Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) have long been the backbone of standardized testing in academia and industry. Correspondingly, there is a constant need for the authors of MCQs to write and refine new questions for new versions of standardized tests as well as to support measuring performance in the emerging massive open online courses, (MOOCs). Research that explores what makes a question difficult, or what questions distinguish higher-performing students from lower-performing students can aid in the creation of the next generation of teaching and evaluation tools. In the automated MCQ answering component of this thesis, algorithms query for definitions of scientific terms, process the returned web results, and compare the returned definitions to the original definition in the MCQ. This automated method for answering questions is then augmented with a model, based on human performance data from crowdsourced question sets, for analysis of question difficulty as well as the discrimination power of the non-answer alternatives. The crowdsourced question sets come from PeerWise, an open source online college-level question authoring and answering environment. The goal of this research is to create an automated method to both answer and assesses the difficulty of multiple choice inverse definition questions in the domain of introductory biology. The results of this work suggest that human-authored question banks provide useful data for building gold standard human performance models. The methodology for building these performance models has value in other domains that test the difficulty of questions and the quality of the exam takers.

Academics encounter problems with the selection, evaluation, testing and implementation of e-assessment software tools. The researcher experienced these problems while adopting e-assessment at the university where she is employed. Hence she undertook this study, which is situated in schools and departments in Computing-related disciplines, namely Computer Science, Information Systems and Information Technology at South African Higher Education Institutions. The literature suggests that further research is required in this domain. Furthermore, preliminary empirical studies indicated similar disabling factors at other South African tertiary institutions, which were barriers to long-term implementation of e-assessment. Despite this, academics who are adopters of e-assessment indicate satisfaction, particularly when conducting assessments with large classes. Questions of the multiple choice genre can be assessed automatically, leading to increased productivity and more frequent assessments. The purpose of this research is to develop an evaluation framework to assist academics in determining which e-assessment tool to adopt, enabling them to make more informed decisions. Such a framework would also support evaluation of existing e-assessment systems. The underlying research design is action research, which supported an iterative series of studies for developing, evaluating, applying, refining, and validating the SEAT (Selecting and Evaluating an e-Assessment Tool) Evaluation Framework and subsequently an interactive electronic version, e-SEAT. Phase 1 of the action research comprised Studies 1 to 3, which established the nature, context and extent of adoption of e-assessment. This set the foundation for development of SEAT in Phase 2. During Studies 4 to 6 in Phase 2, a rigorous sequence of evaluation and application facilitated the transition from the manual SEAT Framework to the electronic evaluation instrument, e-SEAT, and its further evolution. This research resulted in both a theoretical contribution (SEAT) and a practical contribution (e-SEAT). The findings of the action research contributed, along with the literature, to the categories and criteria in the framework, which in turn, contributed to the bodies of knowledge on MCQs and e-assessment. The final e-SEAT version, the ultimate product of this action research, is presented in Appendix J1. For easier reference, the Appendices are included on a CD, attached to the back cover of this Thesis.. / Computing / PhD. (Information Systems)

Academics encounter problems with the selection, evaluation, testing and implementation of e-assessment software tools. The researcher experienced these problems while adopting e-assessment at the university where she is employed. Hence she undertook this study, which is situated in schools and departments in Computing-related disciplines, namely Computer Science, Information Systems and Information Technology at South African Higher Education Institutions. The literature suggests that further research is required in this domain. Furthermore, preliminary empirical studies indicated similar disabling factors at other South African tertiary institutions, which were barriers to long-term implementation of e-assessment. Despite this, academics who are adopters of e-assessment indicate satisfaction, particularly when conducting assessments with large classes. Questions of the multiple choice genre can be assessed automatically, leading to increased productivity and more frequent assessments. The purpose of this research is to develop an evaluation framework to assist academics in determining which e-assessment tool to adopt, enabling them to make more informed decisions. Such a framework would also support evaluation of existing e-assessment systems. The underlying research design is action research, which supported an iterative series of studies for developing, evaluating, applying, refining, and validating the SEAT (Selecting and Evaluating an e-Assessment Tool) Evaluation Framework and subsequently an interactive electronic version, e-SEAT. Phase 1 of the action research comprised Studies 1 to 3, which established the nature, context and extent of adoption of e-assessment. This set the foundation for development of SEAT in Phase 2. During Studies 4 to 6 in Phase 2, a rigorous sequence of evaluation and application facilitated the transition from the manual SEAT Framework to the electronic evaluation instrument, e-SEAT, and its further evolution. This research resulted in both a theoretical contribution (SEAT) and a practical contribution (e-SEAT). The findings of the action research contributed, along with the literature, to the categories and criteria in the framework, which in turn, contributed to the bodies of knowledge on MCQs and e-assessment. The final e-SEAT version, the ultimate product of this action research, is presented in Appendix J1. For easier reference, the Appendices are included on a CD, attached to the back cover of this Thesis.. / Computing / PhD. (Information Systems)