The current 600-question driving theory test includes six unusually structured questions: they display three road signs but only inquire about one. This peculiarity not only deviates from the norm but also impacts the assessment of test-takers' knowledge, affecting the quality of the theoretical driving test.

The following six questions all present three signs but only ask about one (the correct answers are highlighted in blue):

These questions all feature three different traffic signs, labeled Sign 1, Sign 2, and Sign 3. However, the question itself only pertains to one of the three, for example, "Question 338. What is the meaning of Sign 1?" or "Question 446. What is the meaning of Sign 3?"

None of the other questions on the test include such extraneous information.

At first glance, this surplus information might seem harmless. However, it can negatively affect the evaluation's effectiveness, the accuracy of measurement, and the test-takers' experience.

Cognitive interference

Presenting three signs while only asking about one creates cognitive interference. Test-takers, aiming to minimize errors, feel compelled to examine all three signs and wonder, "Are the other signs relevant to the answer?" or "Does this question have a hidden meaning?" This divides their attention and forces them to process more information than necessary, compared to questions that directly address the presented material.

From a cognitive psychology perspective, this is an unnecessary cognitive load. Instead of focusing on understanding and selecting the correct answer for one sign, test-takers expend energy analyzing and eliminating irrelevant distractions.

Violation of multiple-choice question design principles

A key principle in multiple-choice question design is the congruence between question components, including the stem (including any illustrations) and the answer choices. When a question asks about only one sign but the illustration shows three, there's a clear mismatch between the assessment objective and the information provided. This dilutes the question's focus.

If the goal is to test recognition or understanding of a single sign, including two unrelated signs confuses test-takers, reduces focus, and slows decision-making.

Conversely, if the aim is to differentiate between similar signs, the question should prompt test-takers to compare or contrast them.

From a testing perspective, adding two irrelevant images is a waste of information and reduces the question's effectiveness. This contradicts the principle that information should only be present if it directly supports selecting the correct answer.

Lack of pedagogical value

A regrettable consequence of these six questions is their wasted potential and lack of pedagogical value. Presenting three signs creates an opportunity for questions requiring analysis, differentiation, or selection among similar options, rather than simply recalling a single sign's meaning.

For example, question 302 (shown below) is a good question, as it requires test-takers to analyze and compare Sign 1 (no cars), Sign 2 (no trucks and buses), and Sign 3 (no trailers).

Such comparative questions assess the ability to categorize, connect knowledge, and apply it to real-world traffic situations—essential skills for drivers.

Question 424 is also well-designed, focusing on one sign and presenting only that sign.

Conversely, asking about one sign while showing three images without maximizing pedagogical opportunities diminishes the question's discriminatory power. Advanced learners aren't challenged appropriately, while weaker learners are distracted by unnecessary information.

In a high-pressure, time-limited testing environment, this can lead to results that don't accurately reflect test-takers' actual abilities.

Notably, these six questions are pre-existing ones, carried over verbatim to the new 600-question set.

Nguyen Xuan Trung, Engineer, Lecturer

Institute of Educational Sciences and Community Service (VACC)