Department of Medical Education, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2022;19:23. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2022.19.23. Epub 2022 Aug 31.
The percent Angoff (PA) method has been recommended as a reliable method to set the cutoff score instead of a fixed cut point of 60% in the Korean Medical Licensing Examination (KMLE). The yes/no Angoff (YNA) method, which is easy for panelists to judge, can be considered as an alternative because the KMLE has many items to evaluate. This study aimed to compare the cutoff score and the reliability depending on whether the PA or the YNA standard-setting method was used in the KMLE.
The materials were the open-access PA data of the KMLE. The PA data were converted to YNA data in 5 categories, in which the probabilities for a “yes” decision by panelists were 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, and 90%. SPSS for descriptive analysis and G-string for generalizability theory were used to present the results.
The PA method and the YNA method counting 60% as “yes,” estimated similar cutoff scores. Those cutoff scores were deemed acceptable based on the results of the Hofstee method. The highest reliability coefficients estimated by the generalizability test were from the PA method and the YNA method, with probabilities of 70%, 80%, 60%, and 50% for deciding “yes,” in descending order. The panelist’s specialty was the main cause of the error variance. The error size was similar regardless of the standard-setting method.
The above results showed that the PA method was more reliable than the YNA method in estimating the cutoff score of the KMLE. However, the YNA method with a 60% probability for deciding “yes” also can be used as a substitute for the PA method in estimating the cutoff score of the KMLE.
在韩国医师执照考试(KMLE)中,人们推荐使用百分点 Angoff(PA)法来设定截止分数,而不是采用 60%的固定分数线。由于 KMLE 有很多项目需要评估,因此易于评判员判断的是/否 Angoff(YNA)法可以作为替代方法。本研究旨在比较使用 PA 或 YNA 标准设定方法时 KMLE 的截止分数和可靠性。
本研究的材料是 KMLE 的公开 PA 数据。PA 数据被转换为 YNA 数据,分为 5 个类别,评判员“是”的概率分别为 50%、60%、70%、80%和 90%。使用 SPSS 进行描述性分析,使用 G-string 进行概化理论分析来呈现结果。
PA 方法和 YNA 方法(将 60%计为“是”)估计的截止分数相似。根据 Hofstee 方法的结果,这些截止分数被认为是可以接受的。概化测试中估计的可靠性系数最高的是 PA 方法和 YNA 方法,依次为评判员“是”的概率为 70%、80%、60%和 50%。评判员的专业是误差方差的主要原因。无论使用哪种标准设定方法,误差大小都相似。
上述结果表明,PA 法在估计 KMLE 的截止分数方面比 YNA 法更可靠。然而,对于决定“是”的概率为 60%的 YNA 方法也可以作为估计 KMLE 的截止分数的 PA 法的替代方法。