Análisis de la calidad de exámenes de alternativa múltiple a través de la teoría de respuesta al item: aplicación en la asignatura de “Evaluación Psicològica”

  1. Jesús Castro-Calvo 1
  2. Diana Pons-Cañaveras 1
  3. Patricia Beltrán-Martínez 1
  4. Francisco Atienza González 1
  5. Ascensión Bellver-Pérez 1
  6. Usue De la Barrera-Marzal 1
  7. Amelia Díaz-Martínez 1
  8. Alicia Juan-Hidalgo 1
  9. Laura Lacomba-Trejo 1
  10. Adriana Mira-Pastor 1
  11. Estefanía Mónaco-Gerónimo 1
  12. Inmaculada Montoya-Castilla 1
  13. Konstanze Schoeps 1
  14. Castora Silva-Silva 1
  15. Maja E. Wrzesien 1
  1. 1 Universitat de València, España
Book:
In-Red 2022. VIII Congreso nacional de innovación educativa y docencia en red
  1. García Sabater, José Pedro; (dir. congr.)
  2. Cano Escribá, Juan Carlos (dir. congr.)

Publisher: edUPV, Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València ; Universitat Politècnica de València

ISBN: 9788413960173

Year of publication: 2022

Pages: 379-391

Congress: Congreso de Innovación Educativa y Docencia en Red (8. 2022. null)

Type: Conference paper

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

Abstract

Multiple Choice testing (MCT) is one of the most popular approaches to the assessment of knowledge acquisition. Preparing a MCT is complex; however, its metric quality (in terms of difficulty, discrimination capacity, or distractors effectiveness) is not usually assessed. “Item Response Theory" (IRT) is a statistical approach that may assist when evaluating the quality of a MCT. IRT lets to estimate indices that may be used later as a way to improve thequality of the assessment. The aim of this work was to present the results of a teaching innovation project in which the IRT was employed to analyze the MCT used during the last 3 courses in the subject «Psychological Evaluation» (Degree in Speech Therapy). Results suggested that a significant proportion of the questions analyzed presented certain limitations, such as the excessive prevalence of easy items (between 45%-67.5%) or ineffective distractors (between 17.5%-26.6%). Yet, these issues did not impact the discrimination capacity of the MCT. These results serve as a basis for proposing initiatives to improve evaluations through MCT, which ultimately will result in a fairer and more balanced evaluation of the students of the subject.

Data source: Dialnet