav Sci 18:71–80
Boopathiraj C, Chellamani K (2013) Analysis of test items on difficulty level and discrimination index in the test for research in education. Int J Soc Sci Interdiscip Res 2(2):189–193 (ISSN: 2277-3630)
Luger SKK, Bowels J (2013) Two methods for measuring question difficulty and discrimination in incompatible Crowdsourced data. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence
Suruchi S, Rana SS (2014) Test item analysis and relationship between difficulty level and discrimination index of test items in an achievement test in Biology. Parapix Indian J Res 3(6):56–58 (ISSN: 2250-1991)
R K (2018) A Critical analysis of question papers in different school subjects at class IX level. Int J Res Soc Sci 8(3):868–880
Diki D, Yuliastuti E (2018) Discrepancy of difficulty level based on item analysis and test developers’ judgment: Department of Biology at Universitas Terbuka, Indonesia. In: Persichitte K, Suparman A, Spector M (eds) Educational technology to improve quality and access on a global scale. Educational communications and technology: issues and innovations. Springer, Cham, pp 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66227-5_17
Joncas SX, St-Onge C, Bourque S, Farand P (2018) Re-using questions in classroom based assessment: an exploratory study at the undergraduate medical educational level. Perspect Med Educ 7:373–378
Loh KY, Elsayed I, Nurjahan MI, Roland GS (2018) Item difficulty and discrimination index in single best answer MCQ: end of semester examinations at Taylor’s Clinical School. Springer, Singapore, pp 167–171
Dsa JL, Visbal-Dionaldo ML (2017) Analysis of multiple choice questions: item difficulty, discrimination index and distractor efficiency. Int J Nurs Educ 9(3):109–114
Sim SM, Rasiah RI (2006) Relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in true/false-type multiple choice questions of Para-clinical multidisciplinary paper. Acad Med Contin Prof Dev Online Distance Learn Program 35(2):67–71
Lulis E, Freedman R (2011) Validating an instructor rating scale for the difficulty of CS1test items in C++. J Comput Sci Coll 27(2):85–92
Mitra NK, Nagaraja HS, Ponnudurai G, Judson JP (2009) The levels of difficulty and discrimination indices in type a multiple choice questions of pre-clinical semester 1 multidisciplinary summative tests. IEJSME 3(1):2–7
Viriyadamrongkij N, Senivongse T (2017) Measuring difficulty levels of javascript questions in question-answer community based on concept hierarchy. IEEE, pp. 1–6 (ISSN: 5090-4834)
Dixit C, Joshi G, Ayachit NH, Shettar A (2012) Difficulty index of a question paper: a new perspective. In: IEEE international conference on engineering education: innovative practices and future trends (AICERA), pp. 1–5
Thukral D, Pandey A, Gupta R, Goyal V, Chakraborty T (2019) DiffQue: estimating relative difficulty of questions in community question answering services. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol 10(42):1–25
Pathan A, Futane P (2020) Automation of paper setting and identification of difficulty level of questions and question papers. In: Proceeding of international conference on computational science and applications. pp.447–458 (ISBN:978-981-15-0790-8)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
1.1 Difficulty level analysis report of Computer Science Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
70% | Computer Science (UG) | CS218 | 70 | 0.15 | High | 0.23 |
CS219 | 70 | 0.26 | High | |||
CS417 | 75 | 0.25 | High | |||
CS418 | 75 | 0.21 | High | |||
CS623 | 75 | 0.20 | High | |||
CS624 | 75 | 0.28 | High | |||
CS625 | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
CS626A | 75 | 0.16 | High | |||
NCS602 | 75 | 0.31 | High | |||
Computer Science (PG) | MCS242T | 60 | 0.42 | Moderate | 0.44 | |
MCS243T | 60 | 0.33 | High | |||
MCS250T | 60 | 0.54 | Moderate | |||
MCS251T | 60 | 0.44 | Moderate | |||
MCS252T | 60 | 0.66 | Low | |||
MCS253T | 60 | 0.49 | Moderate | |||
MCS254B | 60 | 0.29 | High | |||
MCS440T | 75 | 0.31 | High | |||
MCS441T | 75 | 0.46 | Moderate |
1.2 Difficulty level analysis report of Computer Applications Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
70% | Computer Applications (UG) | CA205 | 70 | 0.25 | High | 0.25 |
CA206 | 70 | 0.32 | High | |||
CA404 | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
CA405 | 75 | 0.26 | High | |||
CA406 | 75 | 0.24 | High | |||
CA604 | 75 | 0.30 | High | |||
CA605 | 75 | 0.13 | High | |||
CA606A | 75 | 0.21 | High | |||
NCA602 | 75 | 0.22 | High | |||
Computer Applications (PG) | MCA240T | 60 | 0.49 | Moderate | 0.40 | |
MCA241T | 60 | 0.33 | High | |||
MCA430T | 75 | 0.49 | Moderate | |||
MCA431T | 75 | 0.40 | Moderate | |||
MCA432T | 75 | 0.50 | Moderate | |||
MCA433T | 75 | 0.20 | High |
1.3 Difficulty level analysis report of Biochemistry Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Biochemistry (UG) | ABC201 | 70 | 0.30 | High | 0.31 |
BC204 | 70 | 0.24 | High | |||
BC205 | 70 | 0.35 | High | |||
BC403 | 75 | 0.30 | High | |||
BC610 | 75 | 0.41 | Moderate | |||
BC611 | 75 | 0.31 | High | |||
BC612A | 75 | 0.23 | High | |||
BC612C | 75 | 0.19 | High | |||
NBC602 | 75 | 0.46 | Moderate | |||
Biochemistry (PG) | BC804 | 60 | 0.62 | Low | 0.56 | |
BC805 | 60 | 0.56 | Moderate | |||
BC806A | 60 | 0.56 | Moderate | |||
BC1001 | 60 | 0.46 | Moderate | |||
BC1002 | 60 | 0.49 | Moderate | |||
BC1003C | 60 | 0.52 | Moderate |
1.4 Difficulty level analysis report of Business Administration Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Business Administration (UG) | B206 | 70 | 0.19 | High | 0.27 |
B207 | 70 | 0.12 | High | |||
B410 | 75 | 0.17 | High | |||
B411 | 75 | 0.12 | High | |||
B412 | 75 | 0.27 | High | |||
B413 | 75 | 0.26 | High | |||
B414 | 75 | 0.23 | High | |||
B611 | 75 | 0.43 | Moderate | |||
B613 | 75 | 0.31 | High | |||
B614 | 75 | 0.28 | High | |||
B615C | 75 | 0.33 | High | |||
NBB602 | 75 | 0.49 | Moderate | |||
Business Administration (PG) | MBA230T | 60 | 0.50 | Moderate | 0.44 | |
MBA231T | 60 | 0.57 | Moderate | |||
MBA232T | 60 | 0.64 | Low | |||
MBA233T | 60 | 0.50 | Moderate | |||
MBA234T | 60 | 0.60 | Low | |||
MBA235T | 60 | 0.70 | Low | |||
MBA236T | 60 | 0.56 | Moderate | |||
MBA421T | 75 | 0.44 | Moderate | |||
MBA422T | 75 | 0.39 | High | |||
MBA423A | 75 | 0.37 | High | |||
MBA423B | 75 | 0.42 | Moderate | |||
MBA424A | 75 | 0.38 | High | |||
MBA424D | 75 | 0.41 | Moderate | |||
MBA425C | 75 | 0.49 | Moderate | |||
MBA425D | 75 | 0.30 | High | |||
MBA426C | 75 | 0.36 | High | |||
MBA426D | 75 | 0.22 | High | |||
MBA426E | 75 | 0.26 | High | |||
MBA434A | 75 | 0.35 | High | |||
MBA434B | 75 | 0.29 | High |
1.5 Difficulty level analysis report of Social Work Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Social work (PG) | MSW220T | 60 | 0.60 | Low | 0.56 |
MSW221T | 60 | 0.71 | Low | |||
MSW223T | 60 | 0.47 | Moderate | |||
MSW224T | 60 | 0.69 | Low | |||
MSW411T | 75 | 0.53 | Moderate | |||
MSW412A | 75 | 0.58 | Moderate | |||
MSW412B | 75 | 0.58 | Moderate | |||
MSW412C | 75 | 0.60 | Low | |||
MSW413A | 75 | 0.47 | Moderate | |||
MSW413B | 75 | 0.53 | Moderate | |||
MSW413C | 75 | 0.42 | Moderate | |||
MSW414B | 75 | 0.55 | Moderate | |||
MSW415A | 75 | 0.58 | Moderate |
1.6 Difficulty Level analysis report of Psychology Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Psychology (PG) | MSY220T | 60 | 0.63 | Low | 0.45 |
MSY221T | 60 | 0.37 | High | |||
MSY222T | 60 | 0.37 | High | |||
MSY223T | 60 | 0.72 | Low | |||
MSY411T | 75 | 0.35 | High | |||
MSY412T | 75 | 0.45 | Moderate | |||
MSY413T | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
MSY414C | 75 | 0.45 | Moderate |
1.7 Difficulty level analysis report of Physics Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Physics(UG) | AP204 | 70 | 0.37 | Moderate | 0.34 |
AP407A | 70 | 0.38 | Moderate | |||
AP407B | 75 | 0.34 | High | |||
NPH602 | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
P210 | 70 | 0.27 | High | |||
P211 | 70 | 0.31 | High | |||
P411 | 75 | 0.33 | High | |||
P626 | 75 | 0.32 | High | |||
P627 | 75 | 0.30 | High | |||
P628 | 75 | 0.40 | Moderate | |||
P629 | 75 | 0.48 | Moderate | |||
Physics (PG) | P813 | 70 | 0.52 | Moderate | 0.46 | |
P814 | 70 | 0.58 | Low | |||
P815 | 70 | 0.66 | Low | |||
P816A | 70 | 0.60 | Low | |||
P1007 | 75 | 0.28 | High | |||
P1008 | 75 | 0.27 | High | |||
P1009A | 75 | 0.36 | Moderate |
1.8 Difficulty level analysis report of Tamil Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Tamil (UG) | LT212 | 70 | 0.26 | High | 0.33 |
LT409DR | 75 | 0.34 | High | |||
LT409JR | 75 | 0.44 | Moderate | |||
LT409PO | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
LT409SS | 75 | 0.46 | Moderate | |||
NTA601 | 75 | 0.32 | High | |||
TA204 | 70 | 0.39 | Moderate | |||
TA205 | 70 | 0.26 | High | |||
TA206 | 70 | 0.28 | High | |||
TA401 | 75 | 0.30 | High | |||
TA402 | 75 | 0.40 | Moderate | |||
TA403 | 75 | 0.24 | High | |||
TA601 | 75 | 0.33 | High | |||
TA602 | 75 | 0.35 | Moderate | |||
TA603 | 75 | 0.38 | Moderate | |||
TA604 | 75 | 0.33 | High | |||
TA605B | 75 | 0.26 | High | |||
Tamil (PG) | TA813 | 60 | 0.85 | Low | 0.56 | |
TA814 | 60 | 0.88 | Low | |||
TA815 | 60 | 0.92 | Low | |||
TA816 | 60 | 0.40 | Moderate | |||
TA817 | 60 | 0.68 | Low | |||
TA1008 | 75 | 0.34 | High | |||
TA1009 | 75 | 0.54 | Moderate | |||
TA1010 | 75 | 0.48 | Moderate | |||
TA1011 | 75 | 0.36 | Moderate | |||
TA1012 | 75 | 0.20 | High |
1.9 Difficulty level analysis report of English Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | English (UG) | EN814 | 70 | 0.51 | Moderate | 0.24 |
EN207 | 70 | 0.24 | Moderate | |||
EN208 | 70 | 0.15 | High | |||
EN209 | 70 | 0.22 | High | |||
EN210 | 70 | 0.18 | High | |||
EN403T | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
EN404T | 75 | 0.20 | High | |||
EN405T | 75 | 0.24 | High | |||
EN406T | 75 | 0.28 | High | |||
EN407T | 75 | 0.29 | Moderate | |||
EN408T | 75 | 0.28 | Moderate | |||
EN609C | 75 | 0.05 | High | |||
English (PG) | EN1006T | 75 | 0.34 | Moderate | 0.29 | |
EN1007T | 75 | 0.24 | Low | |||
EN1008B | 75 | 0.25 | Low | |||
NEN602 | 75 | 0.33 | Low |
1.10 Difficulty Level analysis report of History Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | History | AH209 | 75 | 0.28 | High | 0.32 |
AH406 | 75 | 0.37 | Moderate |
1.11 Difficulty level analysis report of Maths Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Mathematics (UG) | M213 | 70 | 0.24 | High | 0.3 |
M411 | 75 | 0.28 | High | |||
M632 | 75 | 0.53 | Moderate | |||
AM406 | 75 | 0.18 | High | |||
AM407 | 75 | 0.24 | High | |||
AM213E | 75 | 0.07 | High | |||
M212 | 70 | 0.25 | High | |||
M612 | 75 | 0.36 | Moderate | |||
M631 | 75 | 0.41 | Moderate | |||
M635A | 75 | 0.34 | High | |||
NMA602 | 75 | 0.40 | Moderate | |||
Mathematics (PG) | M840 | 60 | 0.37 | Moderate | 0.51 | |
M841 | 60 | 0.53 | Moderate | |||
M842 | 60 | 0.60 | Moderate | |||
M843 | 60 | 0.51 | Moderate | |||
M1038 | 60 | 0.38 | Moderate | |||
M1039 | 75 | 0.30 | High | |||
M1040 | 75 | 0.44 | Moderate | |||
M1041B | 75 | 0.41 | Moderate |
1.12 Difficulty level analysis report of Chemistry Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Chemistry(UG) | ACH209B | 70 | 0.29 | High | 0.31 |
CH214 | 70 | 0.26 | High | |||
CH215 | 70 | 0.28 | High | |||
CH413 | 75 | 0.29 | Moderate | |||
CH629 | 75 | 0.36 | Moderate | |||
CH630 | 75 | 0.46 | Moderate | |||
CH631 | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
CH632A | 75 | 0.26 | Moderate | |||
CH632B | 75 | 0.36 | Moderate | |||
Chemistry(PG) | CH813 | 60 | 0.52 | Moderate | 0.64 | |
CH814 | 60 | 0.74 | Low | |||
CH815 | 60 | 0.57 | Low | |||
CH816A | 60 | 0.74 | Low |
1.13 Difficulty level analysis report of Economics Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Economics (UG) | AE205 | 70 | 0.22 | High | 0.32 |
AE403 | 75 | 0.23 | High | |||
E216 | 70 | 0.08 | High | |||
E217 | 70 | 0.29 | High | |||
E415 | 75 | 0.11 | High | |||
E416 | 75 | 0.14 | High | |||
E634 | 75 | 0.21 | High | |||
E635 | 75 | 0.50 | Moderate | |||
E636 | 75 | 0.60 | High | |||
E637B | 75 | 0.53 | Moderate | |||
E637D | 75 | 0.50 | High | |||
NEC602 | 75 | 0.46 | Moderate | |||
Economics (PG) | E848 | 60 | 0.34 | Moderate | ||
E849 | 60 | 0.39 | Moderate | 0.37 | ||
E850 | 60 | 0.14 | High | |||
E851 | 60 | 0.21 | High | |||
E1029 | 75 | 0.23 | High | |||
E1030 | 75 | 0.49 | Moderate | |||
E1031 | 75 | 0.59 | Low | |||
E1032 | 75 | 0.59 | Low |
1.14 Difficulty level analysis report of Commerce Programme
Threshold selection | Programme | Subject code | Marks | Difficulty level | Difficulty level of the question paper | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
60% | Commerce (UG) | AC4006 | 75 | 0.09 | High | 0.22 |
AC407 | 75 | 0.16 | High | |||
C214 | 70 | 0.21 | High | |||
C215 | 70 | 0.23 | High | |||
C418 | 75 | 0.13 | High | |||
C419 | 75 | 0.20 | High | |||
C420 | 75 | 0.21 | High | |||
C632 | 75 | 0.34 | High | |||
C633 | 75 | 0.31 | High | |||
C634 | 75 | 0.41 | Moderate | |||
C635 | 75 | 0.31 | High | |||
C636A | 75 | 0.11 | High | |||
C636B | 75 | 0.17 | High | |||
NCO602 | 75 | 0.33 | High | |||
Commerce (PG) | C817 | 60 | 0.46 | Moderate | 0.39 | |
C818 | 60 | 0.47 | High | |||
C819 | 60 | 0.47 | High | |||
C820 | 60 | 0.57 | Low | |||
C821A | 60 | 0.47 | High | |||
C1013 | 75 | 0.23 | High | |||
C1014 | 75 | 0.27 | High | |||
C1015 | 75 | 0.29 | High | |||
C1016A | 75 | 0.28 | High |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lourdusamy, R., Magendiran, P. A systematic analysis of difficulty level of the question paper using student’s marks: a case study. Int. j. inf. tecnol. 13, 1127–1143 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41870-020-00599-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41870-020-00599-2