Joint Committee on Intercollegiate Examinations, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Joint Committee on Intercollegiate Examinations, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
J Surg Educ. 2016 Jan-Feb;73(1):143-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.08.003. Epub 2015 Aug 28.
We explored effects of gender, ethnic origin, first language, and training status on scores in the Intercollegiate Specialty Board examinations in the UK and Ireland across the computer-marked written section and in the face-to-face oral and clinical section.
Demographic characteristics and examination results from 9987 attempts across 177 sittings from 2009 to 2013 were analyzed in an analysis of variance by training status, gender, ethnic origin, first language, and section (computer-marked multiple-choice examination vs face-to-face oral and clinical examination).
We found increasing alignment between examiner and candidate characteristics during this period, with a 50% increase in examiners of Asian ethnic origin and a 60% increase in examiners whose first language is not English. The strongest factor in the analysis of variance was training status (F[2, 9818] = 27.67, p < 0.001), with candidates in training significantly outperforming others. Within "core candidates" (first attempt, in training), we found significant main effects for ethnic origin (F[5, 4809] = 2.36, p = 0.04), and first language (F[2, 4809] = 5.29, p = 0.003), but no interaction effects between these factors and section (both F < 1, p > 0.05).
Training status was the most important factor in candidates' results. Although the analysis showed significant effects of ethnic origin and first language within "core candidates," these differences were statistically indistinguishable between the 2 sections of the examination, suggesting that the differential attainment by these factors cannot be attributed to examiner bias in a face-to-face examination.
我们探讨了性别、种族出身、第一语言和培训状况对英国和爱尔兰大学间专业委员会考试的计算机标记书面部分和面对面口头及临床部分考试成绩的影响。
对 2009 年至 2013 年 177 次考试的 9987 次尝试的人口统计学特征和考试结果进行方差分析,分析因素包括培训状况、性别、种族出身、第一语言和考试部分(计算机标记多项选择考试与面对面口头和临床考试)。
在此期间,我们发现考官和考生特征之间的一致性逐渐提高,亚洲族裔考官增加了 50%,第一语言非英语的考官增加了 60%。方差分析的最强因素是培训状况(F[2, 9818] = 27.67,p < 0.001),培训中的考生表现明显优于其他考生。在“核心考生”(首次尝试、培训中)中,我们发现种族出身(F[5, 4809] = 2.36,p = 0.04)和第一语言(F[2, 4809] = 5.29,p = 0.003)存在显著的主效应,但这些因素与考试部分之间没有交互效应(均 F < 1,p > 0.05)。
培训状况是考生成绩的最重要因素。尽管分析显示在“核心考生”中存在种族出身和第一语言的显著影响,但这些差异在考试的两个部分之间在统计学上无显著差异,这表明这些因素的差异成绩不能归因于面对面考试中的考官偏见。