Smith Christopher Dimick, Dai Anya, Kenwright Diane, Grainger Rebecca
University of Otago.
The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners.
MedEdPublish (2016). 2020 Oct 14;9:27. doi: 10.15694/mep.2020.000027.2. eCollection 2020.
This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Introduction Writing and answering multiple choice questions (MCQs) is a learning activity that potentially engages deep learning. We conducted three year-long case studies of MCQ writing and answering in PeerWise to engage students in learning Pathology. Methods Overall, an instrumental case-study design with the structure of sequential multiple case studies was used. Across three years fourth year medical students were required to write and answer MCQs. In 2016 students were provided with advice for writing questions and were encouraged to adhere to Bloom's taxonomy. In 2017, to reduce cognitive load, students were provided with a MCQ template and allocated topics. In 2018, to encourage engagement, students were informed that the top forty MCQs would be in the final exam. Results An evaluation survey was used to measure each student's perception of the MCQ exercise. In 2016 most students had a negative opinion of the MCQ exercise. Students found writing MCQs too time consuming and demanding. In 2017 student's attitudes to the MCQ exercise were more positive. In 2018 there were insufficient responses to the survey but informal student feedback suggested the MCQ exercise was considered an inefficient use of student study time. There were minimal changes in student's activity levels from 2016 to 2017. However, in 2018 when students were informed that the top forty MCQs generated would be included in their final exam they answered a greater number of MCQs than in previous years. Conclusions Providing students with templates and assigning topics for MCQs may improve student attitudes toward MCQ writing and including student generated MCQs in the final exam encourages students to answer more MCQs. However, due to high demands on their time, medical students' prioritised efficiency and MCQ writing may not be an efficient strategy for deep learning.
本文已迁移。该文章被标记为推荐。引言撰写和回答多项选择题（MCQ）是一种可能涉及深度学习的学习活动。我们在PeerWise平台上进行了为期三年的关于撰写和回答MCQ的案例研究，以使学生参与病理学学习。方法总体上，采用了具有连续多个案例研究结构的工具性案例研究设计。在三年时间里，要求四年级医学生撰写和回答MCQ。2016年，为学生提供了撰写问题的建议，并鼓励他们遵循布鲁姆分类法。2017年，为减少认知负荷，为学生提供了MCQ模板并分配了主题。2018年，为鼓励参与，告知学生前四十道MCQ将包含在期末考试中。结果使用评估调查来衡量每个学生对MCQ练习的看法。2016年，大多数学生对MCQ练习持负面看法。学生们发现撰写MCQ耗时且要求高。2017年，学生对MCQ练习的态度更为积极。2018年，对调查的回复不足，但学生的非正式反馈表明MCQ练习被认为是对学生学习时间的低效利用。从2016年到2017年，学生的活动水平变化极小。然而，在2018年，当学生被告知生成的前四十道MCQ将包含在期末考试中时，他们回答的MCQ数量比前几年更多。结论为学生提供模板并为MCQ分配主题可能会改善学生对撰写MCQ的态度，并且在期末考试中纳入学生生成的MCQ会鼓励学生回答更多的MCQ。然而，由于对时间要求很高，医学生优先考虑效率，撰写MCQ可能不是深度学习的有效策略。
