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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cobb, Kate A., Brown, George, Jaarsma, Debbie A. D. C., Hammond, Richard A.
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