Quality of multiple choice question items: item analysis

Author:

Alemu Ayenew Takele,Tesfa Hiwot,Mulugeta Addisu,Fenta Enyew Tale,Belay Mahider Awoke

Abstract

Background: There are different types of exam formats for educational assessment. Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are frequently utilized assessment tools in health education. Considering the reliability and validity in developing MCQ items is vital. Educators often face the difficulty of developing credible distractors in MCQ items. Poorly constructed MCQ items make an exam easier or too difficult to be answered correctly by students as intended learning objectives. Checking the quality of MCQ items is overlooked and too little is known about it. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the quality of MCQ items using the item response theory model. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among MCQ items of public health courses administered to 2nd year nursing students at Injibara university. A total of 50 MCQ items and 200 alternatives were evaluated for statistical item analysis. The quality of MCQ items was assessed by difficulty index (DIF), discrimination index (DI), and distractor efficiency (DE) using students’ exam responses. Microsoft excel sheet and SPSS version 26 were used for data management and analysis. Results: Post-exam item analysis showed that 11 (22%) and 22 (44%) MCQs had too difficult and poor ranges for difficulty and discriminating powers respectively. The overall DE was 71.3%. About forty (20%) distractors were non-functional. Only 8 (16%) MCQs fulfilled the recommended criteria for all-DIF, DI, and DE parameters. Conclusions: The desirable criteria for quality parameters of MCQ items were satisfied only in a few items. The result implies the need for quality improvement. Continuous trainings are required to improve the instructors’ skills to construct quality educational assessment tools.

Publisher

Medip Academy

Reference24 articles.

1. Mehta G, Mokhasi V. Item analysis of multiple choice questions-an assessment of the assessment tool. Int J Health Sci Res, 2014;4(7):197-202.

2. Case SM, Swanson DB. Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences, 3rd edittion, National Board of Medical Examiners Philadelphia. 1998.

3. Tarrant M, Ware J. A framework for improving the quality of multiple-choice assessments. Nurse Educator. 2012;37(3):98-104.

4. Palmer E, Devitt P. Constructing multiple choice questions as a method for learning. Ann Academy Med Singapore. 2006;35(9):604.

5. Gajjar S, Sharma R, Kumar P, Rana M. Item and test analysis to identify quality multiple choice questions (MCQs) from an assessment of medical students of Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Indian J Community Med. 2014;39(1):17-20.

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