عنوان مقاله [English]
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 expert-based approaches.However, the weighting method does not seem to have a significant effect on the reliability of the scores.