Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India
Background: Item analysis is widely used to improve test quality by observing the characteristics of a particular item and this can hence be used to ensure that questions are of an appropriate standard for inclusion in a test. Hence, this study to evaluate the multiple choice questions of an undergr...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2016-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.jdrntruhs.org/article.asp?issn=2277-8632;year=2016;volume=5;issue=3;spage=183;epage=186;aulast=Karkal |
| _version_ | 1811327729609474048 |
|---|---|
| author | Yeshwanth Rao Karkal Ganesh Shenoy Kundapur |
| author_facet | Yeshwanth Rao Karkal Ganesh Shenoy Kundapur |
| author_sort | Yeshwanth Rao Karkal |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Item analysis is widely used to improve test quality by observing the characteristics of a particular item and this can hence be used to ensure that questions are of an appropriate standard for inclusion in a test. Hence, this study to evaluate the multiple choice questions of an undergraduate pharmacology program.
Materials and Methods: A total of 488 items were randomly selected and subjected to item analysis. Facility value (FV) and discrimination index (DI) were calculated by applying the appropriate formulae with the help of MS Excel.
Results: The overall mean FV (difficulty index) and DI was 56.64% (±2.36) (mean range: 23.89-71.25%) and 0.22 (±0.84) (mean range: 0.16-0.44), respectively. 71.09% of the items analyzed were found to be “good/optimal” items based on the FV (14.13% — optimal, 56.96% — good) and 36.26% of the items analyzed were found be “very/reasonably” good items based on the DI (20.49% — very good, 15.77% — reasonably good). The number of “poor” items was 22.95% based on the FV and 18.23% based on the DI. When both the parameters were considered together, only 23% of the items were found to be “good” and 17.11% were found to be “poor.” Pearson correlation between the two indices showed a negative correlation (but statistically insignificant) between these two indices (r = −0.001379, P= 0.9774).
Conclusion: Item analysis when regularly incorporated can help to develop a very useful, valid and a reliable question bank. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T15:13:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4125155553bb4eacae7958f787f1d104 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2277-8632 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T15:13:10Z |
| publishDate | 2016-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-4125155553bb4eacae7958f787f1d1042022-12-22T02:41:57ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences2277-86322016-01-015318318610.4103/2277-8632.191842Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in IndiaYeshwanth Rao KarkalGanesh Shenoy KundapurBackground: Item analysis is widely used to improve test quality by observing the characteristics of a particular item and this can hence be used to ensure that questions are of an appropriate standard for inclusion in a test. Hence, this study to evaluate the multiple choice questions of an undergraduate pharmacology program. Materials and Methods: A total of 488 items were randomly selected and subjected to item analysis. Facility value (FV) and discrimination index (DI) were calculated by applying the appropriate formulae with the help of MS Excel. Results: The overall mean FV (difficulty index) and DI was 56.64% (±2.36) (mean range: 23.89-71.25%) and 0.22 (±0.84) (mean range: 0.16-0.44), respectively. 71.09% of the items analyzed were found to be “good/optimal” items based on the FV (14.13% — optimal, 56.96% — good) and 36.26% of the items analyzed were found be “very/reasonably” good items based on the DI (20.49% — very good, 15.77% — reasonably good). The number of “poor” items was 22.95% based on the FV and 18.23% based on the DI. When both the parameters were considered together, only 23% of the items were found to be “good” and 17.11% were found to be “poor.” Pearson correlation between the two indices showed a negative correlation (but statistically insignificant) between these two indices (r = −0.001379, P= 0.9774). Conclusion: Item analysis when regularly incorporated can help to develop a very useful, valid and a reliable question bank.http://www.jdrntruhs.org/article.asp?issn=2277-8632;year=2016;volume=5;issue=3;spage=183;epage=186;aulast=KarkalAssessmentitem analysismultiple choice questions |
| spellingShingle | Yeshwanth Rao Karkal Ganesh Shenoy Kundapur Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India Journal of Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences Assessment item analysis multiple choice questions |
| title | Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India |
| title_full | Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India |
| title_fullStr | Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India |
| title_full_unstemmed | Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India |
| title_short | Item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an International Medical School in India |
| title_sort | item analysis of multiple choice questions of undergraduate pharmacology examinations in an international medical school in india |
| topic | Assessment item analysis multiple choice questions |
| url | http://www.jdrntruhs.org/article.asp?issn=2277-8632;year=2016;volume=5;issue=3;spage=183;epage=186;aulast=Karkal |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yeshwanthraokarkal itemanalysisofmultiplechoicequestionsofundergraduatepharmacologyexaminationsinaninternationalmedicalschoolinindia AT ganeshshenoykundapur itemanalysisofmultiplechoicequestionsofundergraduatepharmacologyexaminationsinaninternationalmedicalschoolinindia |