12.01.2015 Views

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

CONSTRUCTING A TEST 427<br />

short-answer items to overcome some of these<br />

problems:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Make the blanks close to the end of the<br />

sentence.<br />

Keep the blanks the same length.<br />

Ensure that there can be only a single correct<br />

answer.<br />

Avoid putting several blanks close to each<br />

other (in a sentence or paragraph) such that<br />

the overall meaning is obscured.<br />

Only make blanks of key words or concepts,<br />

rather than of trivial words.<br />

Avoid addressing only trivial matters.<br />

Ensure that students know exactly the kind<br />

and specificity of the answer required.<br />

Specify the units in which a numerical answer<br />

is to be given.<br />

Use short-answers for testing knowledge recall.<br />

With regard to multiple choice items there are<br />

several potential problems:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

the number of choices in a single multiple<br />

choice item and whether there is one or more<br />

right answer(s)<br />

the number and realism of the distractors in a<br />

multiple choice item (e.g. there might be many<br />

distractors but many of them are too obvious<br />

to be chosen – there may be several redundant<br />

items)<br />

the sequence of items and their effects on each<br />

other<br />

the location of the correct response(s) in a<br />

multiple choice item.<br />

Gronlund and Linn (1990), Hanna (1993:<br />

161–75), Cunningham (1998) and Aiken (2003)<br />

set out several suggestions for constructing<br />

effective multiple choice test items:<br />

<br />

<br />

ensure that they catch significant knowledge<br />

and learning rather than low-level recall of<br />

facts<br />

frame the nature of the issue in the stem of the<br />

item, ensuring that the stem is meaningful<br />

in itself (e.g. replace the general ‘sheep’:<br />

(a) are graminivorous, (b) are cloven footed,<br />

(c) usually give birth to one or two calves at a<br />

time’ with ‘how many lambs are normally born<br />

to a sheep at one time’)<br />

ensure that the stem includes as much of the<br />

item as possible, with no irrelevancies<br />

avoid negative stems to the item<br />

keep the readability levels low<br />

ensure clarity and unambiguity<br />

ensure that all the options are plausible so that<br />

guessing of the only possible option is avoided<br />

avoid the possibility of students making the<br />

correct choice through incorrect reasoning<br />

include some novelty to the item if it is being<br />

used to measure understanding<br />

ensure that there can only be a single correct<br />

option (if a single answer is required) and that<br />

it is unambiguously the right response<br />

avoid syntactical and grammatical clues<br />

by making all options syntactically and<br />

grammatically parallel and by avoiding<br />

matching the phrasing of a stem with similar<br />

phrasing in the response<br />

avoid including in the stem clues as to which<br />

may be the correct response<br />

ensure that the length of each response item is<br />

the same (e.g. to avoid one long correct answer<br />

from standing out)<br />

keep each option separate, avoiding options<br />

which are included in each other<br />

ensure that the correct option is positioned<br />

differently for each item (e.g. so that it is not<br />

always option 2)<br />

avoid using options like ‘all of the above’ or<br />

‘none of the above’<br />

avoid answers from one item being used to cue<br />

answers to another item – keep items separate.<br />

The response categories of tests need to be<br />

considered, and we refer readers to our discussion<br />

of this topic in Chapter 15 on questionnaires (e.g.<br />

Likert scales, Guttman scales, semantic differential<br />

scales, Thurstone scales).<br />

Morris et al. (1987: 161), Gronlund and<br />

Linn (1990), Hanna (1993: 147), Cunningham<br />

(1998) and Aiken (2003) also indicate particular<br />

problems in true–false questions:<br />

<br />

<br />

ambiguity of meaning<br />

some items might be partly true or partly false<br />

Chapter 19

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!