Intended and unintended test constructs in a multiple-mini admission interview. A validity study

Lotte Dyhrberg O'Neill, Eva Lykkegaard, Kulamakan Kulasageram

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Abstrakt

Construction errors in multiple-choice items are quite prevalent and constitute threats to test validity of multiple-choice tests. Currently very little research on the usefulness of systematic item screening by local review committees before test administrationseem to exist. The aim of this study was therefore to examine validity and feasibility aspects of review committee screening for item flaws. We examined the reliability of item reviewers’ independent judgments of the presence/absence of item flaws with a generalizability study design and found only moderate reliability using five reviewers. Statistical analyses of actual exam scores could be a more efficient way of identifying flaws and improving average item discrimination of tests in local contexts. The question of validity of human judgments of item flaws is important - not just for sufficiently sound quality assurance procedures of tests in local test contexts - but also for the global re-search on item flaws.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftDansk Universitetspaedagogisk Tidsskrift
Vol/bind14
Udgave nummer26
Sider (fra-til)66-81
ISSN1901-5089
StatusUdgivet - 1. apr. 2019

Emneord

  • Admission Tests
  • Multiple-Mini Interviews
  • Validity
  • Medical Education

Fingeraftryk

Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'Intended and unintended test constructs in a multiple-mini admission interview. A validity study'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater