Literature DB >> 17479352

Differences in knowledge development exposed by multi-curricular progress test data.

Arno M M Muijtjens1, Lambert W T Schuwirth, Janke Cohen-Schotanus, Cees P M van der Vleuten.   

Abstract

Progress testing provides data on the growth of students' knowledge over the course of the curriculum obtained from the results of all students in the curriculum on periodical similar tests pitched at end-of-curriculum level. Since 2001, three medical schools have jointly constructed and administered four progress tests annually. All students in the 6-year undergraduate curricula of these schools take the same tests resulting in 24 distinct measurements per academic year (four tests for six student year groups), which may be used to compare performance between and within schools. Because single point measurements had proven unreliable, we devised a method to use cumulative information to compare schools' test performance. This cumulative deviation method involves calculation of the deviations of schools' scores from the cross-institutional average score for 24 measurement moments in 1 year. The current study shows that it appears to be feasible to use a combination of the cumulative deviation method and trend analysis for subdomains of medical knowledge to detect strengths and weaknesses in knowledge development in medical curricula. We illustrate the method by applying it to data from 16 consecutive progress tests administered to all students (4,300) of three medical schools in the academic years 2001/2002 through 2004/2005.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17479352     DOI: 10.1007/s10459-007-9066-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract        ISSN: 1382-4996            Impact factor:   3.853


  7 in total

1.  Influence of PBL with open-book tests on knowledge retention measured with progress tests.

Authors:  M Heijne-Penninga; J B M Kuks; W H A Hofman; A M M Muijtjens; J Cohen-Schotanus
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 3.853

2.  The progress test of medicine: the Dutch experience.

Authors:  René A Tio; Bert Schutte; Ariadne A Meiboom; Janke Greidanus; Eline A Dubois; Andre J A Bremers
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2016-02

3.  Comparison of formula and number-right scoring in undergraduate medical training: a Rasch model analysis.

Authors:  Dario Cecilio-Fernandes; Harro Medema; Carlos Fernando Collares; Lambert Schuwirth; Janke Cohen-Schotanus; René A Tio
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 2.463

4.  Toward a better judgment of item relevance in progress testing.

Authors:  Xandra M C Janssen-Brandt; Arno M M Muijtjens; Dominique M A Sluijsmans
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 2.463

5.  Impact of Progress testing on the learning experiences of students in medicine, dentistry and dental therapy.

Authors:  Kamran Ali; Josephine Cockerill; Daniel Zahra; Christopher Tredwin; Colin Ferguson
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 2.463

6.  Investigating possible causes of bias in a progress test translation: an one-edged sword.

Authors:  Dario Cecilio-Fernandes; André Bremers; Carlos Fernando Collares; Wybe Nieuwland; Cees van der Vleuten; René A Tio
Journal:  Korean J Med Educ       Date:  2019-08-26

7.  Knowledge assessment of trainees and trainers in general practice in a neighboring country. Making a case for international collaboration.

Authors:  Roy Remmen; Johan Wens; Annelies Damen; Herman Duesman; Veronique Verhoeven
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 2.497

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.