IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

To Use Constructed-Response Questions, Or Not To Use Constructed-Response Questions? That Is The Question

Listed author(s):

Advocates of Constructed Response (CR) questions argue that CR questions provide a different assessment of student knowledge than is available from Multiple Choice (MC) questions. If that is the case, and if the benefit in terms of improved assessment is substantial, then it follows that grade outcomes using CR questions should be different from those using MC questions. We investigate this using a large dataset composed of individual assessment results from thousands of students in introductory economics classes at a large public university. Empirical analysis of our large sample of students indicates that a switch to an all-MC format would result in grade changes that are in the “small” to moderate range when compared to grade changes that occur between assessments. This evidence suggests that CR questions could be abandoned at relatively little cost in grading accuracy. However, there are other arguments in favour of keeping CR questions. In particular, it has been suggested that students perceive a mix of CR and MC as “fairer” than an assessment composed exclusively of one or the other question type. Further, some instructors believe that CR questions encourage students to study harder. We provide survey evidence that supports both arguments.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 10/69.

in new window

Length: 31 pages
Date of creation: 19 Oct 2010
Handle: RePEc:cbt:econwp:10/69
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand

Phone: 64 3 369 3123 (Administrator)
Fax: 64 3 364 2635
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

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.:

in new window

  1. Stephen Hickson & W. Robert Reed, 2009. "Do Constructed-Response and Multiple-Choice Questions Measure the Same Thing?," Working Papers in Economics 09/08, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cbt:econwp:10/69. 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: (Albert Yee)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.