A Simple Answer to a Simple Question on Changing Answers.
A Simple Answer to a Simple Question on Changing Answers.
复制标题
关于更改答案的简单问题的简单答案。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
B. Bridgeman
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Bridgeman
在《教育测量杂志》2011 年冬季刊上的一篇文章中，van der Linden、Jeon 和 Ferrara 建议“考生应该相信自己最初的直觉，并在有机会复习测试项目时保留他们最初的反应。”他们提出了一个复杂的 IRT 模型，该模型似乎表明，改变答案会让学生的情况变得更糟。正如随后的勘误中指出的那样，这个结论是基于有缺陷的数据，并且由于模型无法收敛，因此他们的方法无法分析正确的数据。这使得他们关于答案改变的价值的基本问题没有得到解答。更直接的方法是简单地计算在有机会更改答案后分数高于、低于或与初始分数相同的考生的数量。使用与原始文章相同的数据集，绝大多数学生在有机会更改答案后获得了更高的分数。
In an article in the Winter 2011 issue of the Journal of Educational Measurement, van der Linden, Jeon, and Ferrara suggested that “test takers should trust their initial instincts and retain their initial responses when they have the opportunity to review test items.” They presented a complex IRT model that appeared to show that students would be worse off by changing answers. As noted in a subsequent erratum, this conclusion was based on flawed data, and that the correct data could not be analyzed by their method because the model failed to converge. This left their basic question on the value of answer changing unanswered. A much more direct approach is to simply count the number of examinees whose scores after an opportunity to change answers are higher, lower, or the same as their initial scores. Using the same data set as the original article, an overwhelming majority of the students received higher scores after the opportunity to change answers.