Like Gary, my "good" students perform well with either testing format and the same is true of my "weak" students. But when I check the actual correlation between MC and essay scores, the resulting values are usually between .4 and .6 -- a modest association that could be attributed either to the fact that different skills are tapped by these two testing formats or to the reduced reliability associated with grading essay answers. I suspect that both attributions are valid. To be fair to the students, I usually try to provide both objective test items (MC, true/false) and essay "items" (short-answer questions, assigned papers), so that the specific skills associated with each testing format carry significant weight in the course grade. But as the course size increases, I feel I am forced to emphasize the objective format -- mainly because the task of grading written work becomes overwhelming when the class size approaches 100 or more. --Dave
Gerald Peterson wrote: > I have found strong positive associations between the multiple choice tests I > develop and short essay homework assignments. Those who can't answer real > multiple choice (NOT just regurgitation type) questions also do not know the > material well enough for essays. Just asking for recognition of the > definition of say "random assignment in an experiment" is usually easy, but > asking them in a short essay to explain the purpose of random assignment > requires more than just definitional information and can be tougher. Many of > my MC questions require recognition of examples or illustrations of concepts, > not just definitions. Of course, some might find it more difficult to > objectively grade essays, and some might use written assignments to curve or > otherwise soften up their grading. > My Asian students have trouble with language on the exams, but work hard > and often perform fine. Some of the top students right now in my classes are > from the Middle East or traditional students with brain injuries who are > working extra hard to compensate for their challenges. I know of other > systems around the world that require students to do their own studying and > then pass a couple of major exams in an area. Attending lectures are > optional. If these exams are objectively graded and require actual knowledge > or mastery of the material, I see no problem with that approach either. The > range of topics and depth of understanding can be assessed fine with MC > questions that would otherwise require an essay over each section or chapter. > I guess it depends on course objectives. I have no problem with either > approach. I have not encountered students who do poorly on MC tests but do > well on essays....unless the essays are just inviting BS and verbosity and > are graded for "effort". Gary > > Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D. > Professor, Psychology > Saginaw Valley State University > University Center, MI 48710 > 989-964-4491 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > -- -- ___________________________________________________________________ David E. Campbell, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Department of Psychology Phone: 707-826-3721 Office: 444 BSS Humboldt State University FAX: 707-826-4993 Arcata, CA 95521-8299 www.humboldt.edu/~campbell/psyc.htm <http://www.humboldt.edu/%7Ecampbell/psyc.htm> --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
