International Journal of Social Science and Business Vol. 3 No.

3, November 2018

Introduction to Test Item Classifications

Dr. Charles E. Notar (Emeritus)

Jacksonville State University
United States of America
Dr. Larry Beard
Jacksonville State University
United States of America
Dr. Joseph Akpan
Jacksonville State University
United States of America

Abstract
Parents complain because their child did not do well on a test. Many students also have similar
complaints and, in many cases, their complaints are valid. Some teachers make poor tests. Even
when they use tests that accompany a textbook the tests can be poorly constructed or the test
items may be used to measure the wrong learning objectives. Some areas of concern where
teacher made tests are constructed include: ambiguous questions, excessive wording, lack of
appropriate emphasis, and use of inappropriate item formats to name a few.
Key Words: Selection and supply type test items, learning, formative and summative evaluation,

The authors have children who have come home complaining about a teacher’s test. An example of a complain is
the teacher had six questions on the test that was not covered in the class and was covered in the text by one
paragraph. Worse is when the teacher requires a 250 word essay on ______ when there is one paragraph in text
and four notes during class.
The following is an introductory primer on test items and when to use them and their value to everyone
concerned.
Types of Test Items
There are two types of test questions. The test questions are divided into selection and supply based on how the
test taker answers the question.
Selection type (Objective): Answers to the questions are supplied and the person taking the test must chose the
correct one. Examples of selection type questions are multiple choice, matching, true-false or alternative-
response, and interpretive exercise.
Selection type test item value is due to measuring factual information and understanding, sampling broadly,
eliminating bluffing and writing skill, easy to score, scoring is objective, and pinpoints learning errors.
Supply type (Constructed, Subjective): The person taking the test must supply the answer to the test question.
These type test items in completion, short answer, and essay test questions. Essay type questions are divided into
two categories: restricted response and extended response (1-5, 2018).

6
© Center for Academic Research www.ijssb.com
Restricted response (short) essay questions provide the ability to explain cause-effect relationships,
describe applications of principles, present relevant arguments, formulate tenable hypotheses and valid
conclusions, state necessary assumptions, describe the limitations of data, and explain methods and procedures.
Extended response essay questions provide the ability to produce, organize, and express ideas; integrate
learning from different content areas; and evaluate the worth of ideas. Extended response is best used for higher
level cognitive thinking. Due to the length required to answer an extended response essay question only a few
questions can be asked in an allotted time. Supply type test item value measures factual information,
understanding, and synthesis. They are relatively easy to construct, eliminates blind guessing, and encourages
originality. Essay tests are appropriate when the group to be tested is small and the test is not to be reused, you
wish to encourage and reward the development of student skill in writing and/or you are more interested in
exploring the student’s attitudes than in measuring his/her achievement (6-8, 2018).
Objective tests are appropriate when the group to be tested is large and the test may be reused, highly reliable
scores must be obtained as efficiently as possible and/or impartiality of evaluation, fairness, and freedom from
possible test scoring influences are essential. Either essay or objective tests can be used to, measure almost any
important educational achievement a written test can measure, test understanding and ability to apply principles,
test ability to think critically and/or test ability to solve problems (9, 2018).
Figure 1 shows what type of test items to use when assessing one of the levels of Bloom’s taxonomy:

Figure 1: Types of test items/Bloom’s (Notar, 2003)

7
International Journal of Social Science and Business Vol. 3 No. 3, November 2018
While Figure 1 compares Bloom with test items Figure 2 compares test items characteristics with item types.

Figure 2: Comparison of test item characteristics between selection and supply items.
Knowledge is best measured through the use of objective tests, but skill development is best measured with
performance exercises. In addition, higher levels of thinking, as well as critical thinking, are better indicated on
essay tests. Objective questions can test knowledge and to some extent understanding and applying. But
subjective exams can test more levels on Bloom's taxonomy (analyze, evaluate).
Formative (Informal) Test
A better use of the criterion test is for formative evaluation. Formative evaluation is used to identify learning
weaknesses prior to completion of a lesson, module, unit. Therefore, formative evaluation occurs frequently
during instruction with the aim of testing enabling objectives before testing the terminal learning objectives.
Formative evaluation is a major learning activity in an instructional system. The use of practice exercises and self-
tests with student feedback sheets are examples of formative evaluation. In addition to being used as a corrective
feedback loop to reinforce the appropriate response it also serves to extinguish incorrect responses and becomes a
developmental tool.
Formative evaluations are procedures carried out as the instruction progresses. Formative assessments are
typically short, focused exercises. They are aimed at skill development at a given point in a specific unit of
instruction to verify that students are keeping pace with the concept and skills presented by instruction.
Formative assessments of all kinds inform both teacher and student by providing periodic feedback. They
indicate if the class or an individual student has missed a point(s) in the concept under study. They advise
instructors how to pace teaching and learning activities and indicate where difficulties may be occurring.
Formative uses:
A. Size up of students at beginning of year.
B. Identifying individual student’s learning needs
C. Identifying group learning needs
D. Designing instructional materials and activities.
Summative (Formal) Evaluations
As teachers, administrators, and counselors you may examine tests on the basis of format, intent, content, and
condition. Tests which are given at the end of large blocks of instruction are generally summative in nature. They
are used to evaluate student performance and usually occur infrequently.
8
© Center for Academic Research www.ijssb.com
These tests have the disadvantage of identifying problems when it's too late to resolve them. Objectives which
were not mastered may be identified without sufficient time left in the course to re-learn them. Also, if the
instruction is cumulative all of the following modules may be failed because of failure of a previous module.
Summative tests may be criterion tests, but when used in this fashion their ability is minimized.
Summative uses:
A. Assigning grades
B. Placement
C. Self-evaluation (Akpan, Notar, & Padgett, 2012; 10-15, 2018).
Figure 3 provides examples of formative and summative assessment. As stated above formative assessments are
corrected but not graded. Summative assessments count toward grades.

Figure 3: Examples of Formative and Summative Assessments (Appatachia Educational

Laboratory (1999).
Formative Assessments Summative Assessments

Characteristics of Sizing-Up Assessment

1. Sizing up is done at the start of the school year. Most teachers can describe the personal, social, and academic
characteristics of each pupil and the class as a whole after the first 2 weeks of school.
2. Sizing up is pupil-centered. Much of the information about pupils and their characteristics are the focus of
assessment.
Group Evaluation
Group work often is evaluated according to results, products, or presentations. In addition, teachers sometimes
attempt to evaluate each group on its ability to cooperate, stay on task, fulfill individual responsibilities, and
convey positive attitudes when groups or committees were meeting. Cooperative learning, for example, tends to
encourage students to help one another meet their responsibilities. Stronger students often tutor weaker students in
the various aspects of the assignment.

9
International Journal of Social Science and Business Vol. 3 No. 3, November 2018
In a cooperative learning activity, the teacher might evaluate the performance of a randomly selected group
member; therefore, every student must be prepared to represent the group as a whole. Evaluation of group panel
or committee reports can provide assessment difficulties. Some teachers give individual grades on oral
performance, and others also give a group grade. To more fairly judge individual contributions to the group's
presentation, some mentors require written material and reports from each student to help reveal the amount and
quality of individual efforts. Basics of any group assessment must include:
Assess individual, as well as group, learning and performance.
Assess process as well as product.
Make your assessment criteria and grading scheme clear.
Team evaluations: each member of the team evaluates the dynamics of the team as a whole.
Peer evaluations: each team member evaluates the contributions of his/her teammates.
Self-evaluations: each team member documents and evaluates his own contributions to the
team (16-18, 2018).
Conclusion
Teachers, administrators, and counselors must use both summative and formative types of tests. However, the
more formative testing is used the better the chances that the students will do well on the summative tests (Notar,
& Allanson. (2018).

References
1 retrieved from www.catforms.com/pages/item-formats-%26-standards.html
2 retrieved from
https://valenciacollege.edu/faculty/development/coursesResources/documents/SteveDowningHandout1.pdf
3 retrieved from https://jeremiahkimiaublog.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/educational-measurements-and-evaluation-
types-of-tests-and -their-construction/
4 retrieved from https:www2.palomar.edu/pages/testwritingstrategies/2015/04/03/objective-or-subjective-those-are-the-
questions/
5 retrieved from Carla.umn.edu/assessment/vac/research/construction/html
6 retrieved from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/examples-restrictedresponse-performance-tasks-35596.html
7 retrieved from http://educationalevaluationhema.blogspot.com/2011/03/essay-test.html
8 retrieved from https://ctl.yale.edu/BloomsTaxonomy
9 retrieved from https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/teaching-resources/teaching-tips/developing-
assignments/exams/questions-types-characteristics-suggestions
10 retrieved from https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/assessment/basics/formative-summative.
11 retrieved from www.niu.edu/facdev/_pdf/guide/assessment/formative-and-summative
12 retrieved from https://ctl.yale.edu/Formative-Summative-Assessments
13 retrieved from citl.indiana.edu › … › Assessing Student Learning
14 retrieved from https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-formative-and...
15 retrieved from http://edu.stemjobs.com/formative-vs-summative-assessment/
16 retrieved from https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/design/instructionalstrategies/groupprojects/assess.html
17 retrieved from https://www.utc.edu/walker-center-teaching-learning/teaching-resources/group-projects.php
18 retrieved from
http://jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/examples/szymanski08/individual%20group%20evaluation.pdf
Akpan, J., Notar, C., & Padgett, S. (2012). Formative assessment: A basic foundation for teaching and learning.
National Teacher Education Journal. 5(1), 83-98.
Appatachia Educational Laboratory (1999). On target with authentic assessment; creating and implementing classroom
workshop models. Author: AEL School Workshop. Charleston, West Virginia.
Baldwin, M. D., Keating, J. F., & Bachman, K. J. (2006). Teaching in Secondary Schools: Meeting the Challenges of
Today’s Adolescents. Columbus, OH: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall, 57.
Notar, C. E. (2003). EFD 632 Assessment in Education. Jacksonville State University.
Notar, C. E., & Allanson, P. E. (2018). A practical guide to assessment literacy. Advances in Social Science Research
Journal, 5(8), 633-641.

10