Should students change their answers on multiple choice questions?

Author:

Merry Justin W.1ORCID,Elenchin Mary Kate1,Surma Renee N.1

Affiliation:

1. Biology Department, Saint Francis University, Loretto, Pennsylvania

Abstract

Multiple choice exams are ubiquitous, but advice on test-taking strategies varies and is not always well informed by research. This study evaluated the question of whether students benefit or are harmed when they change their initial answers on multiple choice questions in the context of physiology and biology courses. Previously marked examinations were reviewed for eraser marks that indicated answer changes, and the impact of these changes on exam grades was tabulated. In addition, faculty and students were surveyed for their opinions about changing answers. A plurality of faculty (36%) reported a belief that answer changes usually harm student grades, whereas a slim majority of students (51%) believed that answer changing helped their scores (χ2 = 60.52, P < 0.0001). Empirically, across two exams, students changed their answer from an incorrect answer to a correct one 2.8 times (SD 2.2) compared with 1.0 time (SD 1.4) changing in the negative direction. Therefore, on average, students benefited ( V =  123.5, P < 0.0001) from answer changing. Furthermore, comparing across two exams in the same course, some students were consistently more likely to change their answers than others (adjusted R2 = 0.23, P < 0.0001), but the impact of changing answers on the first exam provided no prediction of how much a student would benefit from answer changing on the second exam (adjusted R2 = −0.004, P = 0.42). These data support the argument that students should be advised to review and revise responses to exam questions before submitting them.

Funder

Saint Francis University

Publisher

American Physiological Society

Subject

General Medicine,Physiology,Education

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Effects of physical stock loss on the financial performance of retail enterprises;South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences;2024-06-18

2. Gender gap in standardized tests: What are we measuring?;Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization;2024-05

3. Changing test answers: A scoping review;Nurse Education Today;2024-02

4. Analysis of Process Data to Advance Computer-Based Assessments in Multilingual Contexts;Advances in Analytics for Learning and Teaching;2024

5. On the Math Kangaroo Finland: Homogeneous subgroups, misconceptions and answering choices;Cogent Education;2023-09-30

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