Using Performance Improvement Methods to Evaluate Processes for Writing Multiple-Choice Test Questions in the Postlicensure Clinical Environment: A Case Study.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing Pub Date : 2024-09-05 DOI:10.3928/00220124-20240829-02
Judy E Davidson, Amy Kalinowski, Hirsh Makhija, Stephen D Schneid, Jess Mandel
{"title":"Using Performance Improvement Methods to Evaluate Processes for Writing Multiple-Choice Test Questions in the Postlicensure Clinical Environment: A Case Study.","authors":"Judy E Davidson, Amy Kalinowski, Hirsh Makhija, Stephen D Schneid, Jess Mandel","doi":"10.3928/00220124-20240829-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This article is the last of a four-part series to guide educators on the construction and evaluation of multiple-choice test items in the post-licensure environment. Previous articles in this series described the problem and the mechanics of test item construction and evaluation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A replicable strategy for evaluating the organizational process for constructing multiple-choice test questions is provided. Steps taken to create change are described; work tools are provided.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Guidance and training are needed to create multiple-choice test questions. Many educators have not had training in item construction. Educators welcomed training. Personalized mentorship resulted in improvement. Asynchronous learning alone was helpful and well received and improved self-perceived knowledge, yet fell short of achieving competence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Voluntary training may not be adequate to assure enculturation of best practices without accountability standards and monitoring. Future research is indicated to assess the situation and provide national standards for adoption within health care organizations. <b>[<i>J Contin Educ Nurs.</i> 202x;5x(x):xx-xx.]</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":49295,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20240829-02","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This article is the last of a four-part series to guide educators on the construction and evaluation of multiple-choice test items in the post-licensure environment. Previous articles in this series described the problem and the mechanics of test item construction and evaluation.

Method: A replicable strategy for evaluating the organizational process for constructing multiple-choice test questions is provided. Steps taken to create change are described; work tools are provided.

Results: Guidance and training are needed to create multiple-choice test questions. Many educators have not had training in item construction. Educators welcomed training. Personalized mentorship resulted in improvement. Asynchronous learning alone was helpful and well received and improved self-perceived knowledge, yet fell short of achieving competence.

Conclusion: Voluntary training may not be adequate to assure enculturation of best practices without accountability standards and monitoring. Future research is indicated to assess the situation and provide national standards for adoption within health care organizations. [J Contin Educ Nurs. 202x;5x(x):xx-xx.].

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用绩效改进方法评估执照后临床环境中多选题的编写过程:案例研究。
背景:本文是四篇系列文章中的最后一篇,旨在指导教育工作者如何在执业资格考试后的环境中构建和评估多项选择测试项目。本系列的前几篇文章介绍了考试项目构建和评估的问题和机制:方法:提供一种可复制的策略,用于评估构建多项选择试题的组织流程。方法:提供了一种可复制的策略,用于评估构建多项选择测试题的组织流程;描述了为实现变革而采取的步骤;提供了工作工具:结果:编制多项选择试题需要指导和培训。许多教育工作者没有接受过命题方面的培训。教育工作者欢迎培训。个性化辅导带来了进步。单独的异步学习很有帮助,也很受欢迎,提高了自我感觉的知识水平,但还不足以达到能力要求:结论:如果没有问责标准和监督,自愿培训可能不足以确保最佳做法的普及。未来的研究将对这一情况进行评估,并提供供医疗机构采用的国家标准。[202x;5x(x):xx-xx.].
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
107
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing is a monthly peer-reviewed journal publishing original articles on continuing nursing education that are directed toward continuing education and staff development professionals, nurse administrators, and nurse educators in all health care settings, for over 50 years.
期刊最新文献
Improving the Recognition and Assessment of ICU Delirium. Training Nurses in Trauma-Informed Care to Address Workplace Violence in Inpatient Settings. Trauma-Informed Development and Education: Turning the TIDE on Transition to Practice. Using Performance Improvement Methods to Evaluate Processes for Writing Multiple-Choice Test Questions in the Postlicensure Clinical Environment: A Case Study. Investigating the Influence of Simulation-Based Instruction on Advancing Nursing Proficiency: A Rapid Review.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1