Cargando…

Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences

Objectives: To evaluate Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences by determining item writing flaws (IWFs) of MCQs along with cognitive level of each item in both methods. Methods: This analytical study evaluated the quality of the assessment tools used for the first b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Baig, Mukhtiar, Ali, Syeda Kauser, Ali, Sobia, Huda, Nighat
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Professional Medical Publicaitons 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24639820
http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.301.4458
_version_ 1782307579829944320
author Baig, Mukhtiar
Ali, Syeda Kauser
Ali, Sobia
Huda, Nighat
author_facet Baig, Mukhtiar
Ali, Syeda Kauser
Ali, Sobia
Huda, Nighat
author_sort Baig, Mukhtiar
collection PubMed
description Objectives: To evaluate Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences by determining item writing flaws (IWFs) of MCQs along with cognitive level of each item in both methods. Methods: This analytical study evaluated the quality of the assessment tools used for the first batch in a newly established medical college in Karachi, Pakistan. First and sixth module assessment tools in Biochemistry during 2009-2010 were analyzed. Cognitive level of MCQs and SEQs, were noted and MCQ item writing flaws were also evaluated. Results: A total of 36 SEQs and 150 MCQs of four items were analyzed. The cognitive level of 83.33% of SEQs was at recall level while remaining 16.67% were assessing interpretation of data. Seventy six percent of the MCQs were at recall level while remaining 24% were at the interpretation. Regarding IWFs, 69 IWFs were found in 150 MCQs. The commonest among them were implausible distracters (30.43%), unfocused stem (27.54%) and unnecessary information in the stem (24.64%). Conclusion: There is a need to review the quality including the content of assessment tools. A structured faculty development program is recommended for developing improved assessment tools that align with learning outcomes and measure competency of medical students.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3955531
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Professional Medical Publicaitons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39555312014-03-17 Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences Baig, Mukhtiar Ali, Syeda Kauser Ali, Sobia Huda, Nighat Pak J Med Sci Original Article Objectives: To evaluate Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences by determining item writing flaws (IWFs) of MCQs along with cognitive level of each item in both methods. Methods: This analytical study evaluated the quality of the assessment tools used for the first batch in a newly established medical college in Karachi, Pakistan. First and sixth module assessment tools in Biochemistry during 2009-2010 were analyzed. Cognitive level of MCQs and SEQs, were noted and MCQ item writing flaws were also evaluated. Results: A total of 36 SEQs and 150 MCQs of four items were analyzed. The cognitive level of 83.33% of SEQs was at recall level while remaining 16.67% were assessing interpretation of data. Seventy six percent of the MCQs were at recall level while remaining 24% were at the interpretation. Regarding IWFs, 69 IWFs were found in 150 MCQs. The commonest among them were implausible distracters (30.43%), unfocused stem (27.54%) and unnecessary information in the stem (24.64%). Conclusion: There is a need to review the quality including the content of assessment tools. A structured faculty development program is recommended for developing improved assessment tools that align with learning outcomes and measure competency of medical students. Professional Medical Publicaitons 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC3955531/ /pubmed/24639820 http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.301.4458 Text en This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Baig, Mukhtiar
Ali, Syeda Kauser
Ali, Sobia
Huda, Nighat
Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences
title Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences
title_full Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences
title_fullStr Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences
title_short Evaluation of Multiple Choice and Short Essay Question items in Basic Medical Sciences
title_sort evaluation of multiple choice and short essay question items in basic medical sciences
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24639820
http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.301.4458
work_keys_str_mv AT baigmukhtiar evaluationofmultiplechoiceandshortessayquestionitemsinbasicmedicalsciences
AT alisyedakauser evaluationofmultiplechoiceandshortessayquestionitemsinbasicmedicalsciences
AT alisobia evaluationofmultiplechoiceandshortessayquestionitemsinbasicmedicalsciences
AT hudanighat evaluationofmultiplechoiceandshortessayquestionitemsinbasicmedicalsciences