Dennis Schmidt , Tobias Raupach , Annette Wiegand , Manfred Herrmann , Philipp Kanzow
{"title":"考生真实知识与考试成绩的关系:Pick-N题的系统回顾与示例计算","authors":"Dennis Schmidt , Tobias Raupach , Annette Wiegand , Manfred Herrmann , Philipp Kanzow","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This manuscript focusing on Pick-N items is the second of two manuscripts regarding scoring approaches of two specific multiple-select item types commonly used to assess knowledge in written examinations. In contrast to other multiple-select item types, the number of true answer options to be marked within each Pick-N item is disclosed to examinees. As various scoring methods for Pick-N items exist, the present study aimed to help educators make informed choices about the use of Pick-N items, the scoring method to be selected, and related aspects (i.e. defining appropriate examination pass marks). Available scoring methods for conventional multiple-select items and Pick-N items were systematically identified from the literature. Their statistical parameters were compared by assessing the metrics <em>available information included</em> and <em>expected chance scores</em> from random guessing. The study further aimed to examine the relation between examinees’ <em>true knowledge</em> and expected scoring results when using Pick-N items.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relation between examinees’ true knowledge and examination scores: systematic review and exemplary calculations on Pick-N items\",\"authors\":\"Dennis Schmidt , Tobias Raupach , Annette Wiegand , Manfred Herrmann , Philipp Kanzow\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This manuscript focusing on Pick-N items is the second of two manuscripts regarding scoring approaches of two specific multiple-select item types commonly used to assess knowledge in written examinations. In contrast to other multiple-select item types, the number of true answer options to be marked within each Pick-N item is disclosed to examinees. As various scoring methods for Pick-N items exist, the present study aimed to help educators make informed choices about the use of Pick-N items, the scoring method to be selected, and related aspects (i.e. defining appropriate examination pass marks). Available scoring methods for conventional multiple-select items and Pick-N items were systematically identified from the literature. Their statistical parameters were compared by assessing the metrics <em>available information included</em> and <em>expected chance scores</em> from random guessing. The study further aimed to examine the relation between examinees’ <em>true knowledge</em> and expected scoring results when using Pick-N items.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48125,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Research Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Research Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X22000525\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X22000525","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Relation between examinees’ true knowledge and examination scores: systematic review and exemplary calculations on Pick-N items
This manuscript focusing on Pick-N items is the second of two manuscripts regarding scoring approaches of two specific multiple-select item types commonly used to assess knowledge in written examinations. In contrast to other multiple-select item types, the number of true answer options to be marked within each Pick-N item is disclosed to examinees. As various scoring methods for Pick-N items exist, the present study aimed to help educators make informed choices about the use of Pick-N items, the scoring method to be selected, and related aspects (i.e. defining appropriate examination pass marks). Available scoring methods for conventional multiple-select items and Pick-N items were systematically identified from the literature. Their statistical parameters were compared by assessing the metrics available information included and expected chance scores from random guessing. The study further aimed to examine the relation between examinees’ true knowledge and expected scoring results when using Pick-N items.
期刊介绍:
Educational Research Review is an international journal catering to researchers and diverse agencies keen on reviewing studies and theoretical papers in education at any level. The journal welcomes high-quality articles that address educational research problems through a review approach, encompassing thematic or methodological reviews and meta-analyses. With an inclusive scope, the journal does not limit itself to any specific age range and invites articles across various settings where learning and education take place, such as schools, corporate training, and both formal and informal educational environments.