Construction of Multiple Choice Questions Before and After An Educational Intervention
none
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31729/jnma.2976Keywords:
Keywords: Faculty development; Medical education; Multiple choice questions.Abstract
Introduction: Khesar Gyalpo University of Medical Sciences of Bhutan, established in 2014, has ushered in a new era in medical education in Bhutan. Multiple Choice Questions are a common means of written assessment in medical education.
Methods: This was a quasi-experimental study conducted at the Faculty of Postgraduate Medicine, KGUMSB, Thimphu in December 2016. A total of 8 MCQs were prepared by four teaching faculties from different fields who had no prior training on construction of MCQs. It was delivered to a group of 16 randomly selected intern doctors. A 2 hours long workshop on construction of MCQs was conducted. After the workshop, the same MCQs were modified according to standard guidelines on developing MCQs and were tested in the same group of intern doctors. An analysis on the performance, difficulty factor, discrimination index and distractor analysis was done on the two sets of MCQs using Microsoft Excel and SPSS 20.0.
Results: For the pre- and post-workshop questions respectively, the pass percentage was 69.8% (11) and 81.3% (13), difficulty factor was 0.51 and 0.53, discrimination index was 0.59 and 0.47, distractor effectiveness was 83.3% and 74.9%.
Conclusions: The workshop on MCQ development apparently seemed highly valuable and effective in changing the learning and performances of medical educators in the development of MCQs.
Keywords: difficulty factor; discrimination index; faculty development; medical education.
References
2. Abdel-Hameed AA, Al-Faris EA, Alorainy IA. The criteria and analysis of good multiple choice questions in a health professional setting. Saudi Med J. 2005;26(10):1505-10. [Full Text | PubMed]
3. DiBattista D, Kurzawa L. Examination of the quality of multiple-choice items on classroom tests. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2011;2(2):1-22. [Full Text]
4. Haladyna TM, Downing SM. Validity of a taxonomy of multiple choice item-writing rules. ApplMeasEduc. 2002;15(3):309-34. [Full Text]
5. Palmer EJ. Assessment of higher order cognitive skills in undergraduate education: modified essay or multiple choice questions? BMC Medical Education. 2007;7(49):1-7. [Full Text]
6. Abdulghani HM, Ahmad F, Irshad M, Khalil MS, Al-ShaikhGK , Syed S, et al. Faculty development programs improve the quality of multiple choice questions items’ writing. Scientific Reports. 2015;5(9556):1-7. [Full Text | PubMed]
7. Haladyna TM , Downing SM, Rodriguez MC. A Review of Multiple-Choice Item-Writing Guidelines for Classroom Assessment. ApplMeasEduc. 2002;15(3):309–34. [Full Text]
8. Medical Council of Canada. Guidelines for the development of multiple-choice questions. medical council of Canada. 2010. [Full Text]
9. Gajjar S, Sharma R, Kumar P, Rana M. Item and test analysis to identify quality multiple choice questions (MCQS) from an assessment of medical students Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Indian J Community Med. 2014;39:17-20. [Full Text |PubMed]
10. Sim SM, Rasiah RI. Relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in true/false-type multiple choice questions of a para-clinical multidisciplinary paper. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2006;35:67-71. [Full Text | PubMed]
11. Rao C, Kishan Prasad HL, Sajitha K, Permi H, Shetty J. Item analysis of multiple choice questions: assessing an assessment tool in medical students. Int J EducPsychol Res. 2016;2:201-4. [Full Text]
12. Mukherjee P, Lahiri SK. Analysis of multiple choice questions (MCQs): Item and test statistics from an assessment in a medical college of Kolkata, West Bengal. IOSR-JDMS. 2015;14(12):47-52. [Full Text]
13. Mitra N K. Nagaraja H S. Ponnudurai G. Judson J P. The levels of difficulty and discrimination indices in type A multiple choice questions of pre-clinical semester 1 multidisciplinary summative tests. IeJSME. 2009;3(1):2-7. [Full Text]
14. Abdulghani HM, Ahmad F, Ponnamperuma GG, Khalil MS, Aldrees A. The relationship between non-functioning distractors and item difficulty of multiple choice questions: A descriptive analysis. J Health Spec. 2014;2:148-51. [Full Text]
15. Tarrant M, Ware J, Mohammed AM. An assessment of functioning and non-functioning distractors in multiple-choice questions: a descriptive analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2009;9:40. [Full Text | PubMed]
16. Kehoe J. Writing multiple-choice test items. PARE. 1995;4:47-51. [Full Text]
17. Attali Y, Bar-Hillel M. Guess where: the position of correct answers in multiple-choice test items as a psychometric variable. J EducMeas. 2003;40(2):109-28. [Full Text]
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
JNMA allow to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose. The author(s) are allowed to retain publishing rights without restrictions. The JNMA work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. More about Copyright Policy.
