The future of online testing and assessment: question quality in MOOCs

被引:0
作者
Eamon Costello
Jane Holland
Colette Kirwan
机构
[1] Dublin City University,
[2] Royal College of Sugeons in Ireland,undefined
来源
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education | / 15卷
关键词
MOOCs; Educational futures; Tests; Quality; Multiple choice questions; Assessment;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
If MOOCs are to play a role in the future of higher education it is imperative that we critically examine how they are currently functioning. In particular, questions persist about the role MOOCs will play in the future of formal accredited learning. As the focus turns from informal and free to formal, accredited and paid, greater scrutiny will be brought to bear on the quality of the courses themselves. Although there have been some empirical studies into the quality of MOOCs, a notable gap exists in that such research has not examined Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) which are a key component of much MOOC assessment and testing. Previous research suggests that flawed MCQ items may compromise the reliability and validity of these assessments, potentially leading to inconsistent outcomes for students. This study was hence designed to examine MCQ quality in MOOCs. 204 MCQs were analysed, from a selection of 18 MOOCs, sampling the domains of computing, social science and health sciences. Over 50% of MCQs (112) contained at least one item flaw; 57 MCQs contained multiple flaws. A large proportion of MOOC MCQs violated item-writing guidelines, which is comparable with previous studies examining the prevalence of flaws in assessments in more traditional educational contexts. The problem of low quality MCQs can be ameliorated by appropriate faculty training and pre- and post-test quality checks. These activities are essential if MOOCs are to become a force that can enable enhanced and improved pedagogies in the future of higher education, instead of simply proceeding to replicate existing poor practices at scale.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 104 条
  • [21] De Champlain AF(2015)In search of quality: Using quality matters to analyze the quality of massive, open, online courses (MOOCs) The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 16 83-13
  • [22] Del Mar Sánchez-Vera M(2015)Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs) Computers & Education 80 77-8
  • [23] Prendes-Espinosa MP(2017)Is peer review an appropriate form of assessment in a MOOC? Student participation and performance in formative peer review Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 42 1000-12
  • [24] DiSantis DJ(2015)A systematic assessment of ‘none of the Above’on multiple choice tests in a first year psychology classroom The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 6 2-49
  • [25] Ayoob AR(2016)Do item-writing flaws reduce examinations psychometric quality? BMC Research Notes 9 399-979
  • [26] Williams LE(2005)Three options are optimal for multiple-choice items: A meta-analysis of 80 years of research Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 24 3-568
  • [27] Downing S(2016)Technical flaws in multiple-choice questions in the access exam to medical specialties (“examen MIR”) in Spain (2009–2013) BMC Medical Education 16 1-S24
  • [28] Downing SM(2013)Assessment's place in the new MOOC world Research & practice in assessment 8 5-671
  • [29] Downing SM(1996)A closer look at cueing effects in multiple-choice questions Medical Education 30 44-363
  • [30] Epstein RM(2004)Different written assessment methods: What can be said about their strengths and weaknesses? Medical Education 38 974-206