| المستخلص: |
يدور البحث حول استخدام أسئلة اختيار من متعدد لتقييم الطلاب والذي يستخدم كثيرا في التعليم، مع العلم بأن هناك عدد قليل من الأساتذة المتمكنين من وضع هذا النوع من الأسئلة حيث يخطئ معظمهم عند كتابتها. - هدف هذه الدراسة هو حساب أنواع الأخطاء الموجودة في تكوين أسئلة الاختيار من متعدد لطلبة المرحلة الجامعية. - عينة الدراسة تتكون من 379 سؤال من نوع اختيار من متعدد لطلبة المرحلة الجامعية. - نتائج الدراسة: أسفرت نتائج هذه الدراسة عن أن النسبة الكلية للأخطاء هي 17.64%، كما أشارت إلى الأنواع التالية من الأخطاء: 1. وجود تفاصيل كثيرة في الإجابة الصحيحة بنسبة 80% 2. كل ما سبق بنسبة 75% 3. إجابة سلبية 35% 4. إجابة غير مقنعة بنسبة 28% 5. إجابة غير محددة بنسبة 30% وبعد دراسة هذه الأخطاء تم الاستنتاج بأن أنواع هذه العيوب الموجودة في هذا النوع من الامتحانات لها أثر سلبي على نتائج الطلبة
Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are frequently used to assess students in various educational disciplines. However, few educators have formal instruction in writing MCQs and MCQ items often have item-writing flaws. The purpose of this study was to examine the types of item-writing flaws in the construction of MCQs in an undergraduate curriculum and its possible correlation with the student scores. From a larger sample, we selected ten summative test papers with 379 items (MCQs) administered to the undergraduate students. All test items were reviewed for item-writing flaws and Items were classified as flawed if they contained one or more than one flaw. Items not containing item-writing violations were classified as standard. The data was statistically analyzed to obtain a possible correlation between the types of item writing flaws and the students’ scores. The proportion of flawed items out of 379 items ranged from 8% to 24%. Percentage of total flawed items was 17.64%. Most common types of flaws were 17% negative stem (n=33), 14% implausible distractors (n=27), 13% Extra Details in Correct options (n=26), 10% unfocused stem (n=20) and 8% All of the above (n=15) The mean difficulty index for items having flaws like extra detail in correct option was 80%, all of the above 75%, negative stem 35%, implausible distractors 28% and unfocused stem 30%. The results showed that the mean discrimination index for items having flaws like extra detail in correct option was 0.18, all of the above 0.21, negative stem 0.24, implausible distractors 0.12 and unfocused stem 0.19. The inferential statistics showed that results were significant ranging between p= 0.002 to 0.035. Comparing student scores for the flawed items revealed that different flaws had different negative effect on the student scores. This can be concluded that types of item flaws have adverse effect on student scores. Flawed MCQ items are common in high-stakes assessments but do not disadvantage borderline students, as has been previously demonstrated. Regular faculty training for constructing efficient Multiple choice tests keeping the course objectives in mind and review of test papers for presence of item writing flaws before administering the test will possibly improve the chances for accurate assessment based on the designed course objectives
|
