Using computer-based technology to improve feedback to staff and students on MCQ assessments

References

• Adcroft, A. (2011). The mythology of feedback. Higher Education Research & Development, 30, 405–419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university (3rd ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press, McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 219–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crisp, G. T., & Palmer, E. J. (2007). Engaging academics with a simplified analysis of their multiple-choice question (MCQ) assessment results. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 4, 88–106.
   Google Scholar
• Downing, S. M. (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. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 10, 133–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fish, W. W., & Wickersham, L. E. (2009). Best practices for online instructors. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10, 279–284.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 32, 271–283.
   Google Scholar
• Gill, D., Heins, M., & Jones, P. (1984). Perceptions of medical school faculty members and students on clinical clerkship feedback. Journal of Medical Education, 59, 856–864.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hays, R. (2008). Assessment in medical education: Roles for clinical medical educators. The Clinical Teacher, 5, 23–27.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins, R. A., & Hartley, P. (2002). The conscientious consumer: Reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 54–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins, R. A., Hartley, P., & Skeleton, A. (2001). Getting the message across: The problem of communicating assessment feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 6, 269–274.
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, K., & Papageorgiou, G. (2009). Good, bad and insufficient: Students’ expectations, perceptions and uses of feedback. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 8, 85–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland, P. (2000). Learning from feedback on assessment. In P. Hyland, & A. Booth (Eds.), The practice of university history teaching (pp. 233–247). Manchester, NH: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knight, P., & Yorke, M. (2003). Assessment, learning and employability. Maidenhead: SRHE/Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Malau-Aduli, B. S., & Zimitat, C. (2011). Peer review improves the quality of MCQ examinations. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2011.586991.
   Google Scholar
• Malau-Aduli, B. S., Zimitat, C., & Malau-Aduli, A. E. O. (2011). Quality assured assessment processes: Evaluating staff response to change. Journal of Higher Education Management & Policy, 23, 105–127.
   Google Scholar
• McCoubrie, P. (2007). Innovation in medical education: More than meets the eye. The Clinical Teacher, 4, 51–54.
   Google Scholar
• Mory, E. (2004). Feedback research revisited. In D. Jonassen, N. J. Mahwah, & L. Erlbaum (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulos, A., & Mahony, M. J. (2008). Effectiveness of feedback: The students’ perspective. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 143–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Precht, D., Hazlett, C., Yip, S., & Nicholls, J. (2003). Item analysis user’s guide. Hong Kong: International Database for Enhanced Assessments and Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• SAS. (2009). SAS institute North Carolina USA v. 9.1.
   Google Scholar
• Smyth, K. (2004). The benefits of students learning about critical evaluation rather than being summatively judged. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29, 369–378.
   Google Scholar
• Tarrant, M., Ware, J., & Mohammed, A. M. (2009). An assessment of functioning and non-functioning distractors in multiple-choice questions: A descriptive analysis. BMC Medical Education, 9, 40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vahalia, K. V., Subramaniam, K., Marks, S. C. J., & De Souza, E. J. (1995). The use of multiple-choice tests in anatomy: Common pitfalls and how to avoid them. Clinical Anatomy, 8, 61–65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vickerman, P. (2009). Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: An attempt to deepen learning? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34, 221–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar