Constructive multiple-choice testing system

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 41, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1054-1064

  Park, Jooyong ^a  

^a Seoul National University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLLEGE STUDENTS; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; FIFTH-GRADE STUDENTS; TESTING SYSTEMS; TESTING TIME;

INSTRUMENTS; STUDENTS;

TEACHING;

EID: 78349294498     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01058.x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Ackerman, T., &, Smith, P. L., (1988). A comparison of the information provided by essay, multiple-choice, and free-response writing tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12, 2, 117-128.
2. Bennett, R. E., (1993). On the meanings of constructed response. In, R. E. Bennett, &, W.C. Ward, (Eds), Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement: issues in constructed response, performance testing, and portfolio assessment (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Inc.
3. Birenbaum, M., &, Tatuoka, K. K., (1987). Open-ended versus multiple-choice response formats-It does make a difference for diagnostic purposes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 385-395.
4. Black, P., (1995). Can teachers use assessment to improve learning? British Journal of Curriculum & Assessment, 5, 2, 7-11.
5. Black, P., &, Wiliam, D., (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 1, 7-73.
6. Bridgeman, B., (1992). A comparison of quantitative questions in open-ended and multiple-choice format. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 253-271.
7. Cunningham, G. K., (2005). Must high stakes mean low quality? Some testing program implementation issues. In, R. P. Phelps, (Ed.), Defending standardized testing (pp. 123-146). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
8. Downing, S. M., (2006). Selected-response item formats in test development. In, S. M. Downing, &, T. M. Haladyna, (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 287-301). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Earl, L. M., (2003). Assessment as learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
10. Foos, P. W., &, Fisher, R. P., (1988). Using tests as learning opportunities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 2, 179-183.
11. Gay, L., (1980). The comparative effects of multiple-choice versus open-ended on retention. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17, 45-50.
12. Glover, J. A., (1989). The 'testing' phenomenon: not gone but nearly forgotten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 3, 392-399.
13. Heim, A. W., &, Watts, K. P., (1967). An experiment on multiple-choice versus open-ended answering in a vocabulary test. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 37, 339-346.
14. Katz, I. R., Bennett, R. E., &, Berger, A. E., (2000). Effects of response format on difficulty of SAT-Mathematics items: it's not the strategy. Journal of Educational Measurement, 37, 1, 39-57.
15. Koretz, D. M., &, Hamilton, L. S., (2006). Testing for accountability in K-12. In, R. Brennan, (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed.). (pp. 531-578). Westport, CT: Preager Publishers.
16. Lane, S., &, Stone, C. A., (2006). Performance assessment. In, R. Brennan, (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed.) (pp. 387-431). Westport, CT: Preager Publishers.
17. McTighe, J., &, Ferrara, S., (1998). Assessing learning in the classroom. Washington D.C.: National Education Association.
18. Martinez, M. E., (1991). A comparison of multiple-choice and constructed response figural response items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 131-145.
19. Messick, S., (1993). Trait equivalence as construct validity of score interpretation across multiple methods of measurement. In, R. E. Bennett, &, W.C. Ward, (Eds), Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement: issues in constructed response, performance testing, and portfolio assessment (pp. 61-73). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Inc.
20. Park, J., (2005). Learning in a new computerized testing system. Journal of Educational Psychology., 11, 385-395.
21. Parshall, C. G., Davey, T., &, Pashley, P. J., (2000). Innovative item types for computerized testing. In, W. J. Van Der Linden, &, C. A. W. Glas, (Eds), Computerized adaptive testing: theory and practice (pp. 129-148). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
22. Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., &, Glaser, R., (2001). Knowing what students know. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
23. Rodriguez, M. C., (2002). Choosing an item format. In, G. Tindal, &, T. M. Haladyna, (Eds), Large-scale assessment programs for all students: validity, technical adequacy, and implementation (pp. 213-231). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Rodriguez, M. C., (2003). Construct equivalence of multiple-choice and constructed-response items: a random effects synthesis of correlations. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 2, 163-184.
25. Roediger, H. L., &, Karpicke, J. D., (2006). The power of testing memory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 3, 181-210.
26. Ruch, G. M., &, Stoddard, G. D., (1925). Comparative reliabilities of five types of objective examinations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 16, 89-103.
27. Scalise, K., &, Gifford, B., (2006). Computer-based assessment in E-learning: a framework for constructing 'intermediate constraint- questions and tasks for technology platforms. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessement, 4, 6. Retrieved January 5, 2007, from
28. Shepard, L. A., (1996). Measuring achievement: what does it mean to test for robust understanding? The third Angoff Memorial Lecture. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services. Retrieved June 14, 2008, from
29. Shepard, L. A., (2006). Classroom assessment. In, R. Brennan, (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed.), (pp. 623-646). Westport, CT: Preager Publishers.
30. Sireci, S. G., &, Zenisky, A. L., (2006). Innoviative item formats in computer-based testing: in pursuit of construct representation. In, S. M. Downing, &, T. M. Haladyna, (Eds), Handbook of test development (pp. 329-347). Westport, CT: Preager Publishers.
31. Snow, R., (1993). Construct validity and constructed response tests. In, R. E. Bennett, &, W. C. Ward, (Eds), Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement: issues in constructed response, performance testing, and portfolio assessment (pp. 45-60). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Inc.
32. Stevens, R., Ikeda, J., Casillas, A., Palacio-Cayetano, J., &, Clyman, S., (1999). Artificial neural network-based performance assessments. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 295-313.
33. Traub, R. E., &, Fisher, C. W., (1977). On the equivalence of constructed-response and multiple-choice test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 355-369.
34. Vendlinski, T., &, Stevens, R., (2002). A Markov model analysis of problem-solving progress and transfer. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 1, 3. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from.
35. Wainer, H., &, Thissen, D., (1993). Combining multiple-choice and constructed-response test scores: toward a Marxist theory of test construction. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 103-118.