Open Access
Subscription Access
Open Access
Subscription Access
Multi-Facet Evaluation of Under-Graduate Engineering Students by Taxonomy Based MCQ Test
Subscribe/Renew Journal
Assessment of students has always been a difficult task for faculties, particularly when it is an engineering domain. It is observed that in recent scenario, typical written exams are not worthy to conduct as they do not offer sufficient flexibility to evaluate students; flexibility in terms of assessing promptness of attempting variety of questions. Therefore, here an attempt has been made with a taxonomy based an online multiple-choice question- MCQ test for a subject- High Voltage Engineering at RK University. In the present work, the categorization of questions is again a reconsideration of Bloom's taxonomy: Cognitive domain, Affective domain, Psychomotor domain. In the aforementioned subject, a wide spectrum of questions was assigned to the students. It comprises questions with mathematical calculations, illustration and circuits, and reasoning. The objectives of this trial were not only to evaluate the mass of students who attempted a particular set of questions but also to analyze the response of these attempts. This also provides an insight about the proficiency of students. Besides, the paper encompasses the justifiable arguments for the results of the examination by stating the probable causes and effects of it. In the later stage of it, the remedies are also suggested to improve the performance of such examination. Further, certain merits and demerits of the opted mode of examination are also discussed.
Keywords
Assessment, Affection, Cognition, Psychomotor, Taxonomy.
Subscription
Login to verify subscription
User
Font Size
Information
- AAeschlimann, RWestkaemper,MDoherty,AD Woolf (2001), Multiple choice question quiz: A Valid Test for Needs Assessment in CME In Rheumatology and For Self-Assessment, BMJ Journals, AnnRheumDis 2001;60:740–743.
- Tim S Roberts (2006), The Use of Multiple Choice Tests for Formative and Summative Assessment,8th Australasian Computing Education (ACE2006), Australia, Conferences in Information Technology,Vol. 52.
- Faculty Focus (2015), Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Types of Test Questions, Higher ED Teaching Strategies from Magna Publications [Online]. Available at:, 9th Jun 2017.
- Moss E (2001), Multiple Choice Questions: Their Value as an Assessment Tool, US National Library of Medicine, National Institute of Health, 14(6):661-6.
- UNSW Sydney (2017), Assessing by Multiple Choice Questions [Online]. Available at:
- Lorin W. Anderson, David R. Krathwohl; et al (2001), A Taxonomy for Learning,Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, ISBN 13: 9780801319037, , Pearson Publications, Section-II,Chapter-5.
- Richard M. Felder, Rebecca Brent (2004), The ABC's of Engineering Education:Abet, Bloom's Taxonomy, Cooperative Learning, and So On, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Session 1375.
- Heather M Bush, Jennifer Daddysman, and Richard Charnigo (2014), Improving Outcomes with Bloom's Taxonomy: From Statistics Education to Research Partnerships, J Biomet Biostat ISSN: 2155-6180 JBMBS, an Open Access Journal,Volume 5, Issue 4.
- Arthur James Swart (2010), Evaluation of Final Examination Papers in Engineering: A Case Study Using Bloom's Taxonomy, IEEE Transactions on Education,Vol. 53,No. 2.
- Nancy E Adams (2015), Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives, Journal of Medical Library Association, vol.103(3).
- Saul McLeod (2014), Questionnaires, Simply Psychology [online]. Available at:.
- Susan E. Wyse (2014), The Importance of Questionnaire Structure, blog in Snap Surveys [online].Available at:.
- Donald Clark (1995), The Performance Juxtaposition Site [online].Available at: .
Abstract Views: 253
PDF Views: 4