Acceptance and Accuracy of Multiple Choice, Confidence-Level, and Essay Question Formats for Graduate Students

References

• Becker, W. E., & Johnston, C. (1999). The relationship between multiple choice and essay response questions in assessing economics understanding. The Economic Record, 75 348-357.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., & Wang, M. (1991). Equivalence of free-response and multiple choice items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28(1), 77-92.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno, J. E. (1986). Assessing the knowledge base of students: An information theoretic approach to testing. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 18 116-130.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno, J. E., Holland, J. R., & Ward, J. W. (1988). Enhancing academic support services for special action students: An application of information referenced testing. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 2(1), 5-13.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno, J. E., & Dirkzwager, A. (1995). Determining the optimal number of alternatives to a multiple-choice test item: An information theoretic perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55 959-966.
   Google Scholar
• Conderman, G. (2001). Program evaluation: Using multiple assessment methods to promote authentic student learning and circular change. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24 391-394.
   Google Scholar
• Haladyna, T. M. (1999). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, J. D. (1997). Quality multiple-choice test questions: Item-writing guidelines and an analysis of auditing testbanks. Journal of Education for Business, 73 94-97.
   Google Scholar
• Hassman, P., & Hunt, D. P. (1994). Human self-assessment in multiple-choice testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 31 149-160.
   Google Scholar
• Larson, E. D. (2003). An analysis of information referenced testing as an air force assessment tool. Unpublished master's thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, OH.
   Google Scholar
• Madaus, G. F., & O'Dwyer, L. M. (1999). A short history of performance assessment: Lessons learned. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 688-695.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, H. G., Williams, R. G., & Haladyna, T. M. (1978). Beyond facts: Objective ways to measure thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pomplun, M., & Omar, M. D. H. (1997). Multiple-mark items: An alternative objective item format? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 949-962.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, J. L. (1989). How well do tests measure real reading? Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 306552)
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, W. T., & Harley, D. (1999). An empirical comparison of three and four choice items and tests: Susceptibility to testwiseness and internal consistency reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 234-247.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, W. T., & Ndalichako, J. (1997). Comparison of finite state score theory, classical test theory, and item response theory in scoring multiple-choice items. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 580-589.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, W. T., & Ndalichako, J. (2000). Number-right, item-response, and finite-states scoring: Robustness with respect to lack of equally classifiable option and item option independence. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 5-9.
   Google Scholar
• Sidick, J. T., Barrett, G. V., & Doverspike, D. (1994). Three-alternative multiple choice tests: An attractive option. Personnel Psychology, 47, 829-835.
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A. (1964). On the optimal number of alternatives of a choice point. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 386-391.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, W. C. (1998). Linked multiple-choice questions: The tradeoff between measurement accuracy and grading time. Journal of Education for Business, 74, 83-86.
   Google Scholar