When credentialing professionals gather at industry events to tackle industry trends and standards, conversations inevitably center on a foundational truth: program integrity relies entirely on the quality of its exam questions.
Writing high-quality certification exam questions requires balancing technical accuracy with real-world experience. It demands that Subject Matter Expert question writers set aside their assumptions and view the material through the eyes of a candidate. This ensures that every question is directly relevant to exam eligibility and tests the right competencies.
At Kryterion, we know that the quality of an exam hinges on the quality of its questions. This overview will walk you through the essential principles of drafting, refining, and reviewing certification exam questions that are valid, reliable, and fair.
Understanding the Anatomy of a Multiple-Choice Question
The standard multiple-choice question remains the workhorse of the credentialing industry due to its reliability, scalability, and objective scoring. It has to have a strong premise, an indisputably correct answer, and tough but fair incorrect answers.
Of course, the goal of any exam question is to differentiate between the candidate who possesses the required knowledge and skills and the candidate who does not. A well-constructed question makes sure that a competent candidate will readily identify the correct answer. Conversely, an unprepared candidate will be genuinely drawn to one of the incorrect choices.
Golden Rules for Writing the Premise
The premise is the foundation of your question. If it’s confusing, candidates will spend more time trying to decode the syntax than demonstrating their actual capability. This could lead to you testing their reading comprehension rather than their technical skill. Here are some tips:
1. Make the Core Problem Clear Immediately: The question should contain all the necessary information to understand the problem. A candidate should ideally be able to read it and anticipate the correct answer before even looking at the options. For example:
- Poor Question: Which of the following is true about network security?
- Better Question: Which encryption protocol provides the most secure data transmission for a peer-to-peer enterprise network?
2. Keep it Concise and Eliminate Fluff: Extraneous reading material increases cognitive load. If you are writing a scenario-based question, only include details that are strictly relevant to solving the problem. Do not add unnecessary names, convoluted background stories, or irrelevant data points.
3. Avoid Negative Phrasing Whenever Possible: Don’t use words like NOT, EXCEPT, or LEAST. They force the candidate’s brain to work in reverse, looking for the false statement among a sea of true ones. While sometimes necessary, negative phrasing often trips up competent candidates under time pressure. Worse, these questions can often disadvantage candidates for whom English is a second language.
Crafting Incorrect Answers That Actually Distract
Writing the correct answer is usually the easiest part of the process for an SME. However, creating the wrong ones is where the real challenge lies. The hallmark of a poorly written question is a set of potential answers that are obviously wrong. This effectively turns a four-option multiple-choice question into a coin toss. You should:
1. Create Incorrect Answers That Are Plausible: An incorrect option should represent a common misconception, a frequent amateur mistake, or an outdated practice. If an answer is a joke, obviously false, or grammatically jarring, the candidate will eliminate it instantly and have a better chance of getting the question correct by chance alone.
2. Maintain Parallel Structure and Length: People are excellent pattern recognizers. If the correct answer is three lines long and highly detailed, while all three incorrect ones are short and vague, the candidate will likely guess the correct answer based solely on the length. Keep all answer options roughly the same length, detail level, and grammatical structure.
3. Avoid All of the Above and None of the Above: These options are detrimental to the psychometric validity of an exam. With “All of the above,” if a candidate knows that at least two of the options are correct, they can safely guess “All of the above” without evaluating the third option. Conversely, with “None of the above,” the question fails to test whether the candidate actually knows the correct answer. It only tests whether they know that the provided options are wrong. Worse, if a correct answer is available, the candidate can now argue that their preferred correct answer was not provided.
The Subject Matter Expert (SME) Review Process
Writing the question is only the first phase. The review process is where a raw question is polished into a reliable assessment tool. A robust credentialing program relies on a committee of SMEs to review, debate, and refine every single question before candidates ever see them, including:
1. The Technical Review for Accuracy: First and foremost, the review committee must make sure that the answer is 100% correct and that there is only one defensible answer. Often, an author will write what they believe is an incorrect answer, only for another SME to point out a rare case where that answer could actually be considered correct.
2. Bias and Fairness Review: Exam questions must be culturally neutral and free of bias. Idioms, regional slang, or culturally specific references should be edited out. For instance, using a baseball analogy to explain a project management concept might make perfect sense to a candidate in the United States, but it could severely confuse an international candidate. The exam must test the candidate’s professional knowledge, not their cultural background.
Post-Launch: Data-Driven Analysis
Even the most rigorous SME review process cannot predict with absolute certainty how a question will perform in the real world. That is why high-quality certification programs rely on continuous analysis of their questions. Prior to a new test form going live, or following an initial beta testing phase, psychometricians use statistical data to evaluate the health of the questions, including:
1. Difficulty: Question difficulty is indicated by the proportion of candidates who get the question correct on average, or by estimating the ability of a candidate to get each question correct. If a high proportion of candidates get a question correct, or lower-ability candidates are easily able to select the correct answer, the question may be too easy for practical use in determining if candidates are actually qualified to earn a certification. Conversely, if few candidates get a question correct, or only the highest-ability candidates can get a question right, it may be too difficult to fairly assess candidates.
2. Discrimination: The discrimination index for a question is an indication of its ability to fairly differentiate between high- and low-ability candidates. Higher-ability candidates will more often get questions correct, and lower-ability candidates will be more likely to select one of the plausible incorrect answers. Where lower-ability candidates are getting questions correct, or higher-ability candidates are getting a question wrong, the discrimination of the question will be low. This usually indicates a flawed, outdated, or overexposed question.
3. Analysis of Answer Options: If a question has four options (A, B, C, D) and option C has never been selected by a single candidate over the course of 500 exams, option C is a non-functioning answer. The question is effectively acting as a three-option question, which increases the chance of a candidate guessing the correct answer. Additionally, if higher-ability candidates select the same incorrect option, that can indicate that specific option may be partially (or completely) correct. SMEs should review the data and replace answers with better-functioning alternatives when necessary.
Elevating Your Program’s Reputation with Kryterion
Creating high-quality exam content is a labor-intensive, collaborative, and ongoing process. It requires deep alignment between your SMEs and your psychometric advisors to make sure the final product meets the highest standards of the credentialing industry.
The questions on your exam are the ultimate gatekeepers of your certification’s value. By investing time and resources into meticulous question writing and rigorous SME peer review, you protect the public, empower competent professionals, and solidify your credential as the gold standard in your industry.
At Kryterion, we understand that test development is just as crucial as test delivery. Through our comprehensive Webassessor platform and our deep roots in psychometric best practices, we help test sponsors manage the entire lifecycle of their certification programs. From the initial Job Task Analysis to the final data-driven analysis, building a world-class exam is a journey we take together.
About Kryterion
Kryterion Inc. is a global leader in innovative testing and credentialing solutions. We help organizations across various sectors develop and manage their assessments with our advanced test development platform and multi-modal delivery solutions. Established in 2001, Kryterion offers secure and integrated services along with extensive support. This empowers candidates to demonstrate skills and achieve success in world-class careers.
