Office of Curriculum and Assessment, and associate professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, New York 14642, USA.
Acad Med. 2011 Apr;86(4):412-4. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31820cdb28.
Requirements for accreditation of medical professionals are increasingly cast in the language of general competencies. Because the language of these competencies is generally shaped by negotiations among stakeholders, however, it has proven difficult to attain consensus on precise definitions. This lack of clarity is amplified when attempting to measure these essentially political constructs in individual learners. The authors of this commentary frame these difficulties within modern views of test validity. The most significant obstacle to valid measurement is not necessarily a lack of useful tools but, rather, a general unwillingness to question whether the competencies themselves represent valid measurement constructs. Although competencies may prove useful in defining an overall social mission for organizations, such competencies should not be mistaken for measurable and distinct attributes that people can demonstrate in the context of their actual work.
医学专业人员认证的要求越来越多地采用通用能力的语言来表述。然而，由于这些能力的语言通常是由利益相关者之间的协商形成的，因此很难就准确的定义达成共识。当试图在个体学习者中衡量这些本质上是政治性的结构时，这种不明确性就更加突出了。本文的作者将这些困难置于现代测试有效性的观点中。有效测量的最大障碍不一定是缺乏有用的工具，而是普遍不愿意质疑这些能力本身是否代表有效的测量结构。尽管能力可能在为组织定义总体社会使命方面证明是有用的，但这些能力不应被误认为是人们在实际工作中可以展示的可衡量和独特的属性。
