Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Authentic measurement has become an important topic recently. Advocates of authentic measurement feel that objective tests, particularly multiple choice tests, cannot meet the demands required of today's tests and should be replaced by tests that can be closely matched to instruction and can assess higher order cognitive skills. In this article, we address the validity of several popular criticisms of objective tests and, where appropriate, consider the viability of some of the alternatives. The four criticisms of objective tests are that they (a) foster a one-right answer mentality, (b) narrow the curriculum, (c) focus on discrete skills, and (d) underrepresent the performance of low-socioeconomic status (SES) examinees. We suggest that the evidence against multiple choice tests is not nearly as strong as has been claimed, it remains to be proven whether authentic measurements are always better, and substantially more research regarding the strengths and weaknesses of various item formats for meeting particular measurement needs should be carried out.
Hambleton et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: