Analysis of the multiple choice items of the Enade 2016 tests
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18222/eae.v34.7951Keywords:
Higher Education, Enade, Measurement Techniques, Item AnalysisAbstract
The objective was to investigate whether the format of an item, the required cognitive level and the item’s position in the Enade 2016 test affect the results, including the probability of invalidation. The items were classified according to format and cognitive level, based on the literature and Bloom’s Taxonomy. Post-test administration measures were used: difficulty and discrimination indices. Regarding format, it was found that assertion-reason items were more difficult, single answer items had a slightly greater average for discrimination capacity, and one third of the assertion-reason items were invalidated. As for cognitive level, the two indices have lower averages in items of analysis, and the proportion of invalidated items of this level is higher. The hypothesis that the position of an item in the test affects the result was rejected.
Downloads
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). Uma taxonomia para aprender, ensinar e avaliar: Uma revisão da taxonomia de objetivos educacionais da Bloom. Longman.
Bloom, B. S. (1972). Taxionomia de objetivos educacionais 1: Domínio cognitivo. Globo.
Castro, R. da S., & Moreira, E. V. (2010). Exame Nacional de Desempenho de Estudantes: Avaliação ou exame? EDUCAmazônia, 4(1), 1-10.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira. (2017a). Guia de elaboração e revisão de itens. Inep.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira. (2017b). Enade 2017 – Relatório síntese de área: Arquitetura e Urbanismo. Inep.
López Padilla, A., Sánchez Restrepo, H. S., Espinosa Rodríguez, J. D., & Carmona Soto, M. B. (2013). Elaboración de ítems de opción múltiple. Instituto Nacional de Evaluación Educativa.
Oliveira, E. da S. G. de., & Costa, M. de A. (2001). Por um zero consciente? Discussão proativa do Exame Nacional de Cursos. Revista Brasileira de Política e Administração da Educação, 17(2), 221-232.
QEdu Academia. (2019). Guia prático de elaboração de itens: Breves recomendações sobre como criar itens melhores para as suas provas. QEdu.
Rodrigues, J. F. (2009). Avaliação do estudante universitário. Senac.
Rodrigues, S. G. (2002). Texto adaptado de documento do MEC/Inep para elaboração de itens. In L. Prazeres (Org.), Normas técnicas para a elaboração de itens. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Estudos em Avaliação Educacional
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the paper simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution license that allows the sharing of the paper with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are authorized to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this journal (for example publishing in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their paper on-line (for example in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any moment before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes, as well as increase the impact and citation of the published paper (See The Effect of Open Access).
