Single-choice or multiple true false questions (Kprime):Direct comparison of online tests in pharmacology over one year (Preprint)

Author:

Neumann Joachim,Simmrodt Stephanie,Bader Beatrice,Opitz Bertram,Gergs Ulrich

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There remain doubts about whether multiple choice answer formats (single choice) offer the best option to encourage deep learning or whether SC formats simply lead to superficial learning or cramming. Moreover, cueing is always a drawback in the SC format. Another way to assess knowledge is true multiple-choice questions in which one or more answers can be true and the student is not aware of how many true answers are to be anticipated (K´ or Kprime question format).

OBJECTIVE

Here, we compared both single-choice answers (one true answer, SC) with Kprime answers (one to four true answers out of four answers, Kprime) for the very same learning objectives in a study of pharmacology in medical students.

METHODS

Two groups of medical students were randomly subjected to a formative online test: group A) was first given 15 SC (#1-15) followed by 15 different Kprime questions (#16-30). The opposite design was used for group B.

RESULTS

The mean number of right answers was higher for SC than for Kprime questions in group A (10.02 vs. 8.63, p < 0.05) and group B (9.98 vs. 6.66, p < 0.05). The number of right answers was higher for nine questions of SC compared to Kprime in group A and for eight questions in group B (pairwise T-Test, p < 0.05). Thus, SC is easier to answer than the same learning objectives in pharmacology given as Kprime questions. One year later, four groups were formed from the previous two groups and were again given the same online test but in a different order: the main result was that all students fared better in the second test than in the initial test; however, the gain in points was highest if initially mode B was given.

CONCLUSIONS

Kprime is less popular with students being more demanding, but could improve memory of subject matter and thus might be more often used by meidcal educators.

Publisher

JMIR Publications Inc.

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