Randomize it

D. C. Joseph
{"title":"Randomize it","authors":"D. C. Joseph","doi":"10.36021/jethe.v2i1.26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multiple-choice testing is a staple within the U.S. higher education system. From classroom assessments to standardized entrance exams such as the GRE, GMAT, or LSAT, test developers utilize a variety of validated and heuristic-driven item-writing guidelines. One such guideline that has been given recent attention is to randomize the position of the correct answer throughout the entire answer key. Doing this theoretically limits the number of correct guesses that test-takers can make and thus reduces the amount of construct-irrelevant variance in test score interpretations. This study empirically tested the strategy to randomize the answer-key. Specifically, a factorial ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in General Biology classroom multiple-choice test scores by the interaction of method for varying the correct answer’s position and student-ability. Although no statistically significant differences were found, the paper argues that the guideline is nevertheless ethically substantiated.","PeriodicalId":93777,"journal":{"name":"Journal of effective teaching in higher education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of effective teaching in higher education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36021/jethe.v2i1.26","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Multiple-choice testing is a staple within the U.S. higher education system. From classroom assessments to standardized entrance exams such as the GRE, GMAT, or LSAT, test developers utilize a variety of validated and heuristic-driven item-writing guidelines. One such guideline that has been given recent attention is to randomize the position of the correct answer throughout the entire answer key. Doing this theoretically limits the number of correct guesses that test-takers can make and thus reduces the amount of construct-irrelevant variance in test score interpretations. This study empirically tested the strategy to randomize the answer-key. Specifically, a factorial ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in General Biology classroom multiple-choice test scores by the interaction of method for varying the correct answer’s position and student-ability. Although no statistically significant differences were found, the paper argues that the guideline is nevertheless ethically substantiated.
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
随机化
多项选择测试是美国高等教育系统的主要内容。从课堂评估到GRE、GMAT或LSAT等标准化入学考试,考试开发人员利用各种经过验证和启发式驱动的项目写作指南。最近受到关注的一个这样的准则是在整个答案键中随机化正确答案的位置。这样做在理论上限制了考生可以做出的正确猜测的数量,从而减少了考试成绩解释中与结构无关的方差。本研究实证检验了随机化答案密钥的策略。具体来说,通过改变正确答案的位置和学生能力的方法的相互作用,进行了因子方差分析来检验普通生物学课堂多项选择测试成绩的差异。尽管没有发现统计学上的显著差异,但该论文认为,该指南在伦理上是有根据的。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Teaching Spirituality in Higher Education Graduate Programs Indigenous cultures and communities in higher education teaching and learning Using Design Thinking to Solve Real-World Problems Students’ Use and Perceptions of a Due Date Extension Policy Incorporating Positive Psychology into the Post-Secondary Classroom
×
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