Descriptor
| Confidence Testing | 2 |
| Evaluation Methods | 2 |
| Guessing (Tests) | 2 |
| Multiple Choice Tests | 2 |
| Elementary Secondary Education | 1 |
| Engineering Education | 1 |
| Evaluation Criteria | 1 |
| Evaluation Problems | 1 |
| Higher Education | 1 |
| Item Analysis | 1 |
| Program Validation | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Author
| Fenna, Doug S. | 1 |
| Higbie, Jack | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Guides - Classroom - Teacher | 1 |
| Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
Education Level
| Higher Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Direct linkFenna, Doug S. – European Journal of Engineering Education, 2004
Multiple-choice testing (MCT) has several advantages which are becoming more relevant in the current financial climate. In particular, they can be machine marked. As an objective testing method it is particularly relevant to engineering and other factual courses, but MCTs are not widely used in engineering because students can benefit from…
Descriptors: Guessing (Tests), Testing, Multiple Choice Tests, Engineering Education
Peer reviewedHigbie, Jack – Physics Teacher, 1993
Presents a discussion of trying to best account for the variation resulting from guessing on a multiple-choice exam. A mathematical process is given to determine the amount of variance that could be added or subtracted from a student's score to account for guessing. Examples are provided. (MVL)
Descriptors: Confidence Testing, Elementary Secondary Education, Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Methods
