Suppr超能文献

在二年级医学生群体中使用基于确定性的评分:一项试点研究。

Use of certainty-based marking in a second-year medical student cohort: a pilot study.

作者信息

Schoendorfer Niikee, Emmett David

机构信息

Centre for Medical Education, Research and Scholarship, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Australia.

出版信息

Adv Med Educ Pract. 2012 Dec 20;3:139-43. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S35972. Print 2012.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Assessments which consider both competence and confidence attempt to provide insight into actual performance in order to optimize physician capabilities, providing motivation and direction for future learning. The aim of this project was to assess medical students' thoughts and opinions of the utility of a certainty-based marking (CBM) protocol with respect to improving their learning experiences.

METHODS

Second-year medical students at the University of Queensland were provided with a series of optional online formative assessment tools, in the form of 10 sample questions, to support their current module learning outcomes. During four consecutive weeks, CBM was offered on weeks 1, 2, and 4, with week 3 being provided in the usual question-answer format. A mixed-method survey was distributed at the conclusion of the trial period to obtain feedback on the students' impressions of learning via this technique.

RESULTS

Of the 400 students, 15%, 11%, 9%, and 8% used the resource over the four-week period, respectively. During the four-week module directly prior to the test module, 46%, 44%, 44%, and 40% of the students accessed the sample questions which were delivered in the usual multiple choice format. A majority of the students either agreed or strongly agreed that CBM was easy to understand (52%) and useful (57%), but took more time (67%) because they needed to consider their certainty level for every question (76%). A number of students (43%) also stated that CBM affected their attitudes toward decision-making, while 86% thought it would be most useful for revision as opposed to an examination format.

DISCUSSION

Despite the inherent benefits of gaining experience in higher order thinking processes, students were less likely to participate in the CBM tasks than standard multiple choice, even though these did not count toward their final grades.

CONCLUSION

Utilizing such practices at the beginning of an educational program may minimize apparent resistance and alter learning practices to become conducive to deeper levels of learning. This has been corroborated in other studies aiming to encourage similar higher order cognitive processes.

摘要

背景

兼顾能力与信心的评估旨在深入了解实际表现,以优化医生的能力,为未来学习提供动力和方向。本项目的目的是评估医学生对基于确定性评分(CBM)方案在改善其学习体验方面效用的想法和看法。

方法

昆士兰大学的二年级医学生获得了一系列以10个样题形式呈现的在线形成性评估工具,以支持他们当前模块的学习成果。在连续四周内,第1、2和4周提供CBM评估,第3周采用常规问答形式。在试验期结束时进行了一项混合方法调查,以获取学生对通过该技术学习的印象的反馈。

结果

在400名学生中,分别有15%、11%、9%和8%的学生在四周内使用了该资源。在测试模块前的四周模块期间,46%、44%、44%和40%的学生访问了以常规多项选择题形式提供的样题。大多数学生要么同意要么强烈同意CBM易于理解(52%)且有用(57%),但花费时间更多(67%),因为他们需要考虑每个问题的确定程度(76%)。一些学生(43%)还表示CBM影响了他们对决策的态度,而86%的学生认为它对复习最有用,而不是考试形式。

讨论

尽管在高阶思维过程中获得经验有内在好处,但学生参与CBM任务的可能性低于标准多项选择题,即使这些任务不计入他们的最终成绩。

结论

在教育项目开始时采用此类做法可能会将明显的阻力降至最低,并改变学习方式,使其有利于更深入的学习。这在其他旨在鼓励类似高阶认知过程的研究中得到了证实。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

6
Making the certainty based marking pilot study a reality.将基于确定性的评分试点研究变为现实。
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2013 May 7;4:101-2. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S44984. Print 2013.

本文引用的文献

1
Diagnostic error in internal medicine.内科诊断错误。
Arch Intern Med. 2005 Jul 11;165(13):1493-9. doi: 10.1001/archinte.165.13.1493.
2
Primary care: is there enough time for prevention?初级保健:有足够的时间用于预防吗?
Am J Public Health. 2003 Apr;93(4):635-41. doi: 10.2105/ajph.93.4.635.
3
Medical student errors in making a diagnosis.医学生在诊断过程中的错误。
Acad Med. 1998 Oct;73(10 Suppl):S19-21. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199810000-00033.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验