Next Article in Journal
Academic stressors perception according to the motivational orientation to goals in university students
Previous Article in Journal
Resilience as a protective factor of chronic stress in teachers
 
 
European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education is published by MDPI from Volume 10 Issue 1 (2020). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with University Association of Education and Psychology.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The cognitive requirement in the multiple-choice exams in the university context and its relationship with learning approaches, self-regulation, teaching methods and academic performance

by
Pilar Gandía Herrero
and
Agustín Romero Medina
*
Universidad de Murcia. Departamento de Psicología Básica y Metodología. Facultad de Psicología. Campus de Espinardo. C.P.: 30100. Murcia (España)
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2019, 9(3), 177-187; https://doi.org/10.30552/ejihpe.v9i3.333
Submission received: 25 July 2019 / Revised: 2 September 2019 / Accepted: 18 September 2019 / Published: 18 September 2019

Abstract

The quality of academic performance and learning outcomes depend on various factors, both psychological and contextual. The academic context includes the training activities and the type of evaluation or examination, which also influences cognitive and motivational factors, such as learning and study approaches and self-regulation. In our university context, the predominant type of exam is that of multiple-choice questions. The cognitive requirement of these questions may vary. From Bloom's typical taxonomy, it is considered that from lower to higher cognitive demand we have questions about factual, conceptual, application knowledge, etc. Normally, the teacher does not take these classifications into account when preparing this type of exam. We propose here an adaptation model of the multiple choice questions classification according to cognitive requirement (associative memorization, comprehension, application), putting it to the test analyzing an examination of a subject in Psychology Degree and relating the results with measures of learning approaches (ASSIST and R-SPQ-2F questionnaires) and self-regulation in a sample of 87 subjects. The results show differential academic performance according to "cognitive" types of questions and differences in approaches to learning and self-regulation. The convenience of taking into account these factors of cognitive requirement when elaborating multiple choice questions is underlined.
Keywords: Approaches to learning; self-regulation; university students; academic performance; multiple-choice questions Approaches to learning; self-regulation; university students; academic performance; multiple-choice questions

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Herrero, P.G.; Medina, A.R. The cognitive requirement in the multiple-choice exams in the university context and its relationship with learning approaches, self-regulation, teaching methods and academic performance. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2019, 9, 177-187. https://doi.org/10.30552/ejihpe.v9i3.333

AMA Style

Herrero PG, Medina AR. The cognitive requirement in the multiple-choice exams in the university context and its relationship with learning approaches, self-regulation, teaching methods and academic performance. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education. 2019; 9(3):177-187. https://doi.org/10.30552/ejihpe.v9i3.333

Chicago/Turabian Style

Herrero, Pilar Gandía, and Agustín Romero Medina. 2019. "The cognitive requirement in the multiple-choice exams in the university context and its relationship with learning approaches, self-regulation, teaching methods and academic performance" European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education 9, no. 3: 177-187. https://doi.org/10.30552/ejihpe.v9i3.333

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop