Experts’ prediction of the actual item difficulty of multiple-choice questions in the Ethiopian Undergraduate Medicine Licensure Examination

Author:

Gedamu Shewatatek1,Tadesse Tefera2,Moges Belay3,Schauber Stefan4

Affiliation:

1. Jimma University

2. Addis Ababa University

3. Dilla University

4. University of Oslo

Abstract

Abstract Background The ability of expert ratings to predict the difficulty level of items to identify test-taker performance is an important aspect of licensure exams. Expert judgment is used as a primary source of information for users to make prior decisions to determine the pass rate of test takers. The nature of the raters involved in predicting item difficulty is central to setting credible standards. Therefore, this study aimed to assess and compare raters' prediction and actual MCQ item difficulty of the 2022 Ethiopian undergraduate medicine licensure examination (UGMLE). Method 200 Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs) of the 2022 cohort of 815 UGMLE examinees were used in this study and seven physicians participated in the difficulty level ratings. Then, analysis was conducted to understand experts' rating variation in predicting the computed actual difficulty levels of examinees. Descriptive statistics to profile the rater’s assessment results and ANOVA to examine differences between the raters' estimations of the difficulty levels of the MCQs were computed. Additionally, regression analysis was used to understand the interrater variations in their predictions of difficult levels compared to actual difficult levels of MCQs.It was also used to examine the proportion of variation that each rater explained in the predictions of actual difficulty levels across the whole set of MCQs and all UGMLE fourteen domains. Results The study revealed statistically significant differences in the mean difficult level ratings of some raters and moderate to high positive linear relationships with some exam domains. But also, statistically nonsignificant relationships were found in some other domains. Thus, considerations have been needed on the observed variability in difficult-level rating values across raters and UGMLE domains. In the regression results, experts' ratings accounted for 33% of the variations in the actual UGMLE difficulty levels. Between the expert-rated and actual difficulty levels, the regression model showed a moderately positive linear correlation (R = 0.57) that was statistically significant at p = .05. Conclusion This study demonstrated the complex nature of rating the level of difficulty of MCQs on UGMLE and the benefits of employing prior expert ratings. To improve a rater's rating accuracy in UGMLE, designing strategies in line with the changing nature of assessment methods guarantees to maintain the required reliability and validity of the exam.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

Reference47 articles.

1. Trends in national licensing examinations in medicine;Swanson DB;Med Educ,2016

2. Breithaupt K. Medical Licensure Testing, White Paper for the Assessment Review Task Force of the Medical Council of Canada. 2011.

3. Archer DJ, Lynn DN, Roberts MM, Lee D, Gale DT. A Systematic Review on the impact of licensing examinations for doctors in countries comparable to the UK. 2019.

4. Castle RA. Developing a Certification or Licensure Exam. 2002.

5. Biggs JB, Tang CS, Maidenhead kum. England New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press; 2011. 279–389 p. (SRHE and Open University Press imprint; vol. 4th edition).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3