项目写作的最佳实践能改善大学生的多项选择题吗?

F. Bertoni, L. Smales, Bill Trent, Gerhard van de Venter
{"title":"项目写作的最佳实践能改善大学生的多项选择题吗?","authors":"F. Bertoni, L. Smales, Bill Trent, Gerhard van de Venter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3177765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We conduct a randomized experiment using a series of three finance exams sat by over 1,000 students at an Australian university, to determine the extent to which multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are improved by item writing best practices. We identify deviations from best practices (i.e. “flaws”) in MCQs, correct these flaws in a random sample of MCQs and re-administer the exams. Regardless of question difficulty, editing the MCQs according to best practices provides greater clarity for students and increases the proportion of correct responses. We also observe a substantial improvement in MCQ performance related to the effective removal of non-performing distractors. The effect of MCQ editing is larger on those items that students find more difficult. The discriminatory power of MCQs edited according to best practices declines on average, but it increases among students with the lowest scores.","PeriodicalId":409545,"journal":{"name":"EduRN: Economics Education (ERN) (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Item Writing Best Practices Improve Multiple Choice Questions for University Students?\",\"authors\":\"F. Bertoni, L. Smales, Bill Trent, Gerhard van de Venter\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3177765\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We conduct a randomized experiment using a series of three finance exams sat by over 1,000 students at an Australian university, to determine the extent to which multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are improved by item writing best practices. We identify deviations from best practices (i.e. “flaws”) in MCQs, correct these flaws in a random sample of MCQs and re-administer the exams. Regardless of question difficulty, editing the MCQs according to best practices provides greater clarity for students and increases the proportion of correct responses. We also observe a substantial improvement in MCQ performance related to the effective removal of non-performing distractors. The effect of MCQ editing is larger on those items that students find more difficult. The discriminatory power of MCQs edited according to best practices declines on average, but it increases among students with the lowest scores.\",\"PeriodicalId\":409545,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EduRN: Economics Education (ERN) (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EduRN: Economics Education (ERN) (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3177765\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EduRN: Economics Education (ERN) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3177765","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

我们对澳大利亚一所大学的1000多名学生参加的三场金融考试进行了随机实验,以确定最佳写作方法在多大程度上改善了多项选择题(mcq)。我们识别mcq中与最佳实践的偏差(即“缺陷”),在随机的mcq样本中纠正这些缺陷,并重新管理考试。不管问题的难度如何,根据最佳实践来编辑mcq可以让学生更清楚地了解问题,并增加正确回答的比例。我们还观察到与有效去除不良干扰有关的MCQ性能的实质性改善。MCQ编辑对那些学生觉得比较难的题目的影响更大。根据最佳实践编辑的mcq的歧视力量平均下降,但在得分最低的学生中却有所增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do Item Writing Best Practices Improve Multiple Choice Questions for University Students?
We conduct a randomized experiment using a series of three finance exams sat by over 1,000 students at an Australian university, to determine the extent to which multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are improved by item writing best practices. We identify deviations from best practices (i.e. “flaws”) in MCQs, correct these flaws in a random sample of MCQs and re-administer the exams. Regardless of question difficulty, editing the MCQs according to best practices provides greater clarity for students and increases the proportion of correct responses. We also observe a substantial improvement in MCQ performance related to the effective removal of non-performing distractors. The effect of MCQ editing is larger on those items that students find more difficult. The discriminatory power of MCQs edited according to best practices declines on average, but it increases among students with the lowest scores.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信