Literature DB >> 29291132

Implementing the Angoff method of standard setting using postgraduate students: Practical and affordable in resource-limited settings.

A G Mubuuke1, C Mwesigwa1, S Kiguli1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cut scores for students' assessments have always been arbitrarily determined in many institutions. Some institutions have adopted reliable methods of determining cut scores, such as the Angoff method. However, use of this method requires many experts, making it difficult to implement in resource-limited settings. The possibility of involving postgraduate students in implementing the Angoff method of setting cut scores could be the solution to this problem.
OBJECTIVES: To explore the knowledge and practices of faculty regarding standard setting and the feasibility of using postgraduate students when implementing the Angoff method.
METHODS: This was an exploratory operations research study in which data were collected during focus group discussions. Students were trained to use the Angoff method, i.e. a previous examination, in which the pass mark was 50%, was used to evaluate the method.
RESULTS: Initial findings showed that faculty in the consortia of schools did not know what standard setting and the Angoff method entailed and had never used this approach. The postgraduate students involved in implementing the Angoff method of setting cut scores were excited and interested in engaging in the exercise; the pass mark they arrived at was 61.21%.
CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated that it is feasible to use the Angoff method of determining pass marks, even in resource-limited settings. This can be made possible by involving postgraduate students in the absence of enough faculty experts.

Entities:  

Year:  2017        PMID: 29291132      PMCID: PMC5745345          DOI: 10.7196/AJHPE.2017.v9i4.631

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Afr J Health Prof Educ        ISSN: 2078-5127


  11 in total

1.  Reliability and credibility of an angoff standard setting procedure in progress testing using recent graduates as judges.

Authors:  B H Verhoeven; A F van der Steeg; A J Scherpbier; A M Muijtjens; G M Verwijnen; C P van der Vleuten
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 6.251

2.  Panel expertise for an Angoff standard setting procedure in progress testing: item writers compared to recently graduated students.

Authors:  B H Verhoeven; G M Verwijnen; A M M Muijtjens; A J J A Scherpbier; C P M van der Vleuten
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.251

3.  Development of a modified Cohen method of standard setting.

Authors:  Celia A Taylor
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.650

4.  Assessment in the context of uncertainty: how many members are needed on the panel of reference of a script concordance test?

Authors:  R Gagnon; B Charlin; M Coletti; E Sauvé; C van der Vleuten
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 6.251

5.  Do students have sufficient knowledge of clinical anatomy?

Authors:  Katinka J A H Prince; Albert J A A Scherpbier; Henk van Mameren; Jan Drukker; Cees P M van der Vleuten
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 6.251

6.  Assessment of progress tests.

Authors:  Jane McHarg; Paul Bradley; Suzanne Chamberlain; Chris Ricketts; Judy Searle; John C McLachlan
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.251

7.  Benchmarking by cross-institutional comparison of student achievement in a progress test.

Authors:  Arno M M Muijtjens; Lambert W T Schuwirth; Janke Cohen-Schotanus; Arnold J N M Thoben; Cees P M van der Vleuten
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 6.251

8.  Setting and maintaining standards in multiple choice examinations: AMEE Guide No. 37.

Authors:  Raja C Bandaranayake
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.650

9.  Standard setting: comparison of two methods.

Authors:  Sanju George; M Sayeed Haque; Femi Oyebode
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2006-09-14       Impact factor: 2.463

10.  Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews.

Authors:  James Thomas; Angela Harden
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2008-07-10       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  1 in total

1.  Chinese ICU physicians' knowledge of antibiotic pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD): a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Wenchao Mao; Difan Lu; Jia Zhou; Junhai Zhen; Jing Yan; Li Li
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 2.463

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.