Peer review improves the quality of MCQ examinations
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19378307 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Bunmi S Malau-Aduli (0000-0001-6054-8498, University of Tasmania, corresponding author), Craig Zimitat (0000-0002-9073-095X, University of Tasmania) |
| Year | 2012 |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue | 8 |
| Pages | 919-931 |
| Publication date | 2012-12-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0260-2938 • E-ISSN: 1469-297X |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/02602938.2011.586991 |
| OpenAlex | W1966704939 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 22 |
The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the introduction of peer review processes on the quality of multiple-choice examinations in the first three years of an Australian medical course. The impact of the peer review process and overall quality assurance (QA) processes were evaluated by comparing the examination data generated in earlier years (2008) with those held under the new QA regime (2009 and 2010) from the same blueprint. Statistical analysis and comparisons of overall examination performance were made by year. Regarding multiple-choice questions (MCQs), item analysis was used to compare the proportion of difficult and discriminating items and functional distractors on summative examinations in 2008 (pre-implementation of peer review) and 2009 and 2010 (post-implementation). The impact of peer review processes resulted in a decrease in the number of items with negative discrimination; increases in reliability, appropriate item difficulty, and numbers of items with significant discrimination. There was an associated improvement in the effectiveness of distractors for the MCQ items. The trend of overall improvement in the quality of MCQ items continued in 2009 and 2010. The introduction of QA processes, specifically peer review of MCQ items has resulted in a sustained improvement in the quality of MCQ items within our examinations
External quality assessment · Formative assessment · Mathematics education · Medical education · Multiple choice · Peer Assessment · Peer review · Quality assurance · Significant difference · Summative assessment · Applied Psychology · Healthcare Quality and Management · Innovations in Medical Education · Medicine · Psychology · Radiology practices and education
Teacher Preparedness for Medical Emergencies in Belgian Classrooms
Twelve tips for designing and implementing peer-led assessment writing schemes in health professions education
Improving Measures via Examining the Behavior of Distractors in Multiple-Choice Tests
Guidelines on Writing Multiple Choice Questions
Educational measurement.
Learning to Teach in Higher Education
Assessment in Medical Education
A Review of Multiple-Choice Item-Writing Guidelines for Classroom Assessment
How Many Options is Enough for a Multiple-Choice Test Item
The wheel of competency assessment
The assessment of professional competence
| Citations per year | 0.44 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2017 - 2024 (8) |
| Highly cited | No |