Suppr超能文献

医学药理学内部评估考试中认知水平及试题编写缺陷的评估

Evaluation of Cognitive levels and Item writing flaws in Medical Pharmacology Internal Assessment Examinations.

作者信息

Tariq Saba, Tariq Sundus, Maqsood Sadia, Jawed Shireen, Baig Mukhtiar

机构信息

Dr. Saba Tariq, MBBS, M.Phil, Assistant Professor, Pharmacology, University Medical & Dental College, Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Dr. Sundus Tariq, MBBS, M.Phil Assistant Professor, Physiology, University Medical & Dental College, Faisalabad, Pakistan.

出版信息

Pak J Med Sci. 2017 Jul-Aug;33(4):866-870. doi: 10.12669/pjms.334.12887.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the cognitive levels of Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) & Short Answer Questions (SAQs) and types of Item Writing Flaws (IWFs) in MCQs in Medical Pharmacology internal assessment exams.

METHODS

This descriptive, study was conducted over a period of six months, from December 2015 to May 2016 and evaluated six internal assessment examinations comprising SAQs and MCQs. A total of 150 MCQs and 43 SAQs were analyzed. These questions were administered to third-year medical students in the year of 2015. All SAQs were reviewed for their cognitive levels and MCQs were reviewed for cognitive levels as well as for IWFs. Items were classified as flawed if they contained one or more than one flaw. The cognitive level of the questions was determined by the modified Bloom's taxonomy.

RESULTS

The proportion of flawed items out of 150 items in six exams ranged from 16% to 52%. While the percentage of total flawed items was 28%. Most common types of flaws were implausible distractors 19.69% (26), extra detail in correct option 18.18% (24), vague terms 9.85% (13), unfocused stem 9.09% (12) and absolute terms 9.09% (12). The two-third of MCQs 97(64.67%) were assessing the recall of information, while 29 (19.33%) and 24 (16%) were assessing the interpretation of data and problem-solving skills respectively. The majority of the SAQs (90.7%) were assessing recall of the information and only 9.3% were assessing interpretation of data while none of the questions was assessing the problem-solving skills.

CONCLUSIONS

The cognitive level of assessment tools (SAQs & MCQs) is low, and IWFS are common in the MCQs. Therefore, faculty should be urged and groomed to design problem-solving questions which are devoid of any flaws.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估医学药理学内部评估考试中选择题(MCQs)和简答题(SAQs)的认知水平以及选择题中的题目编写缺陷(IWFs)类型。

方法

本描述性研究于2015年12月至2016年5月进行,为期六个月,评估了包括简答题和选择题在内的六次内部评估考试。共分析了150道选择题和43道简答题。这些题目于2015年施用于三年级医学生。所有简答题都进行了认知水平审查,选择题则进行了认知水平以及题目编写缺陷审查。如果题目包含一个或多个缺陷,则将其分类为有缺陷。问题的认知水平由修改后的布鲁姆分类法确定。

结果

六次考试中150道题目中有缺陷题目的比例在16%至52%之间。有缺陷题目的总数百分比为28%。最常见的缺陷类型是不合理的干扰项19.69%(26题)、正确选项中的额外细节18.18%(24题)、模糊术语9.85%(13题)、题目主干不明确9.09%(12题)和绝对术语9.09%(12题)。三分之二的选择题97(64.67%)考查信息回忆,而29(19.33%)和24(16%)分别考查数据解释和问题解决能力。大多数简答题(90.7%)考查信息回忆,只有9.3%考查数据解释,而没有题目考查问题解决能力。

结论

评估工具(简答题和选择题)的认知水平较低,题目编写缺陷在选择题中很常见。因此,应敦促并培养教师设计没有任何缺陷的问题解决型题目。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/edb3/5648954/6079a5f7a8c2/PJMS-33-866-g001.jpg

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