More Evidence on the Use of Constructed-Response Questions in Principles of Economics Classes
This study provides evidence that constructed response (CR) questions contribute information about student knowledge and understanding that is not contained in multiple choice questions (MC). We use an extensive data set of individual assessment results from Introductory Macro- and Microeconomics classes at a large, public university. We find that (i) CR scores contain information not contained in MC questions, (ii) this information is correlated with a measure of student knowledge and understanding of course material, and (iii) CR questions are better able to â€˜explainâ€™ academic achievement in other courses than additional MC questions. There is some evidence to suggest that this greater explanatory power has to do with the ability of CR questions to measure higher-level learning as characterised by Bloomâ€™s taxonomy (Bloom, 1956). Both (i) the generalisability of our results to other principles of economics classes, and (ii) the practical significance (in terms of studentsâ€™ grades) of our findings, remain to be determined.
Volume (Year): 10 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Fax: +44(0)117 331 4396
Web page: http://www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/iree
|Order Information:|| Email: |
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Walstad, William B & Becker, William E, 1994. "Achievement Differences on Multiple-Choice and Essay Tests in Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 193-96, May.
- Becker, William E & Johnston, Carol, 1999. "The Relationship between Multiple Choice and Essay Response Questions in Assessing Economics Understanding," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 75(231), pages 348-57, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:che:ireepp:v:10:y:2011:i:2:p:28-49. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Martin Poulter)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.