An investigation of classification consistency of open education faculty examinations according to the cut-off scores determined by different methods

In order to evaluate student success within the faculties of open education, evaluations such as pass-fail, successful-unsuccessful based on cut-off scores affect millions of students and the quality of the open education system. The qualification of open education students to receive a bachelor's or associate's degree is determined by the passing grade. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the minimum passing score used in open education examinations differs from the currently used minimum passing score according to different standard setting methods, and the classification consistency of the cut-off scores obtained by these methods with the currently used cut-off score and with each other. The correlational survey model was used in this study. The study group of the study consisted of 15 experts, consisting of the authors of the Emergency and Disaster Management Program-Fundamentals of Disaster course book and the instructors conducting this course. The data were collected through Expert Opinion Determination Form. The results showed that the consistency between the expert decisions for Angoff and Nedelsky methods was high and the reliability of the process of determining the minimum passing score obtained by the methods specified in the open education examinations was high. When the end-of-term cut-off scores determined based on the cut-off scores for the final and midterm examinations were compared, it was revealed that the cut-off score determined using the Angoff method (57.92 points) was higher than the cut-off score determined using the Nedelsky method (42.60 points). In the final and midterm examinations, the percentage of successful students according to the cut-off points determined using Angoff and Nedelsky methods was significantly lower than the percentage of successful students according to the current cut-off score of the open education examinations. Finally, the results showed that how different the cut-off scores to be determined based on the academic principles in which the standard-setting processes are used, from the cut-off score in force, and revealed how disjointed are the current pass-fail decisions and the pass-fail decisions made based on administrative decisions.