1. Information Technology Design & Multimedia

2. A Comparison of an Innovative Web-based Assessment Tool Utilizing Confidence Measurement to the Traditional Multiple Choice, Short Answer and Problem Solving Questions: Graham Farrell: Swinburne University

3. Content: MCQCM’s Demonstration. Basis of Development. Benefits of MCQCM. Previous Work Design Issues Comparative Analysis Conclusion and Discussion

4. Multiple Choice Questions with Confidence Measurement Can be accessed via the internet with student login Requires students registration of confidence for each answer, after commitment to an answer Ability to capture Data and produce feedback to both the instructor and the student immediately Offers graphic capabilities. Lets have a look!

5. Is there a need for it? Formative Assessment, integrated, not a disturbance to learning. Feedback, immediate and comprehensive Control of Learning into the hands of the students Recognition of Partial Learning: Medical Field (Davidoff 1995) Asking the Meta-question: “How sure are you of your knowledge?” (Diamond and Forrestor 1973) Supports Competency Based Learning

6. MCQCM Benefits MCQCM for the Students encourages : Honesty! Modification of their learning path (self-regulation) Reflection

7. MCQCM Benefits The MCQCM benefits the Instructors by supplying feedback that encourages: Honesty! Evaluation of teaching effectiveness. Modification or the learning path when required. Diagnostics at group and individual levels when most needed

8. Previous Work Scoring Systems that eliminate guessing by identifying correct and incorrect options (Pollard 1989,1985, 1983) Interactive Systems designed to permit the registration of confidence. (Paul 1997, Klinger 1997,Gardner-Medwin, Gahan 2003) Scoring Systems that disproportionably penalized for incorrect answers to encourage honesty

9. Design Issues Design MCQCM to include the following Fully Web based utilizing Server side technology (HTML,PHP graphics) Permit the students to commit initially as True or False before registering their confidence. (Self- efficacy Bandura 1977) Produce enriched feedback with direction for further study Identify and investigate further applications for the tool

10. Comparative Analysis Cohort of 43 students( Database Design) All students access to BB revision questions and MCQCM Exam structure: 8 MCQ(20% marks) 8 MCQCM(20% marks) 8 Short Answers(33% marks) 2 Problem Solving(27% marks)

11. Comparative Analysis SectionAverage GradeStandard Deviation MCQ73%17.7% MCQCM67%21.0% SA85%9.8% Problem Solving75%14.5%

12. Comparative Analysis Section Comparison Correlation Factor R Defined MCQ vs MCQCM.436Medium MCQ vs SA.447Medium MCQ vs PS.235Small MCQCM vs SA.554Strong MCQCM vs PS.302Medium SA vs PS.442Medium

13. Conclusion and Discussion Directly concerning MCQCM: Strongest correlation between MCQCM and to Short Answers (.544) Medium correlation of MCQCM to PS (.302) -compared to the small MCQ to PS (.235) Medium correlation for MCQCM to the traditional MCQ (.436)

14. Conclusion and Discussion Is MCQCM a valid summative assessment option? MCQCM appears to be “as good as” the others -valid assessment option MCQCM does not appear to offer any great advantage -So why bother? MCQCM as a formative tool gives rich feedback to direct the learning of the individual student and assist the instructor.

15. Further Research The following will be investigated as part of the ongoing research: Gauge the students perception of the MCQCM tool for summative assessment Utilize MCQCM in other areas Star my write up!