在经济评估中使用带解释的多项选择题

S. Kates
{"title":"在经济评估中使用带解释的多项选择题","authors":"S. Kates","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1335987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dissatisfaction with the use of multiple choice tests as a means of evaluating the comprehension of students led to experimentation with a hybrid form that combined multiple choice questions with written explanations for why the particular answer was chosen. A comparison of the multiple choice component of such tests with the written component shows not only a poor correlation between the two sets of results but what was more disturbing, a poor rank correlation. Combining the two forms of assessment was shown to be not only a more accurate means of judging the understanding of students but allowed tests to be set in ways which probed far more deeply into student abilities.","PeriodicalId":174643,"journal":{"name":"Entrepreneurship Educator: Courses","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Use of Multiple Choice Questions with Explanations for Economic Assessment\",\"authors\":\"S. Kates\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1335987\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dissatisfaction with the use of multiple choice tests as a means of evaluating the comprehension of students led to experimentation with a hybrid form that combined multiple choice questions with written explanations for why the particular answer was chosen. A comparison of the multiple choice component of such tests with the written component shows not only a poor correlation between the two sets of results but what was more disturbing, a poor rank correlation. Combining the two forms of assessment was shown to be not only a more accurate means of judging the understanding of students but allowed tests to be set in ways which probed far more deeply into student abilities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":174643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Entrepreneurship Educator: Courses\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Entrepreneurship Educator: Courses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1335987\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Entrepreneurship Educator: Courses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1335987","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

由于对将多项选择题作为评估学生理解能力的一种手段感到不满,于是他们尝试了一种混合形式,将多项选择题与书面解释选择特定答案的原因结合起来。将这类考试的多项选择部分与书面部分进行比较,不仅显示出两组结果之间的相关性很差,而且更令人不安的是,等级相关性很差。将这两种形式的评估结合起来,不仅可以更准确地判断学生的理解能力,而且可以使考试的设置更深入地探究学生的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Use of Multiple Choice Questions with Explanations for Economic Assessment
Dissatisfaction with the use of multiple choice tests as a means of evaluating the comprehension of students led to experimentation with a hybrid form that combined multiple choice questions with written explanations for why the particular answer was chosen. A comparison of the multiple choice component of such tests with the written component shows not only a poor correlation between the two sets of results but what was more disturbing, a poor rank correlation. Combining the two forms of assessment was shown to be not only a more accurate means of judging the understanding of students but allowed tests to be set in ways which probed far more deeply into student abilities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信