649
Views
15
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Crowdsourcing for assessment items to support adaptive learning

, , , , , & show all

References

  • Baños JH, Pepin ME, Van Wagoner N. 2017. Class-wide access to a commercial step 1 question bank during preclinical organ-based modules. Acad Med. 93:486–490.
  • Crocker L, Algina J. 1986. Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Princeton (NJ): ERIC.
  • DeFilippis EM, Jaigirdar T, Gaglani SM, Sakumoto M, Punwani V, Desai R, … Painter M. 2015. Open osmosis: Library of Open Educational Resources (OER) for medical education. Innov Global Health Prof Educ. [accessed 2018 Jul 10]. DOI:10.20421/ighpe2015.3.
  • Downing SM. 2005. 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. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 10:133–143.
  • Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT. 2013. Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 14:4–58.
  • Gierl MJ, Lai H. 2018. Using automatic item generation to create solutions and rationales for computerized formative testing. Appl Psychol Meas. 42:42–57.
  • Gooi ACC, Sommerfeld CS. 2015. Medical school 2.0: how we developed a student-generated question bank using small group learning. Med Teach. 37:892–896.
  • Haladyna TM. 2016. Handbook of test development. New York (NY): Routledge. Chapter 20, Item analysis for selected-response test items; p. 392–409.
  • Haynes MR, Gaglani S, Wilcox M, Mitchell T, DeLeon V, Goldberg H. 2014. Learning through Osmosis: a collaborative platform for medical education. Innov Global Med Health Educ. (2):1–8.
  • Jobs A, Twesten C, Göbel A, Bonnemeier H, Lehnert H, Weitz G. 2013. Question-writing as a learning tool for students – outcomes from curricular exams. BMC Med Educ. 13:89.
  • Jozefowicz RF, Koeppen BM, Case S, Galbraith R, Swanson D, Glew RH. 2002. The quality of in-house medical school examinations. Acad Med. 77:156–161.
  • Palmer E, Devitt P. 2006. Constructing multiple choice questions as a method for learning. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 35:604–608.
  • Paniagua M, Swygert K. (2016). Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences. In: Paniagua M, Swygert K, editors. Director. 4th ed. Philadelphia (PA): NBME.
  • Papinczak T, Peterson R, Babri AS, Ward K, Kippers V, Wilkinson D. 2012. Using student-generated questions for student-centred assessment. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 37:414–439.
  • Poot R, de Kleijn RAM, van Rijen HVM, van Tartwijk J. 2017. Students generate items for an online formative assessment: is it motivating? Med Teach. 39:315–320.
  • Roediger HL, Putnam AL, Smith MA. 2011. Ten benefits of testing and their applications to educational practice. In: Mestre J, Ross BH, editors. Psychology of learning and motivation - advances in research and theory. Vol. 55. Oxford (UK): Elsevier; p. 1–36.
  • Rudner LM. 2007. Implementing the Graduate Management Admission Test® computerized adaptive test. In: Weiss DJ, editor. Proceedings of the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing. p. 1–15.
  • Schwartz LF, Lineberry M, Park YS, Kamin CS, Hyderi AA. 2018. Development and evaluation of a student-initiated test preparation program for the USMLE step 1 examination. Teach Learn Med. 30:193–201.
  • Stagnaro-Green AS, Downing SM. 2006. Use of flawed multiple-choice items by the New England Journal of Medicine for continuing medical education. Med Teach. 28:566–568.
  • Vanderbilt AA, Feldman M, Wood IK. 2013. Assessment in undergraduate medical education: a review of course exams. Med Educ Online. 18:1–5.
  • Walsh JL, Harris BHL, Denny P, Smith P. 2017. Formative student-authored question bank: perceptions, question quality and association with summative performance. Postgrad Med J. 94:97–103.
  • Walsh J, Harris B, Tayyaba S, Harris D, Smith P. 2016. Student- written single- best answer questions predict performance in finals. Clin Teach. 13:352–356.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.