Loomba Rinchu, Jindal Nandita Maini
Department of Biochemistry, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, India.
Department of Biochemistry, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, India.
Korean J Med Educ. 2024 Dec;36(4):367-377. doi: 10.3946/kjme.2024.310. Epub 2024 Nov 28.
The traditional method of oral examination, though a good tool for assessing the depth and breadth of student's knowledge, has its shortcomings. A variable number of questions with variable difficulty levels by different examiners with different expectations can introduce bias in scores. The process aspect of oral examinations of first-year undergraduate medical students was improved by structuring them and by creating uniformity in the number, time, and difficulty level of questions for assessment, and feedback was taken regarding its acceptance as an improved tool of assessment.
After finalizing the topics, questions from a viva viewpoint were structured and categorized into three difficulty levels covering all aspects of chosen topics validated by subject experts. The number of questions asked per difficulty level, time, and marks given to each question was pre-decided. After briefing the students, the structured viva was conducted, and feedback was taken from students and examiners.
The majority (87%) of first-year undergraduate students undertook the structured viva and filled in the feedback form. Nearly all students felt that the structured oral examination was a fair and unbiased assessment tool with less subjectivity compared to traditional viva. Most students (83.9%) felt that the topics were comprehensively covered, and 96.4% of students felt less stressed. Among examiners, there was 100% agreement on the uniformity of questions asked, topics covered, less subjectivity, and no carryover effect.
The examiners have accepted it as one of the formative assessment tools for future batches of students and are ready to explore its utility as a summative assessment tool.
传统的口试方法虽然是评估学生知识深度和广度的良好工具,但也有其缺点。不同考官提出的数量和难度各异的问题,以及不同的期望,可能会导致分数出现偏差。通过对一年级本科医学生的口试进行结构化设计,并在问题数量、时间和难度水平上实现统一,对口试的流程方面进行了改进,并就其作为一种改进的评估工具的接受度征求了反馈意见。
确定主题后,从口试角度构建问题,并将其分为三个难度级别,涵盖所选主题的各个方面,这些主题经学科专家验证。预先确定每个难度级别提出的问题数量、时间以及每个问题的分值。在向学生介绍情况后,进行结构化口试,并从学生和考官那里获取反馈。
大多数(87%)一年级本科生参加了结构化口试并填写了反馈表。几乎所有学生都认为,与传统口试相比,结构化口试是一种公平、无偏见的评估工具,主观性较小。大多数学生(83.9%)认为主题涵盖全面,96.4%的学生感到压力较小。在考官中,对于所提问题的一致性、涵盖的主题、较少的主观性以及无遗留效应,达成了100%的共识。
考官已将其接受为未来几批学生的形成性评估工具之一,并准备探索其作为总结性评估工具的效用。