by Adrian Wong, Pharm.D., PGY
Pharmacy Practice Resident, The Johns Hopkins Hospital
Recently
graduated and staring at the computer screen in front of me, I once again
repeated what I had done many times in pharmacy school – crammed. I had received warnings about how horrific the
Multistate Pharmacy Jurisprudence Examination (MPJE) was from all my mentors
and peers. I was truly dreading the
outcome. Examinations were never my
strong suit and I feared those multiple-multiple choice questions that seem to
appear on these high stakes exams all too frequently. Regardless of the name they are given – K-type, complex multiple-choice
(CMC), or complex-response questions – they all evoke the same feeling of dread. If I need to jog your memory, an example is
shown here:
Question: Based
on the best available evidence, which of the following is the most appropriate
medication to initiate for management of this patient’s congestive heart
failure?
I. Metoprolol
succinate
II. Metoprolol
tartrate
III. Atenolol
a.
I
only
b.
III
only
c.
I
and II only
d.
II
and III only
e.
I,
II and III
After
my experience with these questions, it always seems to come down to one of two
answers. Even using an educated guess, I
never seemed to get the “right” answer. From
my experience with multiple-choice questions, the answer is rarely ever all of the
above. So why did this format of
question come to be? Who came up with
this traumatizing format? What is the
data behind this torture?
Based
on my research, the complex multiple-choice (aka K-type) question was
introduced by the Educational Testing Service in 1978.1 This question format was designed to
accommodate for situations when there is more than one correct choice - much as
in real life. These questions also appear to be more
difficult that comparable “traditional” multiple-choice questions.2 Therefore, in the world of health
professionals, where multiple correct answers may exist, and, in an attempt to
increase the difficulty of board examination questions, the CMC format was adopted
by many professional testing services and persists today.
Weaknesses
of this format exist. Albanese evaluated
the use of Type-K questions and identified several limitations including:2
1. Increased likelihood of “cluing” of
secondary choices
2. Lower test score reliability
3. Greater difficulty constructing
questions
4. Extended time required to answer
questions
“Cluing” results when a test-taker is able to narrow down choices based on the
wording of the question or the available answer options. For example, my thought process for the question above helped me to narrow down the choices solely by looking at the question or “stem.”
The question is looking for only one “most appropriate” answer
(assuming, of course, that the test-writer has written a grammatically correct
statement), as denoted by “is” versus “are.” Thus, as a saavy test taker, I would gravitate
toward choices “a” and “b.” An additional
clue is that there are two similar choices (metoprolol succinate vs. tartrate),
one of which is likely to be the correct answer. Thus, cluing may lead to lower test score
reliability and the results may be dependent on how well a “test-taker” one is through “cluing.”2
Additional
studies have further illustrated the limitations of this assessment format. One study examined the amount of time needed
to complete a CMC-based test compared to multiple true-false (MTF) test.3 On
average, it took 3.5 times as long to complete a CMC-based test compared to a
MTF test.
However,
after evaluating this literature, I will begrudgingly admit that CMC questions,
under certain circumstances, could be effective despite their inherent
weaknesses. Researchers at one pharmacy
school evaluated the use of CMC questions using a partial-credit scoring system
and compared it to traditional dichotomous (right vs. wrong) scoring.4 The instructors designed a test to examine
student knowledge regarding nonprescription drugs. The test was administered to 150 student
pharmacists in their second professional year.
The purpose of this study was to optimize the measurement of student
pharmacist knowledge without penalty for guessing or incorrect responses. Partial-credit scoring was accomplished by
assigning a tiered score based on descending “best” answers. Test items were sent to an external content
review panel for content validity. Parameters evaluated in this study included item difficulty,
Alternatives
to traditional multiple choice testing that have been evaluated in the
literature include the use of open-ended, uncued (UnQ) items, which allows the
test-taker to select an answer from over 500 responses. This type of test has been used for Family
Practice board examinations.5 One study conducted in over 7,000 family
practice residents found the UnQ to be a more reliable method for determining a
physician’s competence.
The
best mode of assessment probably dependents on the material being tested. In my experiences, the open-response format
allows for the best indicator of a student’s knowledge - but like any test, the
questions must be carefully worded. The biggest
weakness of open-response essay-type exams is the time required to grade them
[Editor’s note: As well as the inherent subjectivity
required when judging the “correctness” of the student’s answers]. To my chagrin, the use of CMC questions will
likely continue for licensing examinations for healthcare professionals.
References:
1. Haladyna TM. The
effectiveness of several multiple-choice formats. Appl Measure Educ 1992;5:73-88.
2. Albanese MA. Type
K and other complex multiple-choice items: an analysis of research and item
properties. Educ Measure Issues and
Practice 1993;12:28-33.
3. Frisbie D, Sweeney DC. The
relative merits of multiple true-false achievement tests. Journal of Educational Measurement 1982;19:29-35.
4. Wongwiwtthananukit S, Popovich NG, Bennett
DE. Assessing
pharmacy student knowledge on multiple-choice examinations using partial-credit
scoring of combined-response multiple-choice items. Am J Pharm Educ 2000;61:1-10.
5. Veloski JJ, Rabinowitz HK, Robeson MR, Young
PR. Patients
don’t present with five choices: an alternative to multiple-choice tests in
assessing physicians’ competence. Acad
Med 1999;74:539-46.