Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorOpstad, Leiv
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-03T09:07:29Z
dc.date.available2021-11-03T09:07:29Z
dc.date.created2021-10-24T15:21:25Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Education Economics and Development (IJEED). 2021, 12 (4), 311-328.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1759-5673
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2827488
dc.description.abstractThe selection of assessment format in business schools and higher education has been a topic of consideration for many years. Currently, in Norway, there is a debate about replacing constructed response (CR) questions with multiple-choice (MC) questions. MC tests are popular and have been substituted for traditional exams in many fields. In the context of costs, there is obviously a gain to using MC tests. By exploring data from a macroeconomics course that applied both essay-based and multiple-choice-based tests simultaneously, it was possible to compare the two exam formats and to identify students who performed differently. By using a linear regression model, the findings revealed that there were substantial differences in the influence of the independent variables for the two methods. For CR, the result confirms prior research, while there was almost no significant connection between the chosen independent variables and the dependent variable MC. Therefore, students' background, skills and personal characteristics matter.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherInderscienceen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleCan we identify the students who have success in macroeconomics depending on exam format by comparing multiple-choice test and constructed response test?en_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.pagenumber311-328en_US
dc.source.volume12en_US
dc.source.journalInternational Journal of Education Economics and Development (IJEED)en_US
dc.source.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1504/IJEED.2021.118415
dc.identifier.cristin1948028
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal