Suppr超能文献

评估选择题和简答题的认知水平对牙科学生学习方法的教育影响。

Assessing the educational impact of cognitive level of MCQ and SEQ on learning approaches of dental students.

作者信息

Arooj Mahwish, Mukhtar Khadijah, Khan Rehan Ahmed, Azhar Tayyaba

机构信息

Mahwish Arooj, MBBS, MME, M. Phil, PHD Physiology. Professor of Physiology and Director, DME University College of Medicine and Dentistry, Lahore, Pakistan.

Khadijah Mukhtar, BDS, MME Assistant Professor, DME University College of Medicine and Dentistry, Lahore, Pakistan.

出版信息

Pak J Med Sci. 2021 Mar-Apr;37(2):445-449. doi: 10.12669/pjms.37.2.3475.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

MCQ's and SEQ's are the most widely used assessment tool in dental colleges across Pakistan. This study explores the impact of assessment tool: MCQ's and SEQ's on learning approach of dental students and also identifies correlation between these assessment tools and deep & surface learning approaches in integrated and discipline based curriculum.

METHODS

A quantitative co-relational study was conducted in 2018 on 2nd and 4th year dental students. A pre-validated "Revised Study Process Questionnaire" was used. Spearman's rho correlation coefficient and Wilcoxon signed ranks test were applied to determine the relationship between learning approaches and assessment tools. Internal consistency was calculated by Cronbach's alpha.

RESULTS

Ninety six students out of one hundred and fifty completed the questionnaire. Correlation test showed that surface approach correlates significantly with MCQ's (0.73) while no co-relation exists with SEQ's (-0.14) in our study. Deep approach has a strong and significant correlation with SEQ's (0.80) as compared to MCQ's (0.056).

CONCLUSION

Assessment tool has an impact on learning approaches used by the students. It was concluded that students used to prefer deep learning approach while preparing for SEQ's as they were designed at higher cognitive level, whereas, they preferred surface approach while preparing for MCQ's as they were developed at low cognitive order.

摘要

目的

多项选择题(MCQ)和简答题(SEQ)是巴基斯坦各牙科学院使用最广泛的评估工具。本研究探讨了评估工具(MCQ和SEQ)对牙科学生学习方法的影响,并确定了这些评估工具与基于综合课程和学科课程的深度学习及表面学习方法之间的相关性。

方法

2018年对二年级和四年级牙科学生进行了一项定量相关性研究。使用了预先验证的“修订后的学习过程问卷”。应用斯皮尔曼等级相关系数和威尔科克森符号秩检验来确定学习方法与评估工具之间的关系。通过克朗巴赫α系数计算内部一致性。

结果

150名学生中有96名完成了问卷。相关性测试表明,在我们的研究中,表面学习方法与MCQ显著相关(0.73),而与SEQ不存在相关性(-0.14)。与MCQ(0.056)相比,深度学习方法与SEQ有很强的显著相关性(0.80)。

结论

评估工具对学生使用的学习方法有影响。得出的结论是,学生在准备SEQ时倾向于采用深度学习方法,因为SEQ是在较高认知水平设计的,而在准备MCQ时倾向于采用表面学习方法,因为MCQ是在低认知水平开发的。

相似文献

1
3
Multiple choice questions. The debate goes on.
Br J Med Educ. 1975 Dec;9(4):275-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1975.tb01938.x.
4
Student learning of head and neck anatomy using cone beam computed tomography and immersive virtual reality.
J Dent Educ. 2023 Aug;87(8):1180-1187. doi: 10.1002/jdd.13224. Epub 2023 Apr 22.
6
Do medical students studying in the United Kingdom have an adequate factual knowledge of basic life support?
World J Emerg Med. 2019;10(2):75-80. doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2019.02.002.
8
Assessment of learning with multiple-choice questions.
Nurse Educ Pract. 2005 Jul;5(4):238-42. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2004.12.005.
9
Learning approach among health sciences students in a medical college in Nepal: a cross-sectional study.
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2016 Mar 4;7:137-43. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S100968. eCollection 2016.

引用本文的文献

1
Curriculum mapping of a dental materials science course: a reality check and way forward.
BMC Med Educ. 2023 Oct 2;23(1):716. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04717-z.

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluating the Quality of Multiple Choice Question in Paediatric Dentistry Postgraduate Examinations.
Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2019 May;19(2):e135-e141. doi: 10.18295/squmj.2019.19.02.009. Epub 2019 Sep 8.
3
Psychometric analysis of Anatomy MCQs in Modular examination.
Pak J Med Sci. 2017 Sep-Oct;33(5):1138-1143. doi: 10.12669/pjms.335.12382.
4
5
Learning approach among health sciences students in a medical college in Nepal: a cross-sectional study.
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2016 Mar 4;7:137-43. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S100968. eCollection 2016.
6
Deep and surface learning in problem-based learning: a review of the literature.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2016 Dec;21(5):1087-1112. doi: 10.1007/s10459-015-9645-6. Epub 2015 Nov 13.
7
Medical Student Research: An Integrated Mixed-Methods Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 18;10(6):e0127470. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127470. eCollection 2015.
8
A comparison of medical students' learning approaches between the first and fourth years.
South Med J. 2015 Apr;108(4):207-10. doi: 10.14423/SMJ.0000000000000260.
10
Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences.
Pak J Med Sci. 2014 Jan;30(1):3-6. doi: 10.12669/pjms.301.4458.

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