Structured Process For Writing, Revising, And Assessing Multiple Choice Quizzes
- Conference
- Location
-
Louisville, Kentucky
- Publication Date
-
June 20, 2010
- Start Date
-
June 20, 2010
- End Date
-
June 23, 2010
- ISSN
-
2153-5965
- Conference Session
- Tagged Division
-
Mechanical Engineering
- Page Count
-
23
- Page Numbers
-
15.1110.1 - 15.1110.23
- DOI
-
10.18260/1-2--15825
- Permanent URL
-
https://strategy.asee.org/15825
- Download Count
-
541
Paper Authors
Josh Coffman University of Arkansas
Josh Coffman is a M.S. student in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. He has worked as a civil design technician for Crafton, Tull, Sparks, and Associates in Russellville, Arkansas. He received a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Arkansas Tech University in 2006. V-mail: 479-970-7359; E-mail: jacoffma@uark.edu.
Joseph Rencis University of Arkansas
Daniel Jensen United States Air Force Academy
Daniel J. Jensen is a Professor of Engineering Mechanics at the U.S. Air Force Academy. He received his B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. from the University of Colorado at Boulder. He has worked for Texas Instruments, Lockheed Martin, NASA, University of the Pacific, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and MacNeal-Schwendler Corp. His research includes development of innovative design methodologies and enhancement of engineering education. E-mail: Dan.Jensen@usafa.edu
Christina White Columbia University
Christina White is a doctoral candidate in the Curriculum and Teaching Department at Columbia University. Her research focus is in engineering education with particular emphasis in both engineering diversity and humanitarian design projects. She earned a M. Ed from The University of Texas at Austin in Special Education.
V-mail: 512-963-9609; E-mail: ckw.columbia@gmail.com.
Ashland Brown University of the Pacific
Jiancheng Liu University of the Pacific
Jiancheng Liu has been an assistant professor of the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of the Pacific since 2006. Prior to joining at the University of the Pacific, he has worked in industries for many years. His research focuses on CNC machine design and analysis, computer aided manufacturing and manufacturing system automation. He has published more than 70 peer reviewed technical journal and conference papers. Dr. Liu was also awarded 4 patents. He has invented many new technologies which have been practically applied in industries. He received the Industrial LEAD Award from SME in 2001. Dr. Liu received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in mechanical engineering in China. After receiving his Ph.D. degree in Japan, he moved to the States in 1997 and did his Post Doctorate work at the University of California, Davis. V-mail: 209-946-3079; E-mail: jliu@pacific.edu.
Kristen Kaufman University of Texas, Austin
Kristen Kaufman received her B.S. from the University of Texas at Austin in Mechanical Engineering, where she worked as an undergraduate research assistant. After working for ConocoPhillips as a corporate intern, she returned to UT Austin to pursue her graduate degree in the field of Manufacturing and Design. Her current research interests include transformation design and engineering education, focusing on bringing learning to early childhood education.
Abstract
NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract
Structured Process for Writing, Revising, and Assessing Multiple-Choice Quizzes
Abstract
A structured process is presented for developing or revising a multiple-choice quiz. A multiple- choice checklist form was created based on the best practices found in educational measurement books. The multiple-choice checklist form serves as a guide for an instructor to revise an old quiz or develop a new quiz. The effectiveness of the multiple-choice quiz checklist form is determined based on an assessment and evaluation process. This paper considers the development a ‘new’ quiz for bending stress in a sophomore level fundamentals of mechanics course. Four instructors used the multiple-choice checklist form to develop a new quiz and five instructors developed a new multiple-choice quiz without the checklist form. Independent reviewers are used to carry out a quantitative evaluation of the new quizzes developed with and without the multiple-choice checklist form. The assessment form is based on the multiple-choice checklist form. The results of the assessment process show that the proposed multiple-choice quiz checklist form is a valuable tool for instructors to develop more effective quizzes.
Introduction
Finite element (FE) learning modules have been developed for fifteen required undergraduate engineering courses.1,2,3 Some modules have been developed for the following topics: curved beam, bolt and plate stiffness, lateral frequency of a cantilever beam, lateral vibration of a tapered cantilever beam, steady state heat transfer in a bar, transient heat transfer in a l-bar, cylindrical drag, friction flow in a pipe, probe feed patch antenna, specific absorption rate, transmission parameters of an infinitely long co-axial cable, and human head. These FE learning modules are used to introduce basic and complex engineering problems to enhance student learning of the theory and fundamentals of the finite element method (FEM).
After the implementation of a new fatigue FE learning module in the spring of 2009, the pre- and post-quiz assessment results showed no improvement in student learning.3 This was the first time a FE learning module did not show significant improvement in student learning. After closer examination, we realized the quiz for the fatigue FE learning module used different question formats. The fatigue FE learning module quiz used half multiple-choice and half open- ended questions. Previous FE learning modules used entirely multiple-choice questions. Since open-ended questions are more challenging to assess student learning, future FE learning modules will use only multiple-choice questions. Whether a multiple-choice quiz should be used as opposed to a different format of a quiz (short answer, etc.) is a completely separate question. We have chosen to use a multiple-choice quiz as part of the assessment strategy for our learning modules.
This paper presents a multiple-choice checklist form that was developed based on a review of educational measurement books. The checklist provides a list of best practices divided into domains for an instructor to develop a new quiz or revise an old quiz. The proposed checklist
Coffman, J., & Rencis, J., & Jensen, D., & White, C., & Brown, A., & Liu, J., & Kaufman, K. (2010, June), Structured Process For Writing, Revising, And Assessing Multiple Choice Quizzes Paper presented at 2010 Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, Kentucky. 10.18260/1-2--15825
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2010 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015