{"title":"No pain, no gain: The structure and consequences of question difficulty in a management accounting course","authors":"Timothy J. Fogarty , Paul M. Goldwater","doi":"10.1016/j.jaccedu.2024.100916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>An unrecognized choice made by accounting instructors is the degree of difficulty presented to students. Even if assessment is limited to multiple-choice materials, instructors can pick questions that vary from easy to very difficult. To do this, instructors depend on difficulty classifications provided by textbook authors and publishers. Using computer captured results from student efforts, this paper tests the integrity of these difficulty categories. This effort considers the impact of different grade consequences, different scoring systems, student aptitude and prior question exposure. The extent difficulty levels translate into student success variation is reported. The results generally support the publisher’s classifications. Nonetheless, interesting variations in the degree of these differences can be attributed to the context and consequences of question answering, as well as to the type of student asked to answer.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35578,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748575124000320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
An unrecognized choice made by accounting instructors is the degree of difficulty presented to students. Even if assessment is limited to multiple-choice materials, instructors can pick questions that vary from easy to very difficult. To do this, instructors depend on difficulty classifications provided by textbook authors and publishers. Using computer captured results from student efforts, this paper tests the integrity of these difficulty categories. This effort considers the impact of different grade consequences, different scoring systems, student aptitude and prior question exposure. The extent difficulty levels translate into student success variation is reported. The results generally support the publisher’s classifications. Nonetheless, interesting variations in the degree of these differences can be attributed to the context and consequences of question answering, as well as to the type of student asked to answer.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Accounting Education (JAEd) is a refereed journal dedicated to promoting and publishing research on accounting education issues and to improving the quality of accounting education worldwide. The Journal provides a vehicle for making results of empirical studies available to educators and for exchanging ideas, instructional resources, and best practices that help improve accounting education. The Journal includes four sections: a Main Articles Section, a Teaching and Educational Notes Section, an Educational Case Section, and a Best Practices Section. Manuscripts published in the Main Articles Section generally present results of empirical studies, although non-empirical papers (such as policy-related or essay papers) are sometimes published in this section. Papers published in the Teaching and Educational Notes Section include short empirical pieces (e.g., replications) as well as instructional resources that are not properly categorized as cases, which are published in a separate Case Section. Note: as part of the Teaching Note accompany educational cases, authors must include implementation guidance (based on actual case usage) and evidence regarding the efficacy of the case vis-a-vis a listing of educational objectives associated with the case. To meet the efficacy requirement, authors must include direct assessment (e.g grades by case requirement/objective or pre-post tests). Although interesting and encouraged, student perceptions (surveys) are considered indirect assessment and do not meet the efficacy requirement. The case must have been used more than once in a course to avoid potential anomalies and to vet the case before submission. Authors may be asked to collect additional data, depending on course size/circumstances.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
