Investigating Male Bias in Multiple Choice Questions: Contrasting Formative and Summative Settings

Previous studies have claimed that male advantage may arise from multiple choice question types; we have made a detailed evaluation of this hypothesis, finding limited evidence that female students are disadvantaged by multiple choice questions in summative assessment. Additionally, we find no significant evidence of a gender gap around the use of multiple choice type questions, including variants such as multiple response questions, in formative assessment. Our findings suggest that the use of a multiple choice question format is not a significant factor in the gender gap in assessment

Students' preferences in undergraduate mathematics assessment

Existing research into students' preferences for assessment methods has been developed from a restricted sample: in particular, the voice of students in the ‘hard-pure sciences’ has rarely been heard. We conducted a mixed method study to explore mathematics students' preferences of assessment methods. In contrast to the message from the general assessment literature, we found that mathematics students differentially prefer traditional assessment methods such as closed book examination; they perceive them to be fairer than innovative methods and they perceive traditional methods to be the best discriminators of mathematical ability. We also found that although students prefer to be assessed by traditional methods they are also concerned by the mix of methods they encounter during their degree, suggesting that more account needs to be taken about the students' views of this mix. We discuss the impact of the results on the way general findings about assessment preference should be interpreted

The Professional Responsibility Case for Valid and Nondiscriminatory Bar Exams

Title VII protects against workplace discrimination in part through the scrutiny of employment tests whose results differ based on race, gender, or ethnicity. Such tests are said to have a disparate impact, and their use is illegal unless their validity can be established. Validity means that the test is job-related and measures what it purports to measure. Further, under Title VII, even a valid employment test with a disparate impact could be struck down if less discriminatory alternatives exist.Licensing tests, including bar exams, have been found to be outside these Title VII protections. But the nondiscrimination values that animate Title VII disparate impact analysis for employers apply just as fundamentally to attorney licensing through principles of professional responsibility and legal ethics.This Article examines the civil rights cases from the 1970s that established bar examiners’ immunity from Title VII. It then analyzes our professional duties of public protection, competence, and nondiscrimination that require valid, nondiscriminatory attorney licensing tests, suggesting that the Title VII framework be borrowed for this purpose. The Article then undertakes that scrutiny, presenting evidence of the disparate impact of bar exams and their unproven validity, and suggesting feasible, less discriminatory modifications and alternatives. In other words, core professional responsibilities require consideration and adoption of valid licensing mechanisms that can reduce any disparate impact in who we permit to enter our profession, and who we exclude

Disparities in COVID-19 Rates Among Various Demographics and Lack of Racial Representation in Medical Texts

The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak, which originated in Wuhan, China in December of 2019, has impacted nations all over the globe. Given the health disparities which existed within the United States prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, this pandemic continued to pose a significant challenge to the health of the public. The aims of this research study were twofold: (1) to analyze the incidence rates of COVID-19 among different racial and ethnic groups within the United States and (2) to describe the occurrence of diversity within medical texts. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated health disparities within the United States. Understanding the magnitude of these disparities and the potential impact of medical education in reducing them is critical in improving the health of the general population. This study sought to achieve two research aims related to the complex intersectionality between race and disease outcomes. The data presented in this study shows that there is a statistically significant difference between incidence rates of COVID-19 and various racial and ethnic groups within the United States (Research Aim 1). While no statistical analyses were able to be conducted for research Aim 2, the preliminary data shows a stark difference in word choice used to represent dark-skinned population versus light-skinned populations. Frankly, these data show an overall disappointing inadequacy in the representation of diverse populations expected from an increasingly diverse nation

Neuroeconomics: infeasible and underdetermined

Advocates of neuroeconomics claim to offer the prospect of creating a “unified behavioral theory” by drawing upon the techniques of neuroscience and psychology and combining them with economic theory. Ostensibly, through the “direct measurement” of our thoughts, economics and social science will be “revolutionized.” Such claims have been subject to critique from mainstream and non-mainstream economists alike. Many of these criticisms relate to measurability, relevance, and coherence. In this article, we seek to contribute to this critical examination by investigating the potential of underdetermination, such as the statement that testing involves the conjunction of auxiliary assumptions, and that consequently it may not be possible to isolate the effect of any given hypothesis. We argue that neuroeconomics is especially sensitive to issues of underdetermination. Institutional economists should be cautious of neuroeconomists’ zeal as they appear to over-interpret experimental findings and, therefore, neuroeconomics may provide a false prospectus seeking to reinforce the nostrums of homo economicus