Manoj Kumar Saurabh1, Tejas Patel2, Sahila Khatun3, Jignesh Chaudhri3, Parvati Patel4. 1. Department of Pharmacology, AIIMS, Deoghar, India. 2. Department of Pharmacology, AIIMS, Gorakhpur, India. 3. Department of Pharmacology, GMERSMedical College, Gotri, Vadodara, India. 4. GMERSMedical College, Gotri, Vadodara, India.
Abstract
Context: At present, the method of practical assessment in pharmacology focuses on cognitive and subjective domains. Ideally, it should be objective and comprehensive. Objective: To compare marks obtained in two types of exams, objective structured practical examination (OSPE) and traditional practical examination (TDPE), in order to assess faculty members' and students' perception of OSPE Methodology: Sixty students having 75% attendance were included in the present study. Both OSPE and TDPE were conducted and marks obtained in each of the two exams were compared. Perceptions of students and faculty members were assessed on the basis of Likert- scale. Result and discussion: The percentage of mean marks obtained in TDPE (67.5±2.24) was higher than in OSPE (66.5±2.78), but the results were not statistically significant (p=0.6). This may be due to first time exposure of OSPE and belief that marks would not be counted in internal assessment. Ninety five percent of students agreed that practical skills and knowledge acquired during OSPE would be also helpful after graduation, and 83.33% of participants admitted that personality, gender and other student-related factors did not affect scoring in OSPE. Eighty five percent of students and all faculties were willing to implement OSPE as an assessment tool. All faculties were in favour of OSPE due to its very low variability and because it motivated students learn skills as well subject more. Conclusion: Objective structured practical examination is comparable to TDPE as assessment tool for pharmacology practical examination in terms of marks obtained by students, while satisfaction reported by faculties and students regarding various aspects of OSPE is much more in favour of the latter.
Context: At present, the method of practical assessment in pharmacology focuses on cognitive and subjective domains. Ideally, it should be objective and comprehensive. Objective: To compare marks obtained in two types of exams, objective structured practical examination (OSPE) and traditional practical examination (TDPE), in order to assess faculty members' and students' perception of OSPE Methodology: Sixty students having 75% attendance were included in the present study. Both OSPE and TDPE were conducted and marks obtained in each of the two exams were compared. Perceptions of students and faculty members were assessed on the basis of Likert- scale. Result and discussion: The percentage of mean marks obtained in TDPE (67.5±2.24) was higher than in OSPE (66.5±2.78), but the results were not statistically significant (p=0.6). This may be due to first time exposure of OSPE and belief that marks would not be counted in internal assessment. Ninety five percent of students agreed that practical skills and knowledge acquired during OSPE would be also helpful after graduation, and 83.33% of participants admitted that personality, gender and other student-related factors did not affect scoring in OSPE. Eighty five percent of students and all faculties were willing to implement OSPE as an assessment tool. All faculties were in favour of OSPE due to its very low variability and because it motivated students learn skills as well subject more. Conclusion: Objective structured practical examination is comparable to TDPE as assessment tool for pharmacology practical examination in terms of marks obtained by students, while satisfaction reported by faculties and students regarding various aspects of OSPE is much more in favour of the latter.
Authors: D C Anderson; I B Harris; S Allen; L Satran; C J Bland; J A Davis-Feickert; G A Poland; W J Miller Journal: Acad Med Date: 1991-01 Impact factor: 6.893