Literature DB >> 31619832

Best Practices Related to Examination Item Construction and Post-hoc Review.

Michael J Rudolph1, Kimberly K Daugherty2, Mary Elizabeth Ray3, Veronica P Shuford4, Lisa Lebovitz5, Margarita V DiVall6,7.   

Abstract

Objective. To provide a practical guide to examination item writing, item statistics, and score adjustment for use by pharmacy and other health professions educators. Findings. Each examination item type possesses advantages and disadvantages. Whereas selected response items allow for efficient assessment of student recall and understanding of content, constructed response items appear better suited for assessment of higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy. Although clear criteria have not been established, accepted ranges for item statistics and examination reliability have been identified. Existing literature provides guidance on when instructors should consider revising or removing items from future examinations based on item statistics and review, but limited information is available on performing score adjustments. Summary. Instructors should select item types that align with the intended learning objectives to be measured on the examination. Ideally, an examination will consist of multiple item types to capitalize on the advantages and limit the effects of any disadvantages associated with a specific item format. Score adjustments should be performed judiciously and by considering all available item information. Colleges and schools should consider developing item writing and score adjustment guidelines to promote consistency.
© 2019 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy.

Keywords:  best practice; exam; item analysis; item type; score adjustment

Year:  2019        PMID: 31619832      PMCID: PMC6788158          DOI: 10.5688/ajpe7204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ        ISSN: 0002-9459            Impact factor:   2.047


  8 in total

1.  Measurement practices: methods for developing content-valid student examinations.

Authors:  Patrick D Bridge; Joseph Musial; Robert Frank; Thomas Roe; Shlomo Sawilowsky
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 3.650

2.  Validity: on meaningful interpretation of assessment data.

Authors:  Susan M Downing
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 6.251

3.  The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: the consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education.

Authors:  Steven M Downing
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.853

4.  Surveying the current landscape of assessment structures and resources in US schools and colleges of pharmacy.

Authors:  Michael J Rudolph; Kelly C Lee; Mitra Assemi; Brenda S Bray; Kimberly K Daugherty; Samuel C Karpen; Jaime L Maerten-Rivera; Nina Pavuluri; Julie M Sease; Rosalyn Padiyara Vellurattil; Margaret A Weck
Journal:  Curr Pharm Teach Learn       Date:  2018-11-22

5.  Best Practices on Examination Construction, Administration, and Feedback.

Authors:  Mary Elizabeth Ray; Kimberly K Daugherty; Lisa Lebovitz; Michael J Rudolph; Veronica P Shuford; Margarita V DiVall
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.047

6.  Impact of adopting a newly developed blueprinting method and relating it to item analysis on students' performance.

Authors:  Rani Ghazi Ahmad; Omayma A E Hamed
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.650

7.  Guidelines for the construction of multiple choice questions tests.

Authors:  Mohammed O Al-Rukban
Journal:  J Family Community Med       Date:  2006-09

8.  How Question Types Reveal Student Thinking: An Experimental Comparison of Multiple-True-False and Free-Response Formats.

Authors:  Joanna K Hubbard; Macy A Potts; Brian A Couch
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 3.325

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Getting Rigor Right.

Authors:  Tyler M Rose
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 2.047

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.