Cargando…
The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs
AIM: To evaluate the impact of two different assessment formats on the approaches to learning of final year veterinary students. The relationship between approach to learning and examination performance was also investigated. METHOD: An 18-item version of the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) was se...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Informa UK Ltd.
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3809925/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23808609 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.803061 |
_version_ | 1782288729296076800 |
---|---|
author | Cobb, Kate A. Brown, George Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. Hammond, Richard A. |
author_facet | Cobb, Kate A. Brown, George Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. Hammond, Richard A. |
author_sort | Cobb, Kate A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To evaluate the impact of two different assessment formats on the approaches to learning of final year veterinary students. The relationship between approach to learning and examination performance was also investigated. METHOD: An 18-item version of the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) was sent to 87 final year students. Each student responded to the questionnaire with regards to DOPS (Direct Observation of Procedural Skills) and a Multiple Choice Examination (MCQ). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 of the respondents to gain a deeper insight into the students’ perception of assessment. RESULTS: Students’ adopted a deeper approach to learning for DOPS and a more surface approach with MCQs. There was a positive correlation between an achieving approach to learning and examination performance. Analysis of the qualitative data revealed that deep, surface and achieving approaches were reported by the students and seven major influences on their approaches to learning were identified: motivation, purpose, consequence, acceptability, feedback, time pressure and the individual difference of the students. CONCLUSIONS: The format of DOPS has a positive influence on approaches to learning. There is a conflict for students between preparing for final examinations and preparing for clinical practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3809925 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Informa UK Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38099252013-10-29 The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs Cobb, Kate A. Brown, George Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. Hammond, Richard A. Med Teach Web Paper AIM: To evaluate the impact of two different assessment formats on the approaches to learning of final year veterinary students. The relationship between approach to learning and examination performance was also investigated. METHOD: An 18-item version of the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) was sent to 87 final year students. Each student responded to the questionnaire with regards to DOPS (Direct Observation of Procedural Skills) and a Multiple Choice Examination (MCQ). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 of the respondents to gain a deeper insight into the students’ perception of assessment. RESULTS: Students’ adopted a deeper approach to learning for DOPS and a more surface approach with MCQs. There was a positive correlation between an achieving approach to learning and examination performance. Analysis of the qualitative data revealed that deep, surface and achieving approaches were reported by the students and seven major influences on their approaches to learning were identified: motivation, purpose, consequence, acceptability, feedback, time pressure and the individual difference of the students. CONCLUSIONS: The format of DOPS has a positive influence on approaches to learning. There is a conflict for students between preparing for final examinations and preparing for clinical practice. Informa UK Ltd. 2013-11 2013-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3809925/ /pubmed/23808609 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.803061 Text en © 2013 Informa UK Ltd. All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted |
spellingShingle | Web Paper Cobb, Kate A. Brown, George Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C. Hammond, Richard A. The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs |
title | The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs |
title_full | The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs |
title_fullStr | The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs |
title_full_unstemmed | The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs |
title_short | The educational impact of assessment: A comparison of DOPS and MCQs |
title_sort | educational impact of assessment: a comparison of dops and mcqs |
topic | Web Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3809925/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23808609 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.803061 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cobbkatea theeducationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs AT browngeorge theeducationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs AT jaarsmadebbieadc theeducationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs AT hammondricharda theeducationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs AT cobbkatea educationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs AT browngeorge educationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs AT jaarsmadebbieadc educationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs AT hammondricharda educationalimpactofassessmentacomparisonofdopsandmcqs |