Quality assurance of item writing: During the introduction of multiple choice questions in medicine for high stakes examinations

Medical Teacher

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 238-243

  Ware, James ^a   Vik, Torstein ^b  

^a KUWAIT UNIVERSITY   (Kuwait)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS; ARTICLE; CURRICULUM; LEARNING; LICENSING; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL SCHOOL; MULTIPLE CHOICE TEST; NONHUMAN; QUALITY CONTROL; WRITING;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; EDUCATION, MEDICAL; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; NORWAY; QUALITY CONTROL; WRITING;

EID: 71149119779     PISSN: 0142159X     EISSN: 1466187X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01421590802155597     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Case S, Swanson DW. 2004. Item writing manual: Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences, National Board of Medical Examiners publications, retrieved in 2004, from: http://www.nbme.org/ aboutitem/writing.asp
2. Downing SM. 2003. Guessing on selected-response examinations. Med Educ 37:670-671.
3. Downing SM. 2005. The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: The consequences of using flawed items on achievement examinations in medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ 10:133-143.
4. Fremtidens speciallæge. 2000. Betenkning fram speciallæ gekommissionen. København: Sundhedsministeriet, pp 178-179.
5. Haladyna TM, Downing SM. 1989. Validity of taxonomy of multiple-choice item writing rules. Appl Meas Educ 2:51-78.
6. Haladyna TM, Downing SM. 1993. How many options is enough for a multiple-choice test item? Educ. Psychol Measure 53:999-1010.
7. Hegstad AC, Materstvedt LJ, Kaasa S. 2004. Undervisning i medisinsk etikk: Trondheims-modellen (Education in medical ethics: The Trondheim Model). Tidsskr Nor Lægeforen (J Norw Assoc) 124:2104-2106.
8. Irwin WG, Bamber JH. 1982. The cognitive structure of the modified essay question. Med Educ 16:326-331.
9. Jozefowicz RF, Koeppen BM, Case S, Galbrath R, Swanson D, Glew RH. 2002. The quality of in-house medical school examinations. Acad Med 77:156-161.
10. Osterlind SJ. 1998. Constructing test items. 2nd ed. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
11. Prideaux D, Gordon J. 2002. Can global co-operation enhance quality in medical education? Some lessons from an international assessment consortium in medical education. Med Educ 37:404-405.
12. Schuwirth LW, Van der Vleuten CP. 2003. ABC of learning and traching in medicine: Written Assessment. BMJ 326:643-645.
13. Tarrant M, Ware J. 2008. The impact of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions on student achievment in highy-stakes nursing assessments. Med Educ 43:198-206.
14. Tarrant M, Kneirim A, Hayes SK, Ware J. 2006. The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions in high stakes nursing examinations. Nurse Educ Today 26:662-671 (Pubitemid 44810567)