IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijeded/v12y2021i4p311-328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can we identify the students who have success in macroeconomics depending on exam format by comparing multiple-choice test and constructed response test?

Author

Listed:
  • Leiv Opstad

Abstract

The selection of assessment format in business schools and higher education has been a topic of consideration for many years. Currently, in Norway, there is a debate about replacing constructed response (CR) questions with multiple-choice (MC) questions. MC tests are popular and have been substituted for traditional exams in many fields. In the context of costs, there is obviously a gain to using MC tests. By exploring data from a macroeconomics course that applied both essay-based and multiple-choice-based tests simultaneously, it was possible to compare the two exam formats and to identify students who performed differently. By using a linear regression model, the findings revealed that there were substantial differences in the influence of the independent variables for the two methods. For CR, the result confirms prior research, while there was almost no significant connection between the chosen independent variables and the dependent variable MC. Therefore, students' background, skills and personal characteristics matter.

Suggested Citation

  • Leiv Opstad, 2021. "Can we identify the students who have success in macroeconomics depending on exam format by comparing multiple-choice test and constructed response test?," International Journal of Education Economics and Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(4), pages 311-328.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijeded:v:12:y:2021:i:4:p:311-328
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=118415
    Download Restriction: Open Access
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:ids:ijeded:v:12:y:2021:i:4:p:311-328. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=346 .

    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.