1. Designing a Classroom Test Anthony Paolo, PhD Director of Assessment & Evaluation Office of Medical Education & Psychometrician for CTC Teaching & Learning Technologies September 2008

2. Content Purpose of classroom test Test blueprint & specifications Item writing Assembling the test Item analysis

3. Purpose of Classroom Test Establish basis for assigning grades Determine how well each student has achieved course objectives Diagnose student problems Identify areas where instruction needs improvement Motivate students to study Communicate what material is important

4. Test Blueprint To ensure the test assesses what you want to measure Ensure the test assesses the level or depth of learning you want to measure

5. Bloom’s Revised Cognitive Taxonomy Remembering & Understanding –Remembering: Retrieving, recognizing, recalling relevant knowledge. –Understanding: Constructing meaning from information through interpreting, classifying, summarizing, inferring, explaining. ITEM TYPES: MC, T/F, Matching, Short Answer Applying & Analyzing –Applying: Implementing a procedure or process. –Analyzing: Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose through differentiating, organizing, and attributing. ITEM TYPES: MC, Short Answer, Problems, Essay Evaluating & Creating –Evaluating: Making judgments based on criteria & standards through checking and critiquing. –Creating: Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements into a new pattern or structure through generating, planning, or producing. ITEM TYPES: MC, Essay

6. Test Blueprint Learning Level (Number of test items) Content/ Objective Knows facts (Recall) UnderstandingApplies Principles (Application) Total Kreb Cycle 35210 Aquaporins 22410 Cell Types 5005 Total107825

7. Test Specifications To ensure the test covers the content and/or objectives in the proper proportions

8. Test Specifications TopicsTime spent on Topic % of total class time Number (%) of test items Kreb Cycle 10 hrs40%10 (40%) Aquaporins 10 hrs40%10 (40%) Cell Types 5 hrs20%5 (20%) Total25 hrs100%25 (100%)

9. Item Writing – General Guidelines 1 Present a single clearly defined problem that is based on a significant concept rather then trivial or esoteric ideas Use simple, precise & unambiguous wording Exclude extraneous or irrelevant information Eliminate any systematic pattern of answers that may allow guessing correctly

10. Item Writing – General Guidelines 2 Avoid cultural, racial, ethnic & sexual bias. Avoid presupposed knowledge which favors one group over another (“fly ball” favors those that know baseball) Refrain from providing unnecessary clues to the correct answer. Avoid negatively phrased items (i.e., except, not) Arrange answers in alphabetical / numerical order

11. Item Writing – General Guidelines 3 Avoid “None of the above” or “All of the above” type answers Avoid “Both A & B” or “Neither A or B” type answers

12. Item Writing – Correct Answer is Longer More qualified or more general Uses familiar phraseology Is grammatically correct for item stem Is 1 of the 2 similar statements Is 1 of the 2 opposite statements

13. Item Writing – Wrong Answer is Usually the first or last option Contain extreme words (always, never, nonsense, etc.) Contain unexpected language or technical terms Contain flippant remarks or completely unreasonable statements

14. Item Writing – Grammatical Cues

15. Item Writing – Logical Cues

16. Item Writing – Absolute Terms

17. Item Writing – Word Repeats

18. Item Writing – Vague Terms

20. Item Writing Effective test items match the desired depth of learning as directly as possible Applying & Analyzing Applying: Implementing a procedure or process. Analyzing: Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose through differentiating, organizing, and attributing. –ITEM TYPES: MC, Short Answer, Problems, Essay

21. Comparison of MC & Essay 1 EssayMC Depth of learning Can measure application and more complex outcomes. Poor for recall. Can be designed to measure application and more complex outcomes as well as recall. Item prepFewer test items, less prep time Relatively large number of items, more prep time Content sampling Limited, few itemsBroader content sampling

22. Comparison of MC & Essay 2 EssayMC EncouragementEncourages organization, integration & effective expression of ideas Encourages development of broad background of knowledge & abilities ScoringTime consuming, requires special measures for consistent results Easy to score with consistent results.

23. Item Writing - Application MC application of knowledge items tend to have long vignettes that require decisions. Case, et al. at the NBME investigated the impact of increasing levels of interpretation, analysis and synthesis required to answer a question on item performance. (Academic Medicine, 1996;71:528-530)

24. Item Writing - Application

27. Preparing & Assembling the Test Provide general directions –Time allowed (allow enough time to complete test) –How items are scored –How to record answers –How to record name /ID Arrange items systematically Provide adequate space for short answer and essay responses Placement of easier & harder items

28. Interpreting test scores Teachers High scores = good instruction Low scores = poor students Students High scores = smart, well-prepared Low scores = poor teaching, bad test

29. Interpreting test scores High scores too easy, only measured simple educational objectives, biased scoring, cheating, unintentional clues to right answers Low scores too hard, tricky questions, content not covered in class, grader bias, insufficient time to complete test

30. Item Analysis Main purpose of item analysis is to improve the test Analyze items to identify: Potential mistakes in scoring Ambiguous/tricky items Alternatives that do not work well Problems with time limits

31. Reliability The reliability of a test refers to the extent to which a test is likely to produce consistent results. Test-Retest Split-Half Internal consistency Reliability coefficients range from 0 (no reliability) to 1 (perfect reliability) Internal consistency usually measured by Kuder- Richardson 20 (KR-20) or Cronbach’s coefficient alpha

32. Internal Consistency Reliability High reliability means that the questions of the test tended to hang together. Students that answered a given question correctly were more likely to answer other questions correctly. Low reliability means that the questions tended to be unrelated to each other in terms of who answered them correctly.

33. Reliability Coefficient Interpretation General guidelines for homogeneous tests.80 and above – Very good reliability.70 to.80 – Good reliability, a few test items may need to be improved.50 to.70 – Somewhat low, several items will likely need improvement (unless short test 15 or fewer items).50 and below – Questionable reliability, test likely needs revision

34. Item difficulty 1 Proportion of students that got the item correct (ranges from 0% to 100%) Helps evaluate if an item is suited to the level of examinee being tested. Very easy or very hard items cannot adequately discriminate between student performance levels. Spread of student scores is maximized with items of moderate difficulty.

35. Item difficulty 2 Moderate item difficulty is the point halfway between a perfect score and a chance score. Item format Moderate Difficulty level 4-option MC63% 5-option MC60% 10-option MC55%

36. Item discrimination 1 How well does the item separate those that know the material from those that do not. In LXR, measured by the Point-Biserial (rpb) correlation (ranges from -1 to 1). rbp is the correlation between item and exam performance

37. Item discrimination 2 + rpb means that those scoring higher on the exam were more likely to answer the item correctly. (better discrimination) - rpb means that high scorers on the exam answered the item wrong more frequently than low scorers. (poor discrimination) A desirable rpb correlation is +0.20 or higher.

38. Evaluation of Distractors Distractors are designed to fool those that do not know the material. Those that do not know the answer, guess among the choices. Distractors should be equally popular. (# expected = # answered item wrong / # of distractors) Distractors ideally have a low or -rpb

39. LXR Example 1 (* correct answer) A*BCDE N 860010 % 99%0% 1%0% Avg % Correct on Exam 85.3%0% 82.0%0% rpb +.06--------.06--- Very easy item, would probably review the alternates to make sure they are not ambiguous and/or provide clues that they are wrong.

40. LXR Example 2 (* correct answer) ABC*DE N 0216520 % 0%24%74%2%0% Avg % Correct on Exam 0%80.7%87.2%78.7%0% rpb ----.33+.36-.13--- Three of the alternatives are not functioning well, would review them.

41. LXR Example 3 (* correct answer) ABC*DE N3115566 %3%1%17%6%76% Avg % Correct on Exam 83.0%80.0%83.4%82.2%86.8% rpb-.07-.09-.15-.12+.23 Probably a miskeyed item. The correct answer is likely option E.

42. LXR Example 4 (* correct answer) AB*CDE N11433228 %13%49%3%25%9% Avg % Correct on Exam 81.5%87.4%82.3%84.5%82.4% rpb-.24+.35-.09-.08-.15 Relatively hard item with good discrimination. Would review alternatives C & D to see why they attract a relatively low & high number of students.

43. LXR Example 5 (* correct answer) AB*CDE N3601518 %3%69%1%6%21% Avg % Correct on Exam 83.0%85.3%80.0%82.2%86.8% rpb-.07+.002-.09-.12+.13 Poor discrimination for correct choice “B”. Choice “E” actually does a better job discriminating. Would review item for proper keying, ambiguous wording, proper wording of alternatives, etc. This item needs revision.

44. Resources Constructing Written Test Questions for the Basic and Clinic Sciences (www.nbme.org) How to Prepare Better Multiple-Choice Test Items: Guidelines for University Faculty (Brigham Young University: (testing.byu.edu/info/handbooks/betteritems.pdf)

45. Thank you for your time Questions ???