Literature DB >> 22208143

Assessment of medical knowledge: the pros and cons of using true/false multiple choice questions.

Madawa Chandratilake1, Margery Davis, Gominda Ponnamperuma.   

Abstract

True/false multiple choice items, commonly referred to as true/ false multiple choice questions (MCQs), were previously a widely used selected response examination format. They can be written relatively easily and cover a wide range of content. Educational researchers have however highlighted several adverse features of this format that make it inappropriate for many assessment settings. These include: (i) there is a high chance of guessing the correct answer; (ii) some marks are not awarded for knowing the correct answer, but for knowing that an answer is incorrect; (iii) they are weak in discriminating between high and low performers; (iv) identifying items which are absolutely true or false may lead to assessment of trivial knowledge; (v) there are difficulties with constructing flawless items; (vi) they may not encourage learning around the items; and (vii) they may not assess what they purport to assess. Many assessment agencies abandoned the use of this format decades ago due to these shortcomings. The use of single best answer (SBA) and extended matching item (EMI) formats helps overcome or minimize the above weaknesses. Assessors who plan to change to SBA or EMI formats from true/false MCQs may, however, need to increase the number of questions to include a representative sample of the curriculum (lengthening the question paper). However, they may not need to increase the examination time, as in general students can answer more SBAs or EMIs than true/false MCQs per unit time. It is time that we reflect upon the disadvantages of true/false MCQs and review their place in our assessment toolkit, as their use in summative examinations may not be fair to students, especially 'good' students.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22208143

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Natl Med J India        ISSN: 0970-258X            Impact factor:   0.537


  7 in total

1.  The influence of question design on the response to self-assessment in www.elearnSCI.org: a submodule pilot study.

Authors:  N Liu; X-W Li; M-W Zhou; F Biering-Sørensen
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2015-02-17       Impact factor: 2.772

2.  Multiple choice questions are superior to extended matching questions to identify medicine and biomedical sciences students who perform poorly.

Authors:  Thijs M H Eijsvogels; Tessa L van den Brand; Maria T E Hopman
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2013-11

3.  A novel pain interprofessional education strategy for trainees: assessing impact on interprofessional competencies and pediatric pain knowledge.

Authors:  Judith P Hunter; Jennifer Stinson; Fiona Campbell; Bonnie Stevens; Susan J Wagner; Brian Simmons; Meghan White; Margaret van Wyk
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 3.037

4.  Toward a better judgment of item relevance in progress testing.

Authors:  Xandra M C Janssen-Brandt; Arno M M Muijtjens; Dominique M A Sluijsmans
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 2.463

5.  Reporting of Concussion Symptoms by a Nationwide Survey of United States Parents of Middle School Children.

Authors:  Zachary Y Kerr; Brittany M Ingram; Christine E Callahan; Aliza K Nedimyer; Avinash Chandran; Melissa K Kossman; Julia Hoang; Paula Gildner; Johna K Register-Mihalik
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Difference in postcourse knowledge and confidence between Web-based and on-site training courses on resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta.

Authors:  Hiraku Funakoshi; Yosuke Matsumura; Takaaki Maruhashi; Kenichiro Ishida; Tomohiro Funabiki
Journal:  Acute Med Surg       Date:  2021-11-03

7.  Knowledge self-monitoring, efficiency, and determinants of self-confidence statement in multiple choice questions in medical students.

Authors:  Nahid Tabibzadeh; Jimmy Mullaert; Lara Zafrani; Pauline Balagny; Justine Frija-Masson; Stéphanie Marin; Agnès Lefort; Emmanuelle Vidal-Petiot; Martin Flamant
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 2.463

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.