Some Statistical analyses of an Exam of a first course in Mathematics for Architects

  • Jorge Luis Bázan Departamento de Ciencias, Pontificia Universidad Cat´olica del Per´u, Lima
  • Sergio Camiz Dipartimento di Matematica Guido Castelnuovo, Sapienza Universit`a di Roma, Italia
Palabras clave: Item Response Model, Tandem Analysis, Exams, Math for Architecture, Assessment


We present some statistical analyses to evaluate a data set, obtained from exams based on multiple response
tests, considering two methods, based on different rationale. Tandem Analysis, an exploratory technique consisting
in a Correspondence Analysis followed by a Hierarchical Classification, and the Psychometric Analysis that is based
on both Classical and Item Response Theory Analysis were considered. As a case study, we used a data set of a final
examination of Basic Mathematics, a test of 46 items, submitted to 180 students in Architecture. As results, the
Tandem Analysis showed a relatively independent behaviour of small groups of items, correlated with at least three
distinct factors, and partitions in 4 and 8 classes of the students, according to their performance. The Psychometric
analysis showed that both the raw and the Rasch scores of the tests were normal, presented high reliability, and
confirmed that the test structure was not unidimensional. In addition, the Item analysis indicated that the test
could be improved by eliminating some items, whose behaviour was not in agreement with the others. Eventually,
the exploratory analysis provides an interesting framework in which the psychometric analysis gives more details
that may be taken as a guide to improve the elaboration of exams.


1. Agresti A (1992).“A survey of exact inference for contingency tables”. Statistical Science, 7(1), 131-153.
2. Arabie P, Hubert L (1994). “Cluster analysis in marketing research”. In R Bagozzi (ed.), Advanced methods of marketing research, pp. 160-189. Blackwell, London.
3. Baker F, Kim S (2004). Item Response Theory. 2 edition.
4. Bazán JL, Millones O (1998). “Evaluación psicométrica de las pruebas CRECER 98.” Análisis de los Resultados y Metodología de las Pruebas Crecer, pp. 171-195.
5. Benzécri J (1973). L’Analyse des données. Dunod, Paris.
6. Bolfarine H, Bazán JL (2010). “Bayesian Estimation of the Logistic Positive Exponent IRT model.” Journal of Educational Behavioral Statistics, 35-6, 693-713.
7. Bond T, Fox C (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum, Philadelphia, PA.
8. Calinski T, Harabász J (1974). “A dendrite method for cluster analysis”. Communications in Statistics Theory and Methods, 3(1), 1-27.
9. Camiz S (2001). “Exploratory 2- and 3-way Data Analysis and Applications”. Lecture Notes of TICMI, 2. Http://
10. Carmines E, Zeller R (1979). Reliability and validity assessment, volume 17. Sage Publications, Inc, London.
11. Chatterji M (2003). Designing and using tools for educational assessment. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
12. Christensen K, Bjørner J (2003). “SAS macros for Rasch based latent variable modelling”. Technical report 13, Dept. of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen.
13. Fox J (2010). Bayesian item response modeling: Theory and applications. Springer Verlag, New York.
14. Gardner H (1985). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic books, New York.
15. Gelman A, Carlin J, Sterman H, Rubin D (2004). Bayesian Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton.
16. Gordon A (1999). Classification. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL.
17. Greenacre M (1984). Theory and Application of Correspondence Analysis. Academic Press, London.
18. Kim S (2001). “An evaluation of a Markov chain Monte Carlo method for the Rasch model”. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25(2), 163-176.
19. Lebart L, Morineau A, Lambert T, Pleuvret P (1999). SPAD – Systéme Pour L’Analyse des données. CisiaCeresta, Paris.
20. Lebart L, Morineau A, Piron M (1995). Statistique exploratoire multidimensionnelle. Dunod, Paris.
21. Linacre J (2009). Winsteps (version 3.68) [Computer Software]., Beaverton, OR.
22. Malinvaud E (1987). “Data analysis in applied socio economic statistics with special consideration of correspondence analysis”. In Marketing Science Conference. HEC-ISA, Joy en Josas.
23. OECD (2005). “PISA 2003 technical report”. (downloaded May 20th, 2010).
24. Stone BWM (1979). “Best Test Design. Rasch Measurement.” MESA Press, Chicago, IL.
25. Ward J (1963). “Hierarchical Grouping to optimize an objective function”. Journal of American Statistical Association, 58(301), 236-244.
26. Wilson M (2004). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Lawrence Erlbaum, Philadelphia, PA.
Cómo citar
Bázan, J., & Camiz, S. (2021). Some Statistical analyses of an Exam of a first course in Mathematics for Architects. REVCIUNI, 14(2), 58-67. Recuperado a partir de