Cognitive Processing Requirements of Constructed Figural Response and Multiple-Choice Items in Architecture Assessment.

Autor/inn/en	Martinez, Michael E.; Katz, Irvin R.
Institution	Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.
Titel	Cognitive Processing Requirements of Constructed Figural Response and Multiple-Choice Items in Architecture Assessment.
Quelle	(1992), (36 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Architecture; Cognitive Processes; Construct Validity; Constructed Response; Difficulty Level; Educational Assessment; Multiple Choice Tests; Psychometrics; Test Format; Test Items; Test Use; Visual Stimuli + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Architektur; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess; Schwierigkeitsgrad; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Multiple choice examinations; Multiple-choice tests, Multiple-choice examinations; Multiple-Choice-Verfahren; Psychometry; Psychometrie; Testentwicklung; Test content; Testaufgabe; Testanwendung
Abstract	Contrasts between constructed response items and stem-equivalent multiple-choice counterparts typically have involved averaging item characteristics, and this aggregation has masked differences in statistical properties at the item level. Moreover, even aggregated format differences have not been explained in terms of differential cognitive processing demands of the items. In this paper, item-level differences between figural response items and their multiple-choice counterparts in architecture are examined. The figural response item format is an assessment form that uses figural materials (such as graphs, illustrations, and diagrams) as item stimuli and the medium through which knowledge and skill are demonstrated. Item-level format differences in difficulty are examined, and then whether there are corresponding differences in the cognitive processing requirements of the items that can account for the psychometric differences is studied. Based on the evidence uncovered for these connections, it is proposed that differences in processing requirements and concomitant psychometric properties might be systematic and predictable. These analyses shed light on aspects of construct validity that are frequently neglected, and they touch the interface of the usually segregated psychometric and cognitive methodologies. Four tables and three figures illustrate the discussion. (Contains 20 references.) (Author/SLD)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC