Practicality and robustness of number right elimination testing (NRET) for multiple-choice items in paper-and-pencil testing (PPT) and computer-based testing (CBT)
{ Number Right (NR) method is the conventional form of scoring multiple-choice items where one point is awarded for the correct answer and no point for incorrect answer. Although commonly used, it has been criticized for failure to credit partial knowledge and encourage guessing. This study develop...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2010
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://ir.unimas.my/id/eprint/36806/1/Lau%20Sie%20Hoe.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | { Number Right (NR) method is the conventional form of scoring multiple-choice items where one point is awarded for the correct answer and no point for incorrect
answer. Although commonly used, it has been criticized for failure to credit partial knowledge and encourage guessing. This study developed, implemented and assessed the practicality and the robustness of Number Right El imination
Testing (NRET) method in scoring multiple-choice items. NRET method is a hybrid of two existing scoring method; Number Right (NR) and Elimination Testing (ET). System approach model designed by Dick and Carey (200 I) was employed to develop the NRET method. NRET method was implemented in both
Paper-and-Pencil Testing (PPT) and Computer-Based Testing (CBT) mode via a web based Computer-Adaptive Assessment Software (CAAS) which is available at http://caa.bestservices.com.my) Quasi-experimental research design was employed to determine the practicality and the robustness of NRET method in scoring multiple-choice items. The study conducted in the year 2008 involved 1145 Form Two students and 41 teachers in 30 secondary schools throughout
Sarawak in Malaysia. The findings from this study provided some positive and encouraging results on the practically and robustness of NRET method in scoring multiple-choice items. The resuhs of the application of NRET method for both
PPT and CBT mode showed similar results. Generally, NRET method was found to be practical and acceptable by both students and teachers. Nevertheless, the CRT students and teachers were more rcccpt ive toward N RET mcthod. In
addition, students and tl:aci1ers still pref'crrcd the conventional NR method if given a choice. The PPT teachers viewed the NRET marking procedure as simple and
practical and the CBT students valued feedback on knowledge state. Students were realistic and consistent in applying the NRET method during the study. Guessing was found to be minimal under NRET method. NRET method was able to credit partial knowledge and diagnoses misconceptions. NRET method was more efficient in estimating students' ability. The analyses on the efficiency of NRET method by gender and ability group were inconclusive. However, there was tendency of NRET method favouring the medium or low ability group
iv - . |
|---|