Reviewing and changing answers on computerized fixed-item vocabulary tests.
The writer compared results of computerized vocabulary tests under conditions in which item review was allowed and not allowed. He argues that comparison between the review and no-review conditions did not yield statistically significance differences in number correct scores, ability estimates, or...
| Publicado en: | Educational & Psychological Measurement Vol. 60; no. 3; pp. 371 - 385 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
June 2000
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=507701123&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 507701123 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00131644 EPM jtl: Educational & Psychological Measurement issn: 00131644 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: June 2000 vid: 60 iid: 3 pid: 344 pub: Sage Publications Inc. artinfo: ui: 507701123 10.1177/00131640021970600 ppf: 371 ppct: 14 formats: tig: atl: Reviewing and changing answers on computerized fixed-item vocabulary tests. aug: au: Vispoel, Walter P. su: Computer software Examinations Vocabulary tests Examination administrators Psychology sug: subj: Computer software Examinations Vocabulary tests Examination administrators Psychology ab: The writer compared results of computerized vocabulary tests under conditions in which item review was allowed and not allowed. He argues that comparison between the review and no-review conditions did not yield statistically significance differences in number correct scores, ability estimates, or measurement error but points out that examinees in both conditions strongly desired review opportunities. He asserts that comparisons of answers before and after review within the review condition indicated that only a small percentage of answers was altered, that more answers were altered from wrong to right than vice versa, that a large proportion of examinees changed answers to at least some questions, and that most examinees who altered answers enhanced their performance by doing so. Furthermore, he contends that performance gains after review were greater for those of higher ability and that review was desired more by examinees with higher test anxiety. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|