Suppr超能文献

基于计算机的评估能否提高形成性多项选择题考试的接受度?一种效用分析。

Can computer-based assessment enhance the acceptance of formative multiple choice exams? A utility analysis.

机构信息

Dean's Office for Student Affairs, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Germany.

出版信息

Med Teach. 2012;34(4):292-6. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.652707. Epub 2012 Mar 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Students' motivation to participate is one of the main challenges in formative assessment. The utility framework identifies potential points of intervention for improving the acceptance of formative assessment [Van Der Vleuten C. 1996. The assessment of professional competence: Developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ 1(1):41-67]. At the Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, the paper-based version of the Berlin Progress Test has been transformed into computer-based version providing immediate feedback.

AIM

To investigate whether the introduction of computer-based assessment (CBA) enhances the acceptance of formative assessment relative to paper-based assessment (PBA).

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study (PBA: N = 2597, CBA: N = 2712), students' overall acceptance of the two forms of assessment was surveyed, their comments were analyzed, and we analyzed their test behavior and categorized students into "serious" or "non-serious" test takers.

RESULTS

In the preclinical phase of medical education, no differences were found in overall acceptance of the two forms of assessment (p > 0.05). In the clinical phase, differences in favor of CBA were found in overall acceptance (p < 0.05), the proportion of positive comments (p < 0.001), and the proportion of serious participants (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of immediate feedback via CBA can enhance the acceptance and therefore the utility of formative assessment.

摘要

背景

学生参与的动机是形成性评估的主要挑战之一。效用框架确定了改善形成性评估接受度的潜在干预点[Van Der Vleuten C. 1996. 专业能力评估:发展、研究和实际意义。Adv Health Sci Educ 1(1):41-67]。在科隆大学医学院,柏林进展测试的纸质版本已转变为提供即时反馈的计算机化版本。

目的

调查与纸质评估(PBA)相比,引入计算机化评估(CBA)是否会提高形成性评估的接受度。

方法

在一项回顾性队列研究(PBA:N=2597,CBA:N=2712)中,调查了学生对两种评估形式的总体接受程度,分析了他们的意见,并分析了他们的测试行为,并将学生分为“认真”或“不认真”的测试者。

结果

在医学教育的基础阶段,两种评估形式的总体接受度没有差异(p>0.05)。在临床阶段,CBA 在总体接受度(p<0.05)、正面评价比例(p<0.001)和认真参与者比例(p<0.001)方面具有优势。

结论

通过 CBA 提供即时反馈可以提高形成性评估的接受度,从而提高其效用。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验