Evaluation of multiple choice questions by item analysis in a medical college at Pondicherry, India

Authors

  • Rajkumar Patil Department of Community Medicine, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pillaiyarkuppam, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth University, Pondicherry 607402, India
  • Sachin Bhaskar Palve Department of Community Medicine, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pillaiyarkuppam, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth University, Pondicherry 607402, India
  • Kamesh Vell Department of Community Medicine, Sree Lakshmi Narayana Institute of Medical Sciences, Osudu, Agaram Village, Villianur Commune Kudupakkam Post, Pondicherry 605502, India
  • Abhijit Vinod Boratne Department of Community Medicine, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pillaiyarkuppam, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth University, Pondicherry 607402, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20161638

Keywords:

MCQs, Item analysis, Difficulty index, Discrimination index, Distractor efficiency, Medical education

Abstract

Background: Medical students are evaluated and assessed by different methods. One of the methods for evaluation is by using multiple choice questions (MCQs). MCQs are difficult to frame but easy to administer and check. MCQs can be evaluated for the quality by item and test analysis. The objective of the study was to evaluate the MCQs among seventh semester MBBS students.

Methods:Total 30 MCQs were constructed in community medicine. These MCQs were administered to a small group of MBBS students. All MCQs had single stem with three wrong and one correct answer. The data were entered in Microsoft excel 2010 software and analysed. Mean, SD, Proportions were used. Difficulty index (DIF I), discrimination index (DI) and distractor efficiency (DE) were the parameters used to evaluate the items.

Results: Total 90 distractors (3x30 MCQs) were analysed. Mean for difficulty index, discrimination index and distractor efficiency were 38.3%, 0.27 and 82.8% respectively. Of 30 items, 11 items were of higher difficulty level (DIF I <30%) while 5 items were of easy level (DIF I >60%). Total 15 items were having very good DI. Of the 90 distractors, there were 16 (17.8%) non-functional distractors (NFDs) present in 13 (43.3%) items.  

Conclusions:In present study, there were only three MCQs out of the total 30 MCQs which satisfied all the criteria for an ideal MCQ.

References

Mitra NK, Nagaraja HS, Ponnudurai G, Judson JP. The levels of difficulty and Discrimination Indices in Type A Multiple Choice Questions of pre-clinical semester I multidisciplinary summative tests. International e-Journal of Science, Medicine and Education. 2009;3(1):2-7.

Sarin YK, Khurana M, Natu MV, Thomas AG, Singh T. Item analysis of published MCQs. Indian Pediatrics. 1998;35:1103-5.

Hingorjo MR, Jaleel F. Analysis of one-best MCQs: The difficulty index, discrimination index and distractor efficiency. Journal of Pakistan Medical Association. 2012;62:142-7.

Singh T, Gupta P, Singh D. Principles of Medical Education. 3rd Ed. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. 2009.Test and item analysis; p.70–7.

Zubairi AM, Kassim NL. Classical and Rasch analysis of dichotomously scored reading comprehension test items. Malaysain Journal of English Language Teaching Research. 2006; 2:1-20.

Sim SM, Rasiah RI. Relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in true/false-type multiple choice questions of a para-clinical multidisciplinary paper. Annals Academy of Medicine Singapore. 2006;35:67-71.

Tarrant M, Ware J, Mohammed AM. An assessment of functioning and non-functioning distractors in multiple-choice questions: A descriptive analysis. BMC Medical Education. 2009;9:1-8.

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 Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Indian Journal of Community Medicine. 2014;39(1):17-20.

Schuwirth LWT, Vleuten CPM. Different written assessment methods: what can be said about their strengths and weaknesses? Medical Education. 2004;38(9):974-9.

Downloads

Published

2017-01-05

How to Cite

Patil, R., Palve, S. B., Vell, K., & Boratne, A. V. (2017). Evaluation of multiple choice questions by item analysis in a medical college at Pondicherry, India. International Journal Of Community Medicine And Public Health, 3(6), 1612–1616. https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20161638

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles