Study on item and test analysis of multiple choice questions amongst undergraduate medical students
Keywords:Item, Difficulty index, Discrimination index, Non functional distracters, Distracter efficiency
Background: Item analysis is the process of collecting, summarizing and using information from students’ response to assess the quality of test items. However it is said that MCQs emphasize recall of factual information rather than conceptual understanding and interpretation of concepts. There is more to writing good MCQs than writing good questions. The objectives of the study was to assess the item and test quality of multiple choice questions and to deal with the learning difficulties of students, identify the low achievers in the test.
Methods: The hundred MBBS students from Government medical college were examined. A test comprising of thirty MCQs was administered. All items were analysed for Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index and Distractor Efficiency. Data entered in MS Excel 2007 and SPSS 21 analysed with statistical test of significance.
Results: Majority 80% items difficulty index is within acceptable range. 63% items showed excellent discrimination Index. Distractor efficiency was overall satisfactory.
Conclusions: Multiple choice questions with average difficulty and also having high discriminating power with good distracter efficiency should be incorporated into student’s examination.
Kehoe J. Basic item analysis for multiple choice tests. PARE. 1995;4:10.
Zubairi AM, Kassim NLA. Classical and Rasch analysis of dichotomously scored reading comprehension test items. Malaysian J ELT Res. 2006;2:1-20.
Srivastava A, Dhar A, Agarwal CS. Why MCQ? Indian J Surg. 2004;66:246-8.
Carneson J, Delpierre G, Masters K. Designing and managing MCQs. Appendix C: MCQs and Blooms taxonomy, 2011. Available at: http://web. uct.ac.za/projects/cbe/mcqman/mcqappc.html. Accessed on 3 March 2017.
Case SM, Swanson DB. Extended matching items: a practical alternative to free response questions. Tech Learn Med. 1993;5:107-15.
Cizek GJ, O'Day DM. Further investigations of nonfunctioning options in multiple- choice test items. Educ Psychol Med. 1994;54(4):861-72.
Saudi Commission for Health Specialties. Item writing manual for multiple-choice questions. Available at: http: //www.scfhs.org.sa /education /HighEduExams/Guidlines/mcq/Documents/MCQ%20Manual.pdf. Accessed on 5 March 2017.
Mehta G, Mokhasi V. Item analysis of multiple choice questions – An assessment of the assessment tool. Int J Health Sci Res. 2014;4:197-202.
Shyam K, Pandey R. MCQ item analysis and Banking. The Art of Teaching Medical Students. 3rd Edition. New Delhi: Elsevier; 2015: 304-321.
Kuder–Richardson Formula 20. Available at: https://en.wikipedi.org/wiki/Kuder%E2%80%93Richardson_Formula_20 Accessed on 5 March 2017.
Gajjar S, Sharma R, Kumar P, Rana M. Item and test analysis to identify quality Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) from an assessment of medical students of Ahemdabad, Gujarat. Indian J Comm Med. 2014;39:17-20.
Pande SS, Pande SR, Parate VR, Agrekar SH. Correlation between difficulty and discrimination indices of MCQs in formative exam in Physiology. South East Asian J Med Education. 2013;7:45-50.
Karelia BN, Pillai A, Vegada BN. The levels of difficulty and discrimination indices relationship between them in four response type multiple choice questions of pharmacology summative tests of year II MBBS students. Ie JSME. 2013;6:41-6.
Patel KA, Mahajan NR. Itemized Analysis of Questions of Multiple Choice Question (MCQ) Exam. Int J Sci Res. 2013;2:279-80.
Hingorjo MR, Laleel F. Analysis of One -Best MCQs: the Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index and Distractor Efficiency. J Pak Med Assoc. 2012;62:142-7.
Dufresne RJ, Leonard WJ, Gerace WJ. Making sense of students answers to multiple choice questions. Phys Teach. 2002;40:174-80.
Mukherjee P, Lahiri SK, Analysis of Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs): Item and Test Statistics from an assessment in a medical college of Kolkata, West Bengal. IOSR J Dental Med Sci. 2015;14(12):47-52.