The Optimal Number of Options in a Multiple-Choice English Test
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
While multiple-choice tests are efficient in terms of test administration and scoring, it is both time-consuming and difficult to construct good items. To design a good multiple-choice item, it is important to include attractive distracters as options. Another factor that may determine the quality of a test item is the number of options. In general, test items with more options are believed to have more item discrimination power. For this reason, in recent years five options have been widely adopted in many English language tests. However, increasing the number of options does not necessarily guarantee a test with high discrimination power. In practice it is difficult and often impossible to develop as many as five good alternatives. Thus, this study compared five options with three or four options and examined the item discrimination index as a function of the number of options. The findings of the study indicated that the three options had the highest item discrimination power. It can be inferred from the finding that designing ‘functioning’ options rather than increasing the number of options should be the primary concern in constructing test items.
Abstract
While multiple-choice tests are efficient in terms of test administration and scoring, it is both time-consuming and difficult to construct good items. To design a good multiple-choice item, it is important to include attractive distracters as options. Another factor that may determine the quality of a test item is the number of options. In general, test items with more options are believed to have more item discrimination power. For this reason, in recent years five options have been widely adopted in many English language tests. However, increasing the number of options does not necessarily guarantee a test with high discrimination power. In practice it is difficult and often impossible to develop as many as five good alternatives. Thus, this study compared five options with three or four options and examined the item discrimination index as a function of the number of options. The findings of the study indicated that the three options had the highest item discrimination power. It can be inferred from the finding that designing ‘functioning’ options rather than increasing the number of options should be the primary concern in constructing test items.
참고문헌 (27)
- Bachman,L.F, "Fundamental considerations in language testing" (1990), Oxford University Press
- Bruno,J.E, "Determining the optimal number of alternatives to a multiple choice test item:An information theoretic perspective", Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55(6), pp.959~966 (1995)
- Cizek,G.J, "Further investigation of nonfuntioning options in multiple-choice test items", Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(4), pp.861~872 (1994)
- Cohen,A, "Testing language ability in the classroom" (1980), Newbury House Publishers
- Costin,F, "The optimal number of alternatives in multiple-choice achievement tests:Some empirical evidence for a mathematical proof", Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, pp.353~358 (1970)
- Delgado,A.R, "Further evidence favoring three-option items in multiple choice tests", European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 14, pp.197~201 (1998)
- Ebel,R.L, "Expected reliability as a function of choices per item", Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29, pp.565~570 (1969)
- Grier,J.B, "The optimal number of alternatives at a choice point with travel time considered", Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 14, pp.91~97 (1976)
- Haladyna,T.M, "Functional distractors:Implications for test-item writing and test design.New Orleans,LA:Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association", ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 293851). Retrieved March 1, 2009, from ERIC database, ~ (1988)
- Haladyna,T.M, "A taxonomy of multiple-choice item-writing rules", Applied Measurement in Education, 2(1), pp.37~50 (1989)
- Haladyna,T.M, "The validity of a taxonomy of multiple-choice item-writing rules", Applied Measurement in Education, 2(1), pp.51~78 (1989)
- Haladyna,T.M, "How many options is enough for a multiple-choice test item?", Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(4), pp.999~1010 (1993)
- Henning,G, "A guide to language testing" (1987), Heinle and Heinle Publishers
- Hughes,A, "Testing for language teachers" (1989), Cambridge University Press
- "석사", Seoul National University, 1994
- Lee,K.-S, "The effects of answer position and question-by-option interaction on test-takers’ performance in multiple-choice English listening comprehension test", Paper presented at the Third International Conference on English Language Testing in Asia. October 27-28. Hong Kong Examination Authority, ~ (2000)
- Lee,W.-K, "On the number of options in a multiple-choice English test", The 5th International Conference on Language Testing in Asia (2002), The Society for Testing English Proficiency, Inc.
- "석사", Seoul National University, 1998
- Lord,F.M, "Optimal number of choices per item--A comparison of four approaches", Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, pp.33~38 (1977)
- Owen,S.V, "What’s wrong with three-option multiple choice items?", Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47, pp.513~522 (1987)
- Ruch,G.M, "Tests and measurements in high school instruction" (1927), World Book
- Seong,T.-J, "An understanding of the IRT models" (2001), Gyoyookgwahaksa
- Sherman.J, "The effect of question preview in listening comprehension tests", Language Testing, 14(2), pp.185~213 (1997)
- Shizuka,T, "A comparison of three-and four-option English tests for university entrance selection purposes in Japan", Language Testing, 23(1), pp.35~57 (2006)
- Shohamy,E, "Validation of listening comprehension tests:The effect of text and questions type", Language Testing, 8(1), pp.23~40 (1991)
- Tversky,A, "On the optimal number of alternatives at a choice point", Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, pp.386~391 (1964)
- Weir,C, "Communicative language testing" (1988), University of Exeter