Examining chemistry students’ perceptions toward multiple-choice assessment tools that vary in feedback and partial credit

Abstract

Multiple-choice testing with dichotomous scoring is one of the most common assessment methods utilized in undergraduate education. Determining students’ perceptions toward different types of multiple-choice testing formats is important for effective assessment. The present study compared two alternative multiple-choice testing formats used in a second-year required chemistry course: (i) Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IFAT®) and (ii) Personal Point Allocation (PPA). Both testing methods allow for partial credit, but only the IFAT® provides immediate feedback on students’ responses. Both survey and interview data indicated that, overall, most students preferred IFAT® to the PPA testing method. These positive ratings were related to potential increase in reward, ease of use, and confidence. IFAT® was also perceived to be less stress producing and anxiety provoking than PPA. Interview data not only supported these findings, but also indicated individual differences in preference for each of these two methods. Additionally, students’ feedback on strategies used for either testing method and suggestions on how to improve the methods are discussed.