The Effect of Practice Sessions on the Use of Separate Answer Sheets by First and Second Graders

Ramseyer, Gary C.; Cashen, Valjean M.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1971.tb00922.x

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Children in grades lower than the fourth have attained significantly lower test scores when the major format change of using a separate answer sheet is introduced (Cashen & Ramseyer, 1969;Harcourt, Brace, & Jovanovich, 1973;Ramseyer & Cashen, 1971). The skill of complet;ng the separate answer sheet appears to be developmental in nature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of Children's Strategy Use on Reading Achievement Tests

Scruggs¹,

Bennion²,

Lifson³

1985

The Elementary School Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of Children's Strategy Use on Reading Achievement Tests

Scruggs¹,

Bennion²,

Lifson³

1985

The Elementary School Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As has been reported by previous investigators (cf. Gaffney & Maguire, 1971;Ramseyer & Cashen, 1971;Cashen & Ramseyer, 1969;Loiselle, 1960), test scores are often adversely affected when separate answer sheets are used by lower elementary school pupils. The results of this study confirm these results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Achievement Test Reliability as a Function of Pupil‐response Procedures

Beck¹

1974

J Educational Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Muller, Calhoun, and Orling (1972) conclude that test reliability is dependent on the type of answer document used by elementary pupils. The present study was designed in part to assess the differential effect of two pupil response procedures (answering directly in the test booklet versus on a separate answer folder) on Metropolitan Achievement Tests scores of grades 3 and 4 pupils. Over 4000 pupils from nine school systems took the Metropolitan, half responding in their booklets and half using answer folders. The two groups were matched by grade in general scholastic aptitude. Although the separate answer folder group received lower scores than did the group responding in the test booklets, the score reliabilities did not differ significantly for any test. Additionally, these reliabilities did not differ significantly from comparable Metropolitan normative reliabilities. For survey achievement tests such as Metropolitan, test reliability would not appear to depend on pupil response mode.

show abstract

“…Cashen and Ramseyer (1969;Ramseyer and Cashen 1971) found a statistically significant difference in performance of grade 1 and 2 students (aged 6 to 8 years) between response formats, with students scoring less well when they were required to write their answers to multiple-choice questions on a separate answer sheet. At grade 3 (aged 8 to 9 years), students were found to be able to cope with the additional demand and statistically significant differences in performance between response format were removed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Improving students' capacity to show their knowledge, understanding and skills in exams by using combined question and answer papers

Crisp

2008

Research Papers in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research set out to compare the quality, length and nature of (1) exam responses in combined question and answer booklets, with (2) responses in separate answer booklets in order to inform choices about response format. Combined booklets are thought to support candidates by giving more information on what is expected of them. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the use of combined booklets may encourage students to attempt an answer rather than write nothing. However, candidates may be wasting time if they write more in order to fill the space but this extra response is not worth extra credit.Questions from a geography AS-level past paper were arranged to form two subtests. Over 400 students each attempted one part of the test in a combined paper and one part in a separate booklet. Six students were interviewed after taking the test. Four examiners marked the scripts and completed coding sheets to record the length of responses and which of a number of options about the nature of the responses applied (e.g. Not enough depth, Evidence of 'gapfilling'/irrelevance).On both parts of the test, the mean total scores were found to be significantly higher with the combined paper than the separate booklet. The combined format often prompted longer answers and for most items elicited many more full-length answers. The combined format tended to encourage students to show their depth of knowledge and understanding, elicit fewer incidences of irrelevance (or gap-filling), reduce the frequency of good answers that were not concise and increase the occurrence of full, concise responses. The combined format gave students better information on what was needed and encouraged them to show their knowledge, understanding and skills more fully. This confirms the view that this format is preferable for exam papers requiring short to medium-length responses.

show abstract

The Effect of Practice Sessions on the Use of Separate Answer Sheets by First and Second Graders

Cited by 12 publications

References 1 publication

An Analysis of Children's Strategy Use on Reading Achievement Tests

An Analysis of Children's Strategy Use on Reading Achievement Tests

Achievement Test Reliability as a Function of Pupil‐response Procedures

Improving students' capacity to show their knowledge, understanding and skills in exams by using combined question and answer papers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About