Showing 1 - 7 of 7 Research Library Publications
Posted: | Janet Mee, Ravi Pandian, Justin Wolczynski, Amy Morales, Miguel Paniagua, Polina Harik, Peter Baldwin, Brian E. Clauser

Advances in Health Sciences Education

 

Recent advancements enable replacing MCQs with SAQs in high-stakes assessments, but prior research often used small samples under low stakes and lacked time data. This study assesses difficulty, discrimination, and time in a large-scale high-stakes context

Posted: | Mark Gierl, Kimberly Swygert, Donna Matovinovic, Allison Kulesher, Hollis Lai

Teaching and Learning in Medicine: Volume 33 - Issue 4 - p 366-381

 

The purpose of this analysis is to describe these sources of evidence that can be used to evaluate the quality of generated items. The important role of medical expertise in the development and evaluation of the generated items is highlighted as a crucial requirement for producing validation evidence.

Posted: | P. Harik, R.A. Feinberg RA, B.E. Clauser

Integrating Timing Considerations to Improve Testing Practices

 

This chapter addresses a different aspect of the use of timing data: it provides a framework for understanding how an examinee's use of time interfaces with time limits to impact both test performance and the validity of inferences made based on test scores. It focuses primarily on examinations that are administered as part of the physician licensure process.

Posted: | C. Liu, M. J. Kolen

Journal of Educational Measurement: Volume 55, Issue 4, Pages 564-581

 

Smoothing techniques are designed to improve the accuracy of equating functions. The main purpose of this study is to compare seven model selection strategies for choosing the smoothing parameter (C) for polynomial loglinear presmoothing and one procedure for model selection in cubic spline postsmoothing for mixed‐format pseudo tests under the random groups design.

Posted: | M.R. Raymond, C. Stevens, S.D. Bucak

Adv in Health Sci Educ 24, 141–150 (2019)

 

Research suggests that the three-option format is optimal for multiple choice questions (MCQs). This conclusion is supported by numerous studies showing that most distractors (i.e., incorrect answers) are selected by so few examinees that they are essentially nonfunctional. However, nearly all studies have defined a distractor as nonfunctional if it is selected by fewer than 5% of examinees.

Posted: | S. Tackett, M. Raymond, R. Desai, S. A. Haist, A. Morales, S. Gaglani, S. G. Clyman

Medical Teacher: Volume 40 - Issue 8 - p 838-841

 

Adaptive learning requires frequent and valid assessments for learners to track progress against their goals. This study determined if multiple-choice questions (MCQs) “crowdsourced” from medical learners could meet the standards of many large-scale testing programs.

Posted: | D. Franzen, M. Cuddy, J. S. Ilgen

Journal of Graduate Medical Education: June 2018, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 337-338

 

To create examinations with scores that accurately support their intended interpretation and use in a particular setting, examination writers must clearly define what the test is intended to measure (the construct). Writers must also pay careful attention to how content is sampled, how questions are constructed, and how questions perform in their unique testing contexts.1–3 This Rip Out provides guidance for test developers to ensure that scores from MCQ examinations fit their intended purpose.