• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Current State of Test Development, Administration, and Analysis: A Study of Faculty Practices.

作者信息

Bristol Timothy J, Nelson John W, Sherrill Karin J, Wangerin Virginia S

机构信息

Author Affiliations: Faculty (Dr Bristol), Walden University, Minneapolis, Minnesota; President (Dr Bristol) and Consultant (Ms Sherrill and Dr Wangerin), NurseTim, Inc, Waconia, Minnesota; and President and Data Scientist (Dr Nelson), Healthcare Environment, St Paul, Minnesota; Faculty (Ms Sherrill), Maricopa Community College, Phoenix, Arizona; and Clinical Assistant Professor (Dr Wangerin), Iowa State University, Ames.

出版信息

Nurse Educ. 2018 Mar/Apr;43(2):68-72. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000425.

DOI:10.1097/NNE.0000000000000425
PMID:28817472
Abstract

Developing valid and reliable test items is a critical skill for nursing faculty. This research analyzed the test item writing practice of 674 nursing faculty. Relationships between faculty characteristics and their test item writing practices were analyzed. Findings reveal variability in practice and a gap in implementation of evidence-based standards when developing and evaluating teacher-made examinations.

摘要

相似文献

1
Current State of Test Development, Administration, and Analysis: A Study of Faculty Practices.
Nurse Educ. 2018 Mar/Apr;43(2):68-72. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000425.
2
Flaws of Multiple Choice Questions in Teacher-Constructed Nursing Examinations: A Pilot Descriptive Study.教师自编护理考试中选择题的缺陷:一项初步描述性研究
J Nurs Educ. 2017 Aug 1;56(8):490-496. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20170712-08.
3
Writing Across the Curriculum: Reliability Testing of a Standardized Rubric.贯穿课程写作:标准化量表的信度测试。
J Nurs Educ. 2018 Jun 1;57(6):366-370. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20180522-08.
4
Nursing Faculty Development: Building a Common Grading Rubric to Evaluate Writing.护理教师发展:构建用于评估写作的通用评分标准
Nurse Educ. 2016 Sep-Oct;41(5):222-4. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000268.
5
Implementing a writing course in an online RN-BSN program.在在线注册护士-本科护理课程中实施写作课程。
Nurse Educ. 2014 Jan-Feb;39(1):17-21. doi: 10.1097/01.NNE.0000437362.73347.5c.
6
Concordance Within an RN to BSN Program: Standardized Writing Assessment Rubrics.注册护士到护理学学士项目中的一致性:标准化写作评估量表
Nurs Educ Perspect. 2019 Nov/Dec;40(6):372-373. doi: 10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000365.
7
The frequency of item writing flaws in multiple-choice questions used in high stakes nursing assessments.高风险护理评估中使用的多项选择题的题目编写缺陷频率。
Nurse Educ Today. 2006 Dec;26(8):662-71. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.07.006. Epub 2006 Oct 2.
8
Evaluating reflective writing for appropriateness, fairness, and consistency.评估反思性写作的适当性、公正性和一致性。
Nurs Educ Perspect. 2002 Sep-Oct;23(5):238-42.
9
Righting writing: strategies for improving nursing student papers.纠正写作:提高护生论文质量的策略
Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2010;7:Article8. doi: 10.2202/1548-923X.1964. Epub 2010 Feb 25.
10
Answering Student Questions During Examinations: A Descriptive Study of Faculty Beliefs.考试期间回答学生问题:对教师观念的描述性研究
Nurs Educ Perspect. 2016 May-Jun;37(3):168-70.