Evaluación de la Validez y Fiabilidad de un Sistema de Test Basado en el Grado de Confianza del Estudiante
Palabras clave:
Test basado en la confianza, Evaluación, Validez, Fiabilidad, Aprendizaje, Estudiante universitario, Grado de seguridadDerechos de autor 2020 Revista Iberoamericana de Evaluación Educativa
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0.
Resumen
Los exámenes de tipo test basados en la confianza del alumno son escasamente utilizados en el entorno académico español. Este sistema de evaluación hace énfasis tanto en el conocimiento del alumno como en el grado de seguridad que tiene del mismo. Se analizaron los resultados obtenidos en exámenes con el sistema de test basado en la confianza (TBC). El estudio se realizó en una escuela de Enfermería y Fisioterapia durante los cursos comprendidos de 2009 a 2014. Se compararon la validez y fiabilidad del TBC con las obtenidas con el sistema de test con puntuación tradicional por aciertos. Los alumnos adquieren pronto destreza con el nuevo procedimiento de puntuación, escogiendo de forma racional la opción de seguridad más adecuada acorde con su nivel de conocimientos. La validez del sistema de corrección es superior en el TBC respecto al sistema tradicional de test, con una diferencia estadísticamente significativa. La fiabilidad se analiza en cinco grupos de alumnos mediante el coeficiente ? de Cronbach, siendo en cuatro de ellos superior la consistencia interna con el TBC e igual en el restante. El test basado en el grado de seguridad ha mostrado ser un procedimiento que aporta ventajas frente al test tradicional. Proporciona mayor información al profesor, los alumnos se adaptan a él rápidamente y ha demostrado mayor validez e igual fiabilidad a las puntuaciones que el sistema tradicional.
Descargas
Citas
Ahlgren, A. (1970). A hand-scoring system for confidence-weighted scores. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education & Welfare, Office of Education.
Barr, D. A. y Burke, J. R. (2013). Using confidence-based marking in a laboratory setting: A tool for student self-assessment and learning. The Journal of Chiropractic Education, 27(1), 21-26. https://doi.org/10.7899/JCE-12-018
Ben–Shakhar, G. y Sinai, Y. (1991). Gender differences in multiple-choice tests: The role of differential guessing tendencies. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1991.tb00341.x
Biggs, J. B. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning process really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1993.tb01038.x
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goal S: Handbook I, cognitive domain. Londres: Longman Group.
Budescu, D. y Bar-Hillel, M. (1993). To guess or not to guess: A decision-theoretic view of formula scoring. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30(4), 277-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1993.tb00427.x
Chang, C. Y. y Cheng, W. Y. (2008). Science achievement and students’ self-confidence and interest in science: A Taiwanese representative sample study. International Journal of Science Education, 30(9), 1183-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701435384
Ebel, R.L. (1968). Valid confidence testing: Demonstration kit. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5(4), 353–354.
Entwistle, N., Hanley, M. y Ratcliffe, G. (1979). Approaches to learning and levels of understanding, British Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 99-114. https://doi.org/10.10800141192790050110
Frary, R. B. (1982). A simulation study of reliability and validity of multiple–choice test scores under six response–scoring modes. Journal of Educational Statistics, 7(4), 333-51. https://doi.org/ 10.3102/10769986007004333
Gardner, W. C. (1969, septiembre). The use of confidence testing in the Academic Instructor Course. Comunicación presentada en el Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association, Nueva York.
Gardner-Medwin, A. R. (1995). Confidence assessment in the teaching of basic science. Association for Learning Technology Journal, 3(1), 80-85. https://doi.org/10.3402/ rlt.v3i1.9597
Gardner-Medwin, A. R. (1998). Updating with confidence: Do your students know what they don’t know?. Health Informatics, 4, 45-46.
Gardner–Medwin, A. R. (2006). Confidence-based marking towards deeper learning and better exams. En C. Bryan y K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative Assessment in Higher Education (pp. 141-149). Londres: Routledge.
Gardner–Medwin, A. R. (2011). Reasonable doubt: uncertainty in education, science and law. Proceedings of the British Academy, 171, 465-83. https://doi.org/10.5871/bacad/9780197264843.003.0017
Gardner-Medwin, A. R. y Curtin, N. (2007). Certainty-Based Marking (CBM) for reflective learning and proper knowledge assessment. Recuperado de http://www.ucl.ac.uk/lapt/REAP_cbm.pdf
Gardner-Medwin, A. R. y Gahan, M. (2003, julio). Formative and summative confidence-based assessment. Comunicación presentada en el 7th International Computer–Aided Assessment Conference, Loughborough, Reino Unido. Recuperado de https://tmedwin.net/~ucgbarg/tea/caa03a.pdf
Hambleton, R. K., Roberts, D. M. y Traub, R. R. (1970). A comparison of the reliability and validity of two methods for assessing partial knowledge on a multiple-choice test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 7(2), 75-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1970.tb00698.x
Hassmen, P. y Hunt, D. P. (1994). Human self–assessment in multiple–choice testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 31(2), 149-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1994.tb00440.x
Hevner, K. (1932). A method of correcting for guessing in true–false tests and empirical evidence in support of IT. The Journal of Social Psychology, 3(3), 359-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1932.9919159
Hunt, D. P. (2003). The concept of knowledge and how to measure it. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), 100-13. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930310455414
Kansup, W. y Hakstian, A. R. (1975). A comparison of several methods of assessing partial knowledge in multiple choice tests: I. Scoring procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 12(4), 219-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1975.tb01024.x
Khan, K. S., Davies, D. A. y Gupta, J. K. (2001) Formative self–assessment using multiple true–false questions on the internet: Feedback according to confidence about correct knowledge. Medical Teacher, 23(2),158-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159003107
Kleitman, S. y Stankov, L. (2001). Ecological and person-oriented aspects of metacognitive processes in test-taking. Journal of Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15(3),321-341. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.705
Luetsch, K. y Burrows, J. (2016). Certainty rating in pre-and post-tests of study modules in an online clinical pharmacy course - A pilot study to evaluate teaching and learning. BMC Medical Education,16(1), 267-291. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0783-1
Marton, F. y Säljo, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences of learning (I): outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology,46(1), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x
Marton, F. y Säljo, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning II: outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(2), 115–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02304.x
Moore, D.A. y Healy, P.J. (2008). The trouble with overconfidence. Psychological Review, 115(2), 502-517.https://doi.org/10. 1037/0033-295X.115.2.502
Morales, P. (2006). Las pruebas objetivas: normas, modalidades y cuestiones discutidas. Recuperado dehttp://www.upcomillas. Es/personal/peter/otrosdocumentos /PruebasObjetivas. Pdf.
Morales, P. (2008). Estadística aplicada a las Ciencias Sociales. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia Comillas.
Morony, S., Kleitman, S., Lee, Y. P. y Stankov, L. (2013). Predicting achievement: confidence versus self-efficacy, anxiety, and self-concept in Confucian and European countries. International Journal of Educational Research,58, 79-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.11.002
Panadero, E. y Alonso-Tapia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate? Review of Zimmerman’s cyclical model of self-regulated learning. Anales de Psicología, 30(2), 450-462. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.2.167221
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219-25. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
Rippey, R. M. (1978), Interactive confidence test scoring and interpretation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38(1), 153-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447803800122
Sharma, M. D. y Bewes, J. (2011). Self-monitoring: Confidence, academic achievement and gender differences in Fhysics. Journal of Learning Design, 4(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v4i3.76
Stanger-Hall, K.F. (2012). Multiple-choice exams: An obstacle for higher-level thinking in introductory science classes. CBE Life Scientific Education.11(3), 294-306. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-11-0100
Stankov, L. (2000). Complexity, metacognition and fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 28(2), 121-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(99)00033-1
Stankov, L., Lee, J. y Paek, J. (2009). Realism of confidence judgments. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25, 123-30. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.25.2.123
Stankov, L., Lee, J., Luo, W. y Hogan, D. J. (2012). Confidence: A better predictor of academic achievement self-efficacy, self-concept and anxiety?. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 747-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.05.013
Thomson, B. (1994). Guidelines for authors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54,837-47.
Urosa, B. (1995). La adivinación en las pruebas objetivas: Alternativas a la fórmula clásica de corrección. Tesis Doctoral, Universidad Pontificia Comillas, España.