A discursive question: Supporting student-authored multiple choice questions through peer-learning software in non-STEMM disciplines

Peer‐learning that engages students in multiple choice question (MCQ) formulation promotes higher task engagement and deeper learning than simply answering MCQ's in summative assessment. Yet presently, the literature detailing deployments of student‐authored MCQ software is biased towards accounts from Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths and Medicine (STEMM) subjects, rather than discursive subjects or disciplines where content may contain fewer absolute facts and objective metrics and more nuance. We report on qualitative and quantitative findings from a semester‐long deployment of a peer‐learning software package (PeerWise) in a 140‐student course on Interaction Design. PeerWise enables students to author, rate and comment upon their peers' MCQ questions. The platform was enthusiastically adopted as a revision aid, yet overall question quality was poor and students expressed difficulty in translating the discursive nature of the course content into MCQs with only one correct answer. In addressing these shortcomings, this paper offers specific recommendations to instructors of more discursive subjects using student‐led MCQ authoring platforms, and further, how platforms such as PeerWise may be adapted to better suit disciplines characterised by discursive content. We propose alternative approaches to moderation and two suggestions for potential amendments to the software itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[1]  Gavin Heron,et al.  Re-engineering the multiple choice question exam for social work , 2013 .

[2]  Paul Denny,et al.  A participatory learning approach to biochemistry using student authored and evaluated multiple‐choice questions , 2011, Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[3]  A. Persky,et al.  Student Learning with Generated and Answered Peer-written Questions , 2018, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education.

[4]  Mihai Dupac,et al.  Using Peerwise to Improve Engagement and Learning , 2015 .

[5]  Paul Denny,et al.  The effect of virtual achievements on student engagement , 2013, CHI.

[6]  P. McCoubrie Improving the fairness of multiple-choice questions: a literature review , 2004, Medical teacher.

[7]  Anne-Marie Brady,et al.  Assessment of learning with multiple-choice questions. , 2005, Nurse education in practice.

[8]  HamerJohn,et al.  Coverage of course topics in a student generated MCQ repository , 2009 .

[9]  D. Nicol E‐assessment by design: using multiple‐choice tests to good effect , 2007 .

[10]  Steve New,et al.  INQUIRE: a case study in evaluating the potential of online MCQ tests in a discursive subject , 2004 .

[11]  Paul Denny,et al.  Collaborative learning with PeerWise , 2018 .

[12]  Paul Denny,et al.  Improving large class performance and engagement through student‐generated question banks , 2018, Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[13]  Alison E. Kay,et al.  Learning from Peer Feedback on Student-Generated Multiple Choice Questions: Views of Introductory Physics Students. , 2018 .

[14]  Nathaniel J. Hunsu,et al.  A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[15]  Ewan D. Tempero,et al.  Examining a Student-Generated Question Activity Using Random Topic Assignment , 2017, ITiCSE.

[16]  Ross K. Galloway,et al.  Student-generated content: using PeerWise to enhance engagement and outcomes in introductory physics courses , 2012 .

[17]  Anthea G Blunden,et al.  PeerWise: Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Web-Based Learning Aid in a Second-Year Psychology Subject , 2018 .

[18]  Paul Denny,et al.  Empirical Support for a Causal Relationship Between Gamification and Learning Outcomes , 2018, CHI.

[19]  Robert Howard,et al.  Student Attitudes to an Online, Peer-instruction, Revision Aid in Science Education , 2015 .

[20]  Stephen W. Draper,et al.  Catalytic assessment: understanding how MCQs and EVS can foster deep learning , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[21]  Paul Denny,et al.  Formative student-authored question bank: perceptions, question quality and association with summative performance , 2017, Postgraduate Medical Journal.

[22]  James H. Paterson,et al.  Evaluation Of Student Engagement With Peer Feedback Based On Student-Generated MCQs , 2012 .