Some subscribers to Phys-L might be interested in a post titled "Re:
Multiple Choice Exam Questions" [Hake (2010)]. The abstract reads:
*******************************************
ABSTRACT: Karol Dean of the POD list asked: "Is there any research or
folklore to support the 1 question/minute formula [for
multiple-choice questions] that I've heard?"
To which Ken Bain replied: ". . . . . . multiple-choice questions
that simply require the regurgitation of isolated information, or
worse yet, the ability to recognize correct answers . . . tend to
foster surface or strategic rather than deep approaches to learning.
. . . .THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU CANNOT DEVELOP MULTIPLE-CHOICE
EXAMINATIONS THAT CAN FOSTER DEEP APPROACHES. Look, for example, at
the way Eric Mazur develops what are basically multiple-choice
questions for his Peer Learning approach. But that approach is
embedded in an environment designed to promote deep considerations."
In this post I:
(a) quote psychmetricians Mark Wilson and Meryl Bertenthal in support
of Bain's claim that "multiple-choice examinations that can foster
deep approaches," and
(b) elaborate on the physics education environment in which Mazur
came to desert the traditional passive student lecture for an
"Interactive Engagement" method.
*******************************************
"In science education, there is almost nothing of proven efficacy."
Grover Whitehurst, former director, Institute of Education
Sciences, USDE,
as quoted by Sharon Begley (2004)
"Physicists are out in front in measuring how well students learn the
basics, as science educators incorporate hands-on activities in hopes
of making the introductory course a beginning rather than a finale."
Erik Stokstad (2001)