Multiple-Choice Tests Exonerated, at Least of Some Charges

Little, Jeri L.; Bjork, Elizabeth Ligon; Bjork, Robert A.; Angello, Genna

doi:10.1177/0956797612443370

Cited by 132 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With increasing class sizes or the desire to present multiple exam opportunities, multiple-choice questions are often used to speed up grading. Little, E. Bjork, R. Bjork and Angello (2012) note that multiple-choice tests can be useful learning tools that foster productive retrieval learning. Mathematical analysis of multiple choice tests shows that the fairest method for grading is to give credit for the number of correct answers with no penalty for a wrong or missing answer (Scharf & Baldwin, 2007); this approach, however, does not reduce credit given for blindly guessing an answer (Bush, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple-Choice Testing Using Immediate Feedback—Assessment Technique (IF AT®) Forms: Second-Chance Guessing vs. Second-Chance Learning?

Merrel¹,

Cirillo²,

Schwartz³

et al. 2015

HES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple choice testing is a common but often ineffective method for evaluating learning. A newer approach, however, using Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT ® , Epstein Educational Enterprise, Inc.) forms, offers several advantages. In particular, a student learns immediately if his or her answer is correct and, in the case of an incorrect answer, has an opportunity to provide a second response and receive partial credit for a correct second attempt. For a multiple choice question with five possible answers, the IF AT ® form covers spaces labeled A through E with a thin opaque film; when the film is scratched away, a star indicates the correct answer. This study was conducted in order to assess learning after an initial incorrect answer. Based on random chance, students should have mathematically a 25% chance of guessing a correct second answer (i.e. 1 of 4 remaining answers on the IF AT ® form). Analysis of second responses for 8775 questions on IF AT ® forms in 22 classes over 3 years showed that the percent of correct second answers was 44.9%, significantly higher than one might expect from random guessing. This indicates that students learned from an incorrect answer and, possibly by re-reading the problem, were able to demonstrate some level of mastery of the material. This data leads us to conclude that IF AT ® forms are useful assessment tools.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple-Choice Testing Using Immediate Feedback—Assessment Technique (IF AT®) Forms: Second-Chance Guessing vs. Second-Chance Learning?

Merrel¹,

Cirillo²,

Schwartz³

et al. 2015

HES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, accessing information in long-term memory has recently been shown to have beneficial effects on memory under some circumstances. For example, recent work by Little and colleagues examining multiple choice tests (Little & Bjork, 2015;Little, Bjork, Bjork, & Angello, 2012) has suggested that forced-choice memory paradigms need not lead to forgetting of competitors. Given that retrieval can benefit memory under some circumstances, it is not intuitively obvious that forgetting of related visual objects would have occurred in the Maxcey and Woodman paradigm.…”

Section: Are Practiced)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition-induced forgetting is not due to category-based set size

Maxcey

2015

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What are the consequences of accessing a visual long-term memory representation? Previous work has shown that accessing a long-term memory representation via retrieval improves memory for the targeted item and hurts memory for related items, a phenomenon called retrieval-induced forgetting. Recently we found a similar forgetting phenomenon with recognition of visual objects. Recognition-induced forgetting occurs when practice recognizing an object during a twoalternative forced-choice task, from a group of objects learned at the same time, leads to worse memory for objects from that group that were not practiced. An alternative explanation of this effect is that category-based set size is inducing forgetting, not recognition practice as claimed by some researchers. This alternative explanation is possible because during recognition practice subjects make old-new judgments in a two-alternative forced-choice task, and are thus exposed to more objects from practiced categories, potentially inducing forgetting due to setsize. Herein I pitted the category-based set size hypothesis against the recognition-induced forgetting hypothesis. To this end, I parametrically manipulated the amount of practice objects received in the recognition-induced forgetting paradigm. If forgetting is due to category-based set size, then the magnitude of forgetting of related objects will increase as the number of practice trials increases. If forgetting is recognition induced, the set size of exemplars from any given category should not be predictive of memory for practiced objects. Consistent with this latter hypothesis, additional practice systematically improved memory for practiced objects, but did not systematically affect forgetting of related objects. These results firmly establish that recognition practice induces forgetting of related memories. Future directions and important real-world applications of using recognition to access our visual memories of previously encountered objects are discussed.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have also suggested that the inclusion of open-book learning in tests aids retention and understanding (Heijne-Penninga, Kuks, Hofman, Muijtjens, & CohenSchotanus, 2012). In addition, it has been shown that an initial MCQs test not only improves performance for items that are repeated on a final test, but also enhances retrieval of information associated with incorrect alternatives on the initial practice test (Little, Bjork, Bjork, & Angello, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention in Enhanced Team Based Learning Course: retain or refrain?

Puthucheary¹,

Goh²,

Ha³

et al. 2017

MedEdPublish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Students' ability to retain content in medical school has always been a concern. At Duke-NUS Medical School, we modified our Team-Based Learning (TBL) classes known as TeamLEAD, a learning strategy for first year basic science content, to include an open/closed-book option in the readiness assurance phase to engage teams in deeper discussion. We hypothesize that the open-book option allows students to engage in deeper learning in their teams, which leads to an improvement in retention ability for each individual student at the end of their first year basic science curriculum.

show abstract

Multiple-Choice Tests Exonerated, at Least of Some Charges

Cited by 132 publications

References 30 publications

Multiple-Choice Testing Using Immediate Feedback—Assessment Technique (IF AT®) Forms: Second-Chance Guessing vs. Second-Chance Learning?

Multiple-Choice Testing Using Immediate Feedback—Assessment Technique (IF AT®) Forms: Second-Chance Guessing vs. Second-Chance Learning?

Recognition-induced forgetting is not due to category-based set size

Retention in Enhanced Team Based Learning Course: retain or refrain?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About