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
[31]  
Freitas A(2006)Use of flawed multiple-choice items by the New England journal of medicine for continuing medical education Medical Teacher 28 566-543
[32]  
Paredes J(2008)Measurement characteristics of content-parallel single-best-answer and extended-matching questions in relation to number and source of options Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 83 S21-317
[33]  
Haladyna TM(2006)The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions used in high stakes nursing assessments Nurse Education in Practice 26 662-39
[34]  
Downing SM(2006)The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions used in high stakes nursing assessments Nurse Education in Practice 6 354-undefined
[35]  
Rodriguez MC(2008)Impact of item-writing flaws in multiple-choice questions on student achievement in high-stakes nursing assessments Medical Education 42 198-undefined
[36]  
Holsgrove G(2010)A comparison of the psychometric properties of three-and four-option multiple-choice questions in nursing assessments Nurse Education Today 30 539-undefined
[37]  
Elzubeir M(2009)An assessment of functioning and non-functioning distractors in multiple-choice questions: A descriptive analysis BMC Medical Education 9 40-undefined
[38]  
Jozefowicz RF(2005)Assessing professional competence: From methods to programmes Medical Education 39 309-undefined
[39]  
Koeppen BM(2015)Software-assisted identification and improvement of suboptimal multiple choice questions for medical student examination Health Science Journal 9 8-undefined
[40]  
Case S(2018)A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014–2016) The Internet and Higher Education 37 31-undefined