Literature DB >> 20515373

Can we share questions? Performance of questions from different question banks in a single medical school.

Adrian Freeman1, Anthony Nicholls, Chris Ricketts, Lee Coombes.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To use progress testing, a large bank of questions is required, particularly when planning to deliver tests over a long period of time. The questions need not only to be of good quality but also balanced in subject coverage across the curriculum to allow appropriate sampling. Hence as well as creating its own questions, an institution could share questions. Both methods allow ownership and structuring of the test appropriate to the educational requirements of the institution.
METHOD: Peninsula Medical School (PMS) has developed a mechanism to validate questions written in house. That mechanism can be adapted to utilise questions from an International question bank International Digital Electronic Access Library (IDEAL) and another UK-based question bank Universities Medical Assessment Partnership (UMAP). These questions have been used in our progress tests and analysed for relative performance.
RESULTS: Data are presented to show that questions from differing sources can have comparable performance in a progress testing format.
CONCLUSION: There are difficulties in transferring questions from one institution to another. These include problems of curricula and cultural differences. Whilst many of these difficulties exist, our experience suggests that it only requires a relatively small amount of work to adapt questions from external question banks for effective use. The longitudinal aspect of progress testing (albeit summatively) may allow more flexibility in question usage than single high stakes exams.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20515373     DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2010.486056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Teach        ISSN: 0142-159X            Impact factor:   3.650


  6 in total

1.  The Impact of Educational Resources and Perceived Preparedness on Medical Education Performance.

Authors:  Justin Bauzon; Amalie Alver; Vishvaas Ravikumar; Adrian Devera; Tatiana Mikhael; Rafae Nauman; Edward Simanton
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2021-05-26

2.  Good exams made easy: the item management system for multiple examination formats.

Authors:  Achim Hochlehnert; Konstantin Brass; Andreas Möltner; Jobst-Hendrik Schultz; John Norcini; Ara Tekian; Jana Jünger
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 2.463

3.  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

4.  A qualitative exploration of student perceptions of the impact of progress tests on learning and emotional wellbeing.

Authors:  Jill Yielder; Andy Wearn; Yan Chen; Marcus A Henning; Jennifer Weller; Steven Lillis; Vernon Mogol; Warwick Bagg
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2017-08-29       Impact factor: 2.463

5.  First reported implementation of a German-language progress test in an undergraduate dental curriculum: A prospective study.

Authors:  B Kirnbauer; A Avian; N Jakse; P Rugani; D Ithaler; R Egger
Journal:  Eur J Dent Educ       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 2.355

6.  Medical assessment in the age of digitalisation.

Authors:  Saskia Egarter; Anna Mutschler; Ara Tekian; John Norcini; Konstantin Brass
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 2.463

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.