IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ajosrd/197997.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Logical Choice Weight and Corrected Scoring Methods on Multiple Choice Agricultural Science Test Scores

Author

Listed:
  • Ajayi, B. K.

Abstract

The study focused on the effect of logical choice weight and corrected scoring methods on multiple choice Agricultural science test scores the study also investigated the interaction effect of logical choice weight and corrected scoring methods in schools ,and types of school in multiple choice agricultural science test. The researcher used a combination of survey type and one short experimental design. The sample for the study consisted of 600 students selected by stratified random sampling techniques in south western Nigeria. Overall performance of students in percentage, and correlation was analyzed. The hypotheses were generated and tested at 0.05 level of significance. The study revealed that there was a significant difference in the academic performance of students in logical choice weight and corrected scoring methods in multiple choice agricultural science test scores. The result also shown that there was no interaction effect on the two scoring methods in the type of schools, the location of schools in multiple choices agricultural science test. The study revealed that logical choice weight scoring method was the best method that favoured the scoring of the students’ scripts in multiple choices agricultural science test. On the basis of these findings, logical choice weight should be introduced to the teachers to use in the classroom as a new method of scoring multiple choice agricultural science the logical choice weight method is recommended in the ministry of education, in Examination Division, and to junior secondary schools for scoring JSS (3) three multiple choice test. Examination bodies such as West Africa Examination Council (WAEC), National Examination Council (NECO), Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB) should adopt the use of logical choice weight method in scoring multiple choice tests. The method could be used in tertiary institutions for post ‘JAMB’ Unify Matriculation Examination (UME) test. It is also recommended for all states of the federation as well the West African countries public service could also adopt the use of logical choice weight scoring method.

Suggested Citation

  • Ajayi, B. K., 2012. "The Effect of Logical Choice Weight and Corrected Scoring Methods on Multiple Choice Agricultural Science Test Scores," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society (AESS), vol. 2(04), pages 1-5, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ajosrd:197997
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.197997
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/197997/files/1-79-AJARD-514-518.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.197997?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural Finance; Financial Economics;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ajosrd:197997. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aesstea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.