Test-Taker’s perception and academic performance in using confidence-weighted number right elimination testing (CWNRET) scoring method in multiple choice test
Abstract
The most common assessment tool in Higher Education and in most licensure examinations in the Philippines is the multiple-choice (MC) test. Thus, it is appropriate to device a tool on how teachers can help their students to analyze the items in an MC test better. The aim of this study is to determine the perception and test scores of the students in using Confidence-Weighted Number Right Elimination Testing (CWNRET) compared to Number Right (NR) and Number Right Elimination Testing (NRET) scoring method in answering an MC test. The researcher developed the Test-taker's Perception Inventory for the purpose of this study. Based on the results, this study showed that, generally, the perception of the students who used CWNRET is not significantly different from the perception of the students in using NRET and NR scoring methods. However, there is a significant increase in the students’ perception on their need to give extra effort when CWNRET scoring method is used in answering an MC test compared to NR scoring method. Although, perceived anxiety/ trickiness is also significantly higher when CWNRET scoring method was used compared to NR scoring method. This study also showed that even if the MC tests were completed using the convention scoring method, students who have undergone CWNRET have generally higher mean score compared to students who were trained to answer other scoring methods.
Downloads
References
Davies, P. (2002), “There’s no Confidence in Multiple-Choice Testing, . . . . . .” IN: Proceedings of 6th CAA Conference, Loughborough: Loughborough.
Lau, N. K., Lau, S. H., Hong, K. S., & Usop, H. (2011). Guessing, partial knowledge, and misconception in multiple-choice tests. Journal of Education Technology & Society, 14(4), 99–110.
Ling, J., & Cavers, M., (2015) Student-weighted multiple-choice tests. See also https://prism.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/handle/1880/50553/2015_Ling_and_Cavers_Paper.pdf?sequence=1
Pahayahay, G., & Cisneros-Pahayahay, M. R. (2017). Assessment of Students’ Metacognitive Awareness Level in College Algebra. Advanced Science Letters, 23(2), 1130-1133. doi:10.1166/asl.2017.7517
Rodil, M.S. (2014). Development and Validation of an Inventory that Measures Motivated Behavior in Chemistry. Journal of Education and Practice. 5 (34), 79-85.
Scouller, K. (1998) The influence of assessment method on students’ learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education. 35: 453–472. See also https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003196224280
Xu, X., Kauer, S., & Tupy, S. (2016). Multiple-choice questions: Tips for optimizing assessment in-seat and online. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 2(2), 147.
Yonker, J. E. (2011). The relationship of deep and surface study approaches on factual and applied test-bank multiple-choice question performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36: 673– 686.
Tarun, I. M., Gerardo, B. D., & Tanguilig, B. T., III. (2014). Generating Licensure Examination Performance Models Using PART and JRip Classifiers: A Data Mining Application in Education. International Journal of Computer and Communication Engineering, 3(3), 202-207. doi:10.7763/ijcce.2014.v3.320
Tozoglu D, Tozoglu MD, Gurses A, Dogar C (2004). The students' perceptions: Essay versus multiple choice type examination. J. Baltic Sci. Educ. 2(6): 52-59.
Watering, G. V., Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., & Rijt, J. V. (2008). Students’ assessment preferences, perceptions of assessment and their relationships to study results. Higher Education, 56(6): 645-658. See also doi:10.1007/s10734-008-9116-6
Zeidner M (1987). Essay versus multiple-choice type classroom examination: The students’ perspectives. J. Educ. Res. 80(6): 352-358.
.gif)
