Cargando…

Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters

BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a cornerstone in healthcare assessment. As a potential tool for providing learner-centred feedback on a large scale, the use of tablet devices has been proposed for the recording of OSCE marks, moving away from the traditional, pape...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Denison, Alan, Bate, Emily, Thompson, Jessica
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4839015/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26975742
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-016-0262-8
_version_ 1782428072492924928
author Denison, Alan
Bate, Emily
Thompson, Jessica
author_facet Denison, Alan
Bate, Emily
Thompson, Jessica
author_sort Denison, Alan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a cornerstone in healthcare assessment. As a potential tool for providing learner-centred feedback on a large scale, the use of tablet devices has been proposed for the recording of OSCE marks, moving away from the traditional, paper-based checklist. METHODS: Examiner-recorded comments were collated from successive first year formative and summative OSCE examinations, with paper-based checklists used in 2012 and iPad-based checklists used in 2013. A total of 558 and 498 examiner-candidate interactions took place in the January OSCE examinations, and 1402 and 1344 for the May OSCE examination for 2012 and 2013 respectively. Examiner comments were analyzed for quantity and quality. A tool was developed and validated to assess the quality of the comments left by examiners for use as feedback (Kappa = 0.625). RESULTS: A direct comparison of paper-based checklists and iPad-recorded examinations showed an increase in the quantity of comments left from 41 to 51 % (+ 10 %). Furthermore, there was an increase in the number of comments left for students deemed ‘borderline’: + 22 %. In terms of the quality of the comments for feedback, there was a significant improvement (p < 0.001) between comments left in written-recorded and iPad-recorded examinations. CONCLUSIONS: iPad-marked examinations resulted in a greater quantity and quality of examiner comment for use as feedback, particularly for students performing less well, enabling tutors to direct further learning for these students.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4839015
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48390152016-05-09 Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters Denison, Alan Bate, Emily Thompson, Jessica Perspect Med Educ Original Article BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a cornerstone in healthcare assessment. As a potential tool for providing learner-centred feedback on a large scale, the use of tablet devices has been proposed for the recording of OSCE marks, moving away from the traditional, paper-based checklist. METHODS: Examiner-recorded comments were collated from successive first year formative and summative OSCE examinations, with paper-based checklists used in 2012 and iPad-based checklists used in 2013. A total of 558 and 498 examiner-candidate interactions took place in the January OSCE examinations, and 1402 and 1344 for the May OSCE examination for 2012 and 2013 respectively. Examiner comments were analyzed for quantity and quality. A tool was developed and validated to assess the quality of the comments left by examiners for use as feedback (Kappa = 0.625). RESULTS: A direct comparison of paper-based checklists and iPad-recorded examinations showed an increase in the quantity of comments left from 41 to 51 % (+ 10 %). Furthermore, there was an increase in the number of comments left for students deemed ‘borderline’: + 22 %. In terms of the quality of the comments for feedback, there was a significant improvement (p < 0.001) between comments left in written-recorded and iPad-recorded examinations. CONCLUSIONS: iPad-marked examinations resulted in a greater quantity and quality of examiner comment for use as feedback, particularly for students performing less well, enabling tutors to direct further learning for these students. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2016-03-14 2016-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4839015/ /pubmed/26975742 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-016-0262-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Denison, Alan
Bate, Emily
Thompson, Jessica
Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters
title Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters
title_full Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters
title_fullStr Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters
title_full_unstemmed Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters
title_short Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters
title_sort tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4839015/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26975742
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-016-0262-8
work_keys_str_mv AT denisonalan tabletversuspapermarkinginassessmentfeedbackmatters
AT bateemily tabletversuspapermarkinginassessmentfeedbackmatters
AT thompsonjessica tabletversuspapermarkinginassessmentfeedbackmatters