Standards-based accountability systems are the most popular school reform effort in the United States today. Many of these systems use high-stakes exams to hold students, more than other stakeholders, accountable. In fact, standardized tests are the most popular instrument for gathering data for use in accountability systems. The exams themselves are overwhelmingly reliant on the use of multiple-choice (MC) questions to measure student achievement of state standards. Standard psychometric practice, however, does not include an analysis of qualitative data about how students answer MC questions. Thus, little is known about the extent to which these items measure student achievement. This study looks at how a small-sample group (n=13) of urban 10th graders answer a series of MC items from New York's Global History and Geography Regents exam. This exam was designed to measure students' knowledge of world history and students' ability to think historically. Data was gathered by asking student-participants to qthink aloudq when answering the items and conducting interview immediately following completion of the test in which participants were asked to explain their answers. The findings indicate that the MC questions were not effective measures of participant knowledge of historical facts, nor were they effective measures of participants' ability to think historically.The Global History and Geography Regents exam is designed to measure student achievement of New York State aquot;World ... The exam consists of a fifty- question multiple choice (MC) section, a document based essay and a thematic essay.
|Title||:||Measuring Achievement in History: Multiple-choice, High-stakes and Unsure Outcomes|
|Publisher||:||ProQuest - 2007|