Descriptor
| Confidence Testing | 2 |
| Guessing (Tests) | 2 |
| Psychometrics | 2 |
| Scoring | 2 |
| Engineering Education | 1 |
| Evaluation Methods | 1 |
| Forced Choice Technique | 1 |
| Formative Evaluation | 1 |
| Grade 6 | 1 |
| Intermediate Grades | 1 |
| Item Analysis | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Author
| Bruno, James E. | 1 |
| Fenna, Doug S. | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
| Higher Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Direct linkFenna, Doug S. – European Journal of Engineering Education, 2004
Multiple-choice testing (MCT) has several advantages which are becoming more relevant in the current financial climate. In particular, they can be machine marked. As an objective testing method it is particularly relevant to engineering and other factual courses, but MCTs are not widely used in engineering because students can benefit from…
Descriptors: Guessing (Tests), Testing, Multiple Choice Tests, Engineering Education
Peer reviewedBruno, James E. – Journal of Research and Development in Education, 1989
This study examined multiple choice testing for formative and summative evaluation among sixth-grade inner-city students (N=568) who were assessed simultaneously, with forced choice and information based (confidence weighted) test scoring formats. Results are discussed, with emphasis on implications for teacher evaluation of low-achieving…
Descriptors: Confidence Testing, Forced Choice Technique, Formative Evaluation, Grade 6
