Analysis of MCQ and distractor use in a large first year Health Faculty Foundation Program: assessing the effects of changing from five to four options

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
File version

Version of Record (VoR)

Author(s)
Fozzard, Nicolette
Pearson, Andrew
du Toit, Eugene
Naug, Helen
Wen, William
Peak, Ian R
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2018
Size
File type(s)
Location
Abstract

Background: Multiple choice questions are commonly used in summative assessment. It is still common practice for tertiary institutions and accrediting bodies to use five-option single best answer multiple choice questions, despite a substantial body of evidence showing that multiple choice questions with only three or four options provide effective and discriminatory assessment.

Methods: In this study we investigated the distribution of distractor efficacy in exams from four large first-year undergraduate courses in chemistry and in anatomy and physiology in a Health Faculty; assessed the impact on overall student score after changing from five-option to four-option single best answer multiple choice questions; and assessed the impact of changing from five options to four options on item difficulty and discrimination.

Results: For the five-option questions analysed, 19% had four effective distractors, which is higher than previous studies, but still a minority of questions. After changing from five to four options, the overall student performance on all multiple choice questions was slightly lower in the second offering of one course, slightly higher in the second offering of another course, and similar in the second offering for two courses. For a subset of questions that were used in both offerings, there were negligible differences in item difficulty and item discrimination between offerings.

Conclusions: These results provide further evidence that five-option questions are not superior to four-option questions, with reduction to four options making little if any difference to overall performance, particularly when MCQ is used in conjunction with other assessment types (including short answer questions, and practical or laboratory assessment). Further areas of study that arise from these findings are: to investigate the reasons for resistance to changing established assessment practice within institutions and by accrediting bodies; and to analyse student perceptions of the impact of a reduced number of options in MCQ-based assessment.

Journal Title

BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume

18

Issue
Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement

© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject

Curriculum and pedagogy

Education assessment and evaluation

Clinical sciences

Specialist studies in education

Persistent link to this record
Citation
Collections