File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.07.006
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-33751357179
- PMID: 17014932
- WOS: WOS:000244062800009
- Find via
Supplementary
-
Bookmarks:
- CiteULike: 1
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions used in high stakes nursing assessments
Title | The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions used in high stakes nursing assessments |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Assessment Examination Item-Writing Flaws Multiple-Choice Questions |
Issue Date | 2006 |
Publisher | Churchill Livingstone. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/nedt |
Citation | Nurse Education Today, 2006, v. 26 n. 8, p. 662-671 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Multiple-choice questions are a common assessment method in nursing examinations. Few nurse educators, however, have formal preparation in constructing multiple-choice questions. Consequently, questions used in baccalaureate nursing assessments often contain item-writing flaws, or violations to accepted item-writing guidelines. In one nursing department, 2770 MCQs were collected from tests and examinations administered over a five-year period from 2001 to 2005. Questions were evaluated for 19 frequently occurring item-writing flaws, for cognitive level, for question source, and for the distribution of correct answers. Results show that almost half (46.2%) of the questions contained violations of item-writing guidelines and over 90% were written at low cognitive levels. Only a small proportion of questions were teacher generated (14.1%), while 36.2% were taken from testbanks and almost half (49.4%) had no source identified. MCQs written at a lower cognitive level were significantly more likely to contain item-writing flaws. While there was no relationship between the source of the question and item-writing flaws, teachergenerated questions were more likely to be written at higher cognitive levels (p < 0.001). Correct answers were evenly distributed across all four options and no bias was noted in the placement of correct options. Further training in item-writing is recommended for all faculty members who are responsible for developing tests. Pre-test review and quality assessment is also recommended to reduce the occurrence of item-writing flaws and to improve the quality of test questions. © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/178288 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 3.6 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.091 |
ISI Accession Number ID | |
References |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Tarrant, M | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Knierim, A | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Hayes, SK | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Ware, J | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2012-12-19T09:45:03Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2012-12-19T09:45:03Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2006 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Nurse Education Today, 2006, v. 26 n. 8, p. 662-671 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0260-6917 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/178288 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Multiple-choice questions are a common assessment method in nursing examinations. Few nurse educators, however, have formal preparation in constructing multiple-choice questions. Consequently, questions used in baccalaureate nursing assessments often contain item-writing flaws, or violations to accepted item-writing guidelines. In one nursing department, 2770 MCQs were collected from tests and examinations administered over a five-year period from 2001 to 2005. Questions were evaluated for 19 frequently occurring item-writing flaws, for cognitive level, for question source, and for the distribution of correct answers. Results show that almost half (46.2%) of the questions contained violations of item-writing guidelines and over 90% were written at low cognitive levels. Only a small proportion of questions were teacher generated (14.1%), while 36.2% were taken from testbanks and almost half (49.4%) had no source identified. MCQs written at a lower cognitive level were significantly more likely to contain item-writing flaws. While there was no relationship between the source of the question and item-writing flaws, teachergenerated questions were more likely to be written at higher cognitive levels (p < 0.001). Correct answers were evenly distributed across all four options and no bias was noted in the placement of correct options. Further training in item-writing is recommended for all faculty members who are responsible for developing tests. Pre-test review and quality assessment is also recommended to reduce the occurrence of item-writing flaws and to improve the quality of test questions. © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. | en_US |
dc.language | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Churchill Livingstone. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/nedt | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Nurse Education Today | en_US |
dc.subject | Assessment | en_US |
dc.subject | Examination | en_US |
dc.subject | Item-Writing Flaws | en_US |
dc.subject | Multiple-Choice Questions | en_US |
dc.title | The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions used in high stakes nursing assessments | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.email | Tarrant, M: tarrantm@hkucc.hku.hk | en_US |
dc.identifier.authority | Tarrant, M=rp00461 | en_US |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.07.006 | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 17014932 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-33751357179 | en_US |
dc.relation.references | http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33751357179&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpage | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 26 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issue | 8 | en_US |
dc.identifier.spage | 662 | en_US |
dc.identifier.epage | 671 | en_US |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000244062800009 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United Kingdom | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Tarrant, M=7004340118 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Knierim, A=15073747400 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Hayes, SK=7202408061 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Ware, J=35308222100 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citeulike | 6218571 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0260-6917 | - |