Ramavat Manish, Prajapati Tejas, Akhani Pratik N, Desai Rajesh, Patel Jitendra
Physiology, Gujarat Medical Education and Research Society Medical College, Vadnagar, IND.
Physiology, Dr. N. D. Desai Faculty of Medical Science and Research, Dharmsinh Desai University, Nadiad, IND.
Cureus. 2024 Jul 29;16(7):e65642. doi: 10.7759/cureus.65642. eCollection 2024 Jul.
Introduction Theory question papers form an important part of assessment in medical education. As per the Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) guidelines 2019, questions should test higher levels of cognition. This pilot study analyzes 60 question papers from different universities in Gujarat for their construct and content validity. The aim was to analyze the quality of physiology question papers from various medical universities in Gujarat to gain insights into assessment quality and its alignment with the CBME guidelines. The objectives were twofold: to evaluate the "construct validity" and "content validity" of these physiology theory question papers over the past three years according to the CBME standards. Methods An observational study using a cross-sectional records-based approach was carried out, evaluating 60 summative exam question papers in physiology from eight different universities of Gujarat for their construct and content validity. Using Bloom's taxonomy, the learning level of the cognitive domain for the questions asked was assessed. The findings compared and displayed a sample of papers. Results A total of 1842 questions were analyzed from the 60 question papers of eight different universities of the Gujarat state. The study found that the questions asked for different levels of cognition in Bloom's taxonomy, i.e., remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create, were 560 (30.40%), 434 (23.26%), 222 (12.05%), 118 (6.41%), 94 (5.10%), and 0.00%, respectively. A total of 414 (22.48%) questions did not have any verb, so they did not fit into any level of Bloom's taxonomy. The majority of questions (1773, 96.25%) were asked from the core competencies, while a small percentage (69, 3.75%) of questions were asked from the non-core competencies of physiology. Conclusion The majority of questions in the summative question papers in physiology were of level "remember" and "understand" as per Bloom's taxonomy. Of the questions, 26% did not have any verb. There is a need to incorporate more questions testing higher levels of cognition and to use blueprints by universities. Faculty training is also necessary to bring about course correction.
引言
理论试卷是医学教育评估的重要组成部分。根据2019年基于能力的医学教育（CBME）指南，问题应测试更高层次的认知。本试点研究分析了古吉拉特邦不同大学的60份试卷的结构效度和内容效度。目的是分析古吉拉特邦各医学院校生理学理论试卷的质量，以深入了解评估质量及其与CBME指南的一致性。目标有两个：根据CBME标准评估过去三年这些生理学问卷的“结构效度”和“内容效度”。
方法
采用基于横断面记录的观察性研究方法，评估了古吉拉特邦八所不同大学的60份生理学总结性考试试卷的结构效度和内容效度。使用布鲁姆分类法评估所提问题的认知领域学习水平。研究结果对一组试卷样本进行了比较和展示。
结果
从古吉拉特邦八所不同大学的60份试卷中共分析了1842个问题。研究发现，布鲁姆分类法中要求不同认知水平的问题，即记忆、理解、应用、分析、评价和创造，分别为560个（30.40%）、434个（23.26%）、222个（12.05%）、118个（6.41%）、94个（5.10%）和0.00%。共有414个（22.48%）问题没有任何动词，因此不符合布鲁姆分类法的任何水平。大多数问题（1773个，96.25%）来自核心能力，而一小部分（69个，3.75%）问题来自生理学的非核心能力。
结论
根据布鲁姆分类法，生理学总结性试卷中的大多数问题处于“记忆”和“理解”水平。其中26%的问题没有任何动词。有必要纳入更多测试更高认知水平的问题，并由大学使用蓝图。教师培训对于进行课程修正也是必要的。
