Multiple-Choice Test Items: What Are Textbook Authors Telling Teachers?

Ellsworth, Randy; Dunnell, Pat; Duell, Orpha K.

doi:10.1080/00220671.1990.10885972

Cited by 28 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tarrant et al (2006) evaluated 2,770 MCQs used over a five-year period from 2001 to 2005 and concluded that nearly half (46%) of the items were bad because they violated item-writing guidelines. Similar outcomes in higher education assessments are reported across different disciplines (Ellsworth et al, 1990;Hansen and Dexter, 1997;Masters et al, 2001;Downing, 2005). Poorly written MCQs can negatively impact students' performance and achievement (Downing, 2005;Tarrant et al, 2006;Clifton and Schriner, 2010).…”

Section: Quality Of Mcqs In Higher Educationsupporting

confidence: 52%

Evaluating the Quality of Higher Education Instructor-Constructed Multiple-Choice Tests: Impact on Student Grades

Brown

Abdulnabi

2017

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are commonly used in higher education assessment tasks because they can be easily and accurately scored, while giving good coverage of instructional content in a short time. However, studies that have evaluated the quality of MCQs used in higher education assessments have found many flawed items, resulting in misleading insights about student performance and contaminating important decisions. Thus, MCQs need to be evaluated statistically to ensure high-quality items are used as the basis of inference. This study evaluated the quality of 100 instructor-written MCQs used in an undergraduate midterm test (50 items) and final exam (50 items), making up 50% of the course grade, using the responses of 372 students enrolled in one first-year undergraduate general education course. Item difficulty, discrimination, and chance properties were determined using classical test theory and item response theory (IRT) statistical item analysis models. The two-parameter logistic (2PL) model consistently had the best fit to the data. The impact on overall course grades between the original raw score model and the IRT 2PL model showed 70% of students would receive the same grade (i.e., D to A), but only one-third would get the same mark using the standard augmented grade scale (i.e., A+ to D−). The analyses show that higher education institutions need to ensure MCQs are evaluated before student grading decisions are made.

show abstract

Section: Quality Of Mcqs In Higher Educationsupporting

confidence: 52%

Evaluating the Quality of Higher Education Instructor-Constructed Multiple-Choice Tests: Impact on Student Grades

Brown

Abdulnabi

2017

Front. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tekian et al [17] untersuchten Prüfungsfragen medizinisch-naturwissenschaftlicher Grundlagenfächer, von denen 70% als formal fehlerhaft eingestuft wurden. Ellsworth et al [13] fanden in Psychologie-Prüfungsdatenbanken einen Anteil von 60% fehlerhafter Fragen. Andere Autoren identifizierten dagegen eine geringere Fehleranzahl.…”

Section: Fragenauswahlunclassified

“…Bei einer MC-Frage mit fünf Antwortmög-lichkeiten sollte an jeder Platzierung (A-E) in 20% der Fälle die richtige Lö-sung stehen. Verschiedene Autoren [12,13] berichten über eine ungleiche Verteilung der richtigen Antwort. Tarrant et al [9] fanden in ihrer Studie keine Unterschiede in der Platzierung.…”

unclassified

CME-Fortbildungsangebote in medizinischen Fachzeitschriften: Strukturqualität der MC-Fragen als Erfolgskontrollen

Kühne-Eversmann¹,

Nußbaum²,

Reincke³

et al. 2007

Med Klin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ellsworth et al (1990) reviewed nine educational measurement and 33 educational psychology textbooks to identify MC item-construction guidelines. From their review, the authors identified the 12 most-cited recommendations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality Multiple-Choice Test Questions: Item-Writing Guidelines and an Analysis of Auditing Testbanks

Hansen

Lee

1997

Journal of Education for Business

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple-Choice Test Items: What Are Textbook Authors Telling Teachers?

Cited by 28 publications

References 5 publications

Evaluating the Quality of Higher Education Instructor-Constructed Multiple-Choice Tests: Impact on Student Grades

Evaluating the Quality of Higher Education Instructor-Constructed Multiple-Choice Tests: Impact on Student Grades

CME-Fortbildungsangebote in medizinischen Fachzeitschriften: Strukturqualität der MC-Fragen als Erfolgskontrollen

Quality Multiple-Choice Test Questions: Item-Writing Guidelines and an Analysis of Auditing Testbanks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About