4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development of a New Scoring System To Accurately Estimate Learning Outcome Achievements via Single, Best-Answer, Multiple-Choice Questions for Preclinical Students in a Medical Microbiology Course †

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          During the preclinical years, single-best-answer multiple-choice questions (SBA-MCQs) are often used to test the higher-order cognitive processes of medical students (such as application and analysis) while simultaneously assessing lower-order processes (like knowledge and comprehension). Consequently, it can be difficult to pinpoint which learning outcome has been achieved or needs improvement. We developed a new scoring system for SBA-MCQs using a step-by-step methodology to evaluate each learning outcome independently. Enrolled in this study were third-year medical students ( n = 316) who had registered in the basic microbiology course at the Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University during the academic year 2017. A step-by-step SBA-MCQ with a new scoring system was created and used as a tool to evaluate the validity of the traditional SBA-MCQs that assess two separate outcomes simultaneously. The scores for the two methods, in percentages, were compared using two different questions (SBA-MCQ1 and SBA-MCQ2). SBA-MCQ1 tested the students’ knowledge of the causative agent of a specific infectious disease and the basic characteristics of the microorganism, while SBA-MCQ2 tested their knowledge of the causative agent of a specific infectious disease and the pathogenic mechanism of the microorganism. The mean score obtained with the traditional SBA-MCQs was significantly lower than that obtained with the step-by-step SBA-MCQs (85.9% for the traditional approach versus 90.9% for step-by-step SBA-MCQ1; p < 0.001; and 81.5% for the traditional system versus 87.4% for step-by-step SBA-MCQ2; p < 0.001). Moreover, 65.8% and 87.8% of the students scored lower with the traditional SBA-MCQ1 and the traditional SBA-MCQ2, respectively, than with the corresponding sets of step-by-step SBA-MCQ questions. These results suggest that traditional SBA-MCQ scores need to be interpreted with caution because they have the potential to underestimate the learning achievement of students. Therefore, the step-by-step SBA-MCQ is preferable to the traditional SBA-MCQs and is recommended for use in examinations during the preclinical years.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Biology in bloom: implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology.

          We developed the Blooming Biology Tool (BBT), an assessment tool based on Bloom's Taxonomy, to assist science faculty in better aligning their assessments with their teaching activities and to help students enhance their study skills and metacognition. The work presented here shows how assessment tools, such as the BBT, can be used to guide and enhance teaching and student learning in a discipline-specific manner in postsecondary education. The BBT was first designed and extensively tested for a study in which we ranked almost 600 science questions from college life science exams and standardized tests. The BBT was then implemented in three different collegiate settings. Implementation of the BBT helped us to adjust our teaching to better enhance our students' current mastery of the material, design questions at higher cognitive skills levels, and assist students in studying for college-level exams and in writing study questions at higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. From this work we also created a suite of complementary tools that can assist biology faculty in creating classroom materials and exams at the appropriate level of Bloom's Taxonomy and students to successfully develop and answer questions that require higher-order cognitive skills.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A Review of Multiple-Choice Item-Writing Guidelines for Classroom Assessment

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: the consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education.

              The purpose of this research was to study the effects of violations of standard multiple-choice item writing principles on test characteristics, student scores, and pass-fail outcomes. Four basic science examinations, administered to year-one and year-two medical students, were randomly selected for study. Test items were classified as either standard or flawed by three independent raters, blinded to all item performance data. Flawed test questions violated one or more standard principles of effective item writing. Thirty-six to sixty-five percent of the items on the four tests were flawed. Flawed items were 0-15 percentage points more difficult than standard items measuring the same construct. Over all four examinations, 646 (53%) students passed the standard items while 575 (47%) passed the flawed items. The median passing rate difference between flawed and standard items was 3.5 percentage points, but ranged from -1 to 35 percentage points. Item flaws had little effect on test score reliability or other psychometric quality indices. Results showed that flawed multiple-choice test items, which violate well established and evidence-based principles of effective item writing, disadvantage some medical students. Item flaws introduce the systematic error of construct-irrelevant variance to assessments, thereby reducing the validity evidence for examinations and penalizing some examinees.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                J Microbiol Biol Educ
                JMBE
                Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
                American Society of Microbiology
                1935-7877
                1935-7885
                2020
                28 February 2020
                : 21
                : 1
                : 21.1.4
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
                [2 ]Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
                [3 ]Department of Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
                [4 ]Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Department of Research and Development, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
                [5 ]Department of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 16150 Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wang Lang Rd., Siriraj, Bangkok Noi, Bangkok 10700, Thailand. Phone: +66 2 419 7053. Fax: +66 2 418 4148. E-mail: popchai.nga@ 123456mahidol.ac.th .
                Article
                jmbe-21-4
                10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.1773
                7048397
                10279683-4aca-494e-87db-f4f0deb261d9
                ©2020 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.

                History
                : 18 February 2019
                : 20 November 2019
                Categories
                Research

                Comments

                Comment on this article