Cargando…

The don’t know option in progress testing

Formula scoring (FS) is the use of a don’t know option (DKO) with subtraction of points for wrong answers. Its effect on construct validity and reliability of progress test scores, is subject of discussion. Choosing a DKO may not only be affected by knowledge level, but also by risk taking tendency,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ravesloot, C. J., Van der Schaaf, M. F., Muijtjens, A. M. M., Haaring, C., Kruitwagen, C. L. J. J., Beek, F. J. A., Bakker, J., Van Schaik, J. P. J., Cate, Th. J. Ten
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4639571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25912621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9604-2
_version_ 1782399939483009024
author Ravesloot, C. J.
Van der Schaaf, M. F.
Muijtjens, A. M. M.
Haaring, C.
Kruitwagen, C. L. J. J.
Beek, F. J. A.
Bakker, J.
Van Schaik, J. P. J.
Cate, Th. J. Ten
author_facet Ravesloot, C. J.
Van der Schaaf, M. F.
Muijtjens, A. M. M.
Haaring, C.
Kruitwagen, C. L. J. J.
Beek, F. J. A.
Bakker, J.
Van Schaik, J. P. J.
Cate, Th. J. Ten
author_sort Ravesloot, C. J.
collection PubMed
description Formula scoring (FS) is the use of a don’t know option (DKO) with subtraction of points for wrong answers. Its effect on construct validity and reliability of progress test scores, is subject of discussion. Choosing a DKO may not only be affected by knowledge level, but also by risk taking tendency, and may thus introduce construct-irrelevant variance into the knowledge measurement. On the other hand, FS may result in more reliable test scores. To evaluate the impact of FS on construct validity and reliability of progress test scores, a progress test for radiology residents was divided into two tests of 100 parallel items (A and B). Each test had a FS and a number-right (NR) version, A-FS, B-FS, A-NR, and B-NR. Participants (337) were randomly divided into two groups. One group took test A-FS followed by B-NR, and the second group test B-FS followed by A-NR. Evidence for impaired construct validity was sought in a hierarchical regression analysis by investigating how much of the participants’ FS-score variance was explained by the DKO-score, compared to the contribution of the knowledge level (NR-score), while controlling for Group, Gender, and Training length. Cronbach’s alpha was used to estimate NR and FS-score reliability per year group. NR score was found to explain 27 % of the variance of FS [F(1,332) = 219.2, p < 0.0005], DKO-score, and the interaction of DKO and Gender were found to explain 8 % [F(2,330) = 41.5, p < 0.0005], and the interaction of DKO and NR 1.6 % [F(1,329) = 16.6, p < 0.0005], supporting our hypothesis that FS introduces construct-irrelevant variance into the knowledge measurement. However, NR-scores showed considerably lower reliabilities than FS-scores (mean year-test group Cronbach’s alphas were 0.62 and 0.74, respectively). Decisions about FS with progress tests should be a careful trade-off between systematic and random measurement error.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4639571
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46395712015-11-12 The don’t know option in progress testing Ravesloot, C. J. Van der Schaaf, M. F. Muijtjens, A. M. M. Haaring, C. Kruitwagen, C. L. J. J. Beek, F. J. A. Bakker, J. Van Schaik, J. P. J. Cate, Th. J. Ten Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract Article Formula scoring (FS) is the use of a don’t know option (DKO) with subtraction of points for wrong answers. Its effect on construct validity and reliability of progress test scores, is subject of discussion. Choosing a DKO may not only be affected by knowledge level, but also by risk taking tendency, and may thus introduce construct-irrelevant variance into the knowledge measurement. On the other hand, FS may result in more reliable test scores. To evaluate the impact of FS on construct validity and reliability of progress test scores, a progress test for radiology residents was divided into two tests of 100 parallel items (A and B). Each test had a FS and a number-right (NR) version, A-FS, B-FS, A-NR, and B-NR. Participants (337) were randomly divided into two groups. One group took test A-FS followed by B-NR, and the second group test B-FS followed by A-NR. Evidence for impaired construct validity was sought in a hierarchical regression analysis by investigating how much of the participants’ FS-score variance was explained by the DKO-score, compared to the contribution of the knowledge level (NR-score), while controlling for Group, Gender, and Training length. Cronbach’s alpha was used to estimate NR and FS-score reliability per year group. NR score was found to explain 27 % of the variance of FS [F(1,332) = 219.2, p < 0.0005], DKO-score, and the interaction of DKO and Gender were found to explain 8 % [F(2,330) = 41.5, p < 0.0005], and the interaction of DKO and NR 1.6 % [F(1,329) = 16.6, p < 0.0005], supporting our hypothesis that FS introduces construct-irrelevant variance into the knowledge measurement. However, NR-scores showed considerably lower reliabilities than FS-scores (mean year-test group Cronbach’s alphas were 0.62 and 0.74, respectively). Decisions about FS with progress tests should be a careful trade-off between systematic and random measurement error. Springer Netherlands 2015-04-26 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4639571/ /pubmed/25912621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9604-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Ravesloot, C. J.
Van der Schaaf, M. F.
Muijtjens, A. M. M.
Haaring, C.
Kruitwagen, C. L. J. J.
Beek, F. J. A.
Bakker, J.
Van Schaik, J. P. J.
Cate, Th. J. Ten
The don’t know option in progress testing
title The don’t know option in progress testing
title_full The don’t know option in progress testing
title_fullStr The don’t know option in progress testing
title_full_unstemmed The don’t know option in progress testing
title_short The don’t know option in progress testing
title_sort don’t know option in progress testing
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4639571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25912621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9604-2
work_keys_str_mv AT raveslootcj thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT vanderschaafmf thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT muijtjensamm thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT haaringc thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT kruitwagencljj thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT beekfja thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT bakkerj thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT vanschaikjpj thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT catethjten thedontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT raveslootcj dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT vanderschaafmf dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT muijtjensamm dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT haaringc dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT kruitwagencljj dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT beekfja dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT bakkerj dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT vanschaikjpj dontknowoptioninprogresstesting
AT catethjten dontknowoptioninprogresstesting