TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON STUDENTS’ DIFFICULTIES IN USING MULTIPLE-CHOICE ANSWER SHEETS IN THE 2025 NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION EXAMINATION: A CASE STUDY IN NORTHERN MOUNTAINOUS PROVINCES OF VIETNAM

Autor

  • Tran Quang Hieu Thai Nguyen University of Education, Vietnam
  • Nguyen Thị Phuong Thai Nguyen University of Education, Vietnam
  • Tran Thi Thu Thai Nguyen University of Education, Vietnam

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v10i2.6016

Słowa kluczowe:

multiple-choice answer sheets, student, national high school graduation examination

Abstrakt

In the context of the Ministry of Education's reform of question formats and the use of multiple-choice answer sheets in the National High School Graduation Examination from 2025, research into the difficulties students face will help provide appropriate support strategies and practical advice for students during the test-taking process. This study aims to answer two research questions: (1) What difficulties do students encounter when using the current multiple-choice answer sheets? and (2) Is the application of AI in grading multiple-choice exams feasible, and how should it be implemented? The findings reveal that students in the northern mountainous provinces of Vietnam experience significant challenges with the answer sheets, particularly in misfilling answers, time-consuming corrections, and handling short-answer items. Most teachers support replacing answer shading with direct answer writing and highly value the potential of AI in grading. However, concerns remain regarding the accuracy of handwriting recognition and data security, calling for appropriate technical solutions and communication strategies. Through this study, we emphasize the importance of guiding students on commonly mistaken areas and encourage further research and development of AI-based assessment solutions in education.

Biogram autora

  • Tran Quang Hieu - Thai Nguyen University of Education, Vietnam

    Dr. Tran Quang Hieu is a lecturer at the Faculty of Physics, Thai Nguyen University of Education, Vietnam. He holds a Ph.D. in Physics and is currently involved in teaching and conducting research in the field of physics education and related interdisciplinary approaches. His academic interests include innovative teaching methodologies, integration of technology in science education, and the development of critical thinking skills in students.

    ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5618-6517

    Email: hieutq@tnue.edu.vn

Bibliografia

Ammar, A. (2009). An Automatic System to Grade Multiple Choice Questions paper based exams. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312136231_An_Automatic_System_to_Grade_Multiple_Choice_Questions_paper_based_exams

Bejar, I. I. (2017). A Historical Survey of Research Regarding Constructed-Response Formats. In Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment (pp. 565–633). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58689-2_18

Brady, A.-M. (2005). Assessment of learning with multiple-choice questions. Nurse Education in Practice, 5(4), 238–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2004.12.005

D. Howell, D., Tseng, D. C., & T. Colorado-Resa, J. (2017). Fast Assessments with Digital Tools Using Multiple-Choice Questions. College Teaching, 65(3), 145–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2017.1291489

Echternacht, G. (1976). Reliability and validity of item option weighting schemes. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 36(2), 301–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447603600208

Espitia, O., Paez, A., Mejia, Y., Carrasco, M., & Gonzalez, N. (2019). Optical mark recognition based on image processing techniques for the answer sheets of the Colombian high-stakes tests. Applied Computer Sciences in Engineering: 6th Workshop on Engineering Applications, WEA 2019, Santa Marta, Colombia, October 16–18, 2019, Proceedings 6, 167–176.

Frisbie, D. A. (1974). The Effect of Item Format on Reliability and Validity: a Study of Multiple Choice and True-False Achievement Tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(4), 885–892. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400417

Gobrecht, A., Tuma, F., Möller, M., Zöller, T., Zakhvatkin, M., Wuttig, A., Sommerfeldt, H., & Schütt, S. (2024). Beyond human subjectivity and error: a novel AI grading system. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2405.04323. http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.04323

Harris, F. T. C., & Buckley-Sharp, M. (2009). Automation of Multiple-choice Examination Marking. Medical Education, 2(1), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1968.tb02004.x

Jingyi, T., Hooi, Y. K., & Bin, O. K. (2021). Image processing for enhanced OMR answer matching precision. 2021 International Conference on Computer & Information Sciences (ICCOINS), 322–327. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCOINS49721.2021.9497172

Kellaghan, T., & Greaney, V. (2019). A Brief History of Written Examinations. In Public Examinations Examined (pp. 43–74). The World Bank. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1418-1_ch3

Kreiter, C. D., & Frisbie, D. A. (1989). Effectiveness of multiple true-false items. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(3), 207–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0203_2

Lennox, B. (1967). Marking Multiple-choice Examinations. Medical Education, 1(3), 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1967.tb01698.x

Linn, R. & Gronlund, N. E. (1994). Measurement and Assessment in Teaching. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242393428_Measurement_and_Assessment_In_Teaching

Mallick, A. K., & Ahsan, M. (2019). Multiple Choice Questions: A Potent Tool for Assessment of Medical Stu dents. In Indian Journal of Medical & Health Sciences. Red Flower Publication Private, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.21088/ijmhs.2347.9981.6119.1

Miller, M. D. (2019). Reliability in Educational Assessments. Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756810-0228

Ministry of Education and Training. (2023). The Exam Format Structure for the National High School Graduation Examination from 2025. Electronic Information Portal of the Ministry of Education and Training of Vietnam. Retrieved from https://moet.gov.vn/tintuc/Pages/tin tong hop.aspx?ItemID=8979

Ministry of Education and Training. (2024). Decision No. 764/QĐ-BGDĐT: Regulation on the Exam Format Structure for the National High School Graduation Examination from 2025.

Ministry of Education and Training. (2025). Official Dispatch No. 1239/BGDĐT-QLCL: Guidelines on Certain Aspects of Organizing the 2025 National High School Graduation Examination.

Mislevy, R. J. (2018). Sociocognitive Foundations of Educational Measurement. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315871691

Mohd Dzin, N. H., & Lay, Y. F. (2021). Assessing the Validity and Reliability of Science Multiple Choice Test Using Rasch Dichotomous Measurement Model. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 20(6), 924–941. m https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/21.20.927

Muller, D., Calhoun, E., & Orling, R. (1972). Test Reliability as a Function of Answer Sheet Mode. Journal of Educational Measurement, 9(4), 321–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1972.tb00964.x

Parekh, P., & Bahadoor, V. (2024). The Utility of Multiple-Choice Assessment in Current Medical Education: A Critical Review. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.59778

Patel, D., & Zaid, S. (2017). Efficient System for Evaluation of Omr Sheet-A Survey. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering, Science & Management, 3(7).

Rasaeian, N. (2004). A new methodology for comparison of three-test exam techniques in medical students. Retrieved from https://brieflands.com/articles/jme-105084.pdf

Solomon Chukwu Ohiri, D. I., & Nnennaya, C. (n.d.). Psychometric Properties of a Test: An Overview. http://dx.doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.5.0224.0539

Stern, M. J., Harris, F. T. C., & Buckley-Sharp, M. D. (1973). Multiple-choice question paper scores in pathology: A review of scores obtained in a pretest and in four final MB examinations of London University. Medical Education, 7(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1973.tb02203.x

T., H. (1995). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. Choice Reviews Online, 32(06), 32–3425. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.32-3425

Pobrania

Opublikowane

2025-05-09

Numer

Tom 10 Nr 2 (2025)

Dział

Articles

Licencja

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).