Examining Bloom's Taxonomy in Multiple Choice Questions: Students' Approach to Questions

被引:20
|
作者
Stringer, J. K. [1 ,2 ]
Santen, Sally A. [1 ]
Lee, Eun [3 ]
Rawls, Meagan [1 ]
Bailey, Jean [4 ]
Richards, Alicia [5 ]
Perera, Robert A. [5 ]
Biskobing, Diane [6 ]
机构
[1] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Sch Med, Off Assessment Evaluat & Scholarship, Richmond, VA USA
[2] Rush Med Coll, Off Integrated Med Educ, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
[3] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Sch Med, Dept Immunol, Richmond, VA USA
[4] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Sch Med, Off Fac Dev, Richmond, VA USA
[5] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Sch Med, Dept Biostat, Richmond, VA USA
[6] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Sch Med, Div Endocrinol, Dept Internal Med, Richmond, VA 23284 USA
关键词
Medical students; Multiple choice questions; Clinical reasoning; Assessment; Bloom' s taxonomy;
D O I
10.1007/s40670-021-01305-y
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Background Analytic thinking skills are important to the development of physicians. Therefore, educators and licensing boards utilize multiple-choice questions (MCQs) to assess these knowledge and skills. MCQs are written under two assumptions: that they can be written as higher or lower order according to Bloom's taxonomy, and students will perceive questions to be the same taxonomical level as intended. This study seeks to understand the students' approach to questions by analyzing differences in students' perception of the Bloom's level of MCQs in relation to their knowledge and confidence. Methods A total of 137 students responded to practice endocrine MCQs. Participants indicated the answer to the question, their interpretation of it as higher or lower order, and the degree of confidence in their response to the question. Results Although there was no significant association between students' average performance on the content and their question classification (higher or lower), individual students who were less confident in their answer were more than five times as likely (OR = 5.49) to identify a question as higher order than their more confident peers. Students who responded incorrectly to the MCQ were 4 times as likely to identify a question as higher order than their peers who responded correctly. Conclusions The results suggest that higher performing, more confident students rely on identifying patterns (even if the question was intended to be higher order). In contrast, less confident students engage in higher-order, analytic thinking even if the question is intended to be lower order. Better understanding of the processes through which students interpret MCQs will help us to better understand the development of clinical reasoning skills.
引用
收藏
页码:1311 / 1317
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Examining Bloom’s Taxonomy in Multiple Choice Questions: Students’ Approach to Questions
    J. K. Stringer
    Sally A. Santen
    Eun Lee
    Meagan Rawls
    Jean Bailey
    Alicia Richards
    Robert A. Perera
    Diane Biskobing
    Medical Science Educator, 2021, 31 : 1311 - 1317
  • [2] Incorporation of Bloom's Taxonomy into Multiple-Choice Examination Questions for a Pharmacotherapeutics Course
    Kim, Myo-Kyoung
    Patel, Rajul A.
    Uchizono, James A.
    Beck, Lynn
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION, 2012, 76 (06)
  • [3] What faculty write versus what students see? Perspectives on multiple-choice questions using Bloom's taxonomy
    Monrad, Seetha U.
    Zaidi, Nikki L. Bibler
    Grob, Karri L.
    Kurtz, Joshua B.
    Tai, Andrew W.
    Hortsch, Michael
    Gruppen, Larry D.
    Santen, Sally A.
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2021, 43 (05) : 575 - 582
  • [4] Pushing Critical Thinking Skills With Multiple-Choice Questions: Does Bloom's Taxonomy Work?
    Zaidi, Nikki L. Bibler
    Grob, Karri L.
    Monrad, Seetha M.
    Kurtz, Joshua B.
    Tai, Andrew
    Ahmed, Asra Z.
    Gruppen, Larry D.
    Santen, Sally A.
    ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2018, 93 (06) : 856 - 859
  • [5] Crowdsourcing the Evaluation of Multiple-Choice Questions Using Item-Writing Flaws and Bloom's Taxonomy
    Moore, Steven
    Fang, Ellen
    Nguyen, Huy A.
    Stamper, John
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE TENTH ACM CONFERENCE ON LEARNING @ SCALE, L@S 2023, 2023, : 25 - 34
  • [6] Automated analysis of exam questions according to bloom's taxonomy
    Omar, Nazlia
    Haris, Syahidah Sufi
    Hassan, Rosilah
    Arshad, Haslina
    Rahmat, Masura
    Zainal, Noor Faridatul Ainun
    Zulkifli, Rozli
    UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA TEACHING AND LEARNING CONGRESS 2011, VOL I, 2012, 59 : 297 - 303
  • [7] The Analysis of Chemistry Teachers Exam Questions in Regards to the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy and Their Comparison with OSYM Questions
    Yildirim, Tamer
    PAMUKKALE UNIVERSITESI EGITIM FAKULTESI DERGISI-PAMUKKALE UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 2020, (50): : 449 - 467
  • [8] A systematic approach to multiple choice questions (MCQs)
    AlShehri, AM
    Stanley, IM
    SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1997, 18 (02) : 184 - 187
  • [9] An Automatic Classifier for Fixam Questions in hngineering: A Process for Bloom's Taxonomy
    Jayakodi, Kithsiri
    Bandara, Madhushi
    Perera, Indika
    2015 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TEACHING, ASSESSMENT, AND LEARNING FOR ENGINEERING (TALE), 2015, : 195 - 202
  • [10] Should students change their answers on multiple choice questions?
    Merry, Justin W.
    Elenchin, Mary Kate
    Surma, Renee N.
    ADVANCES IN PHYSIOLOGY EDUCATION, 2021, 45 (01) : 182 - 190