Cargando…
Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education
INTRODUCTION: Competency-based education (CBE) is now pervasive in health professions education. A foundational principle of CBE is to assess and identify the progression of competency development in students over time. It has been argued that a programmatic approach to assessment in CBE maximizes s...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6283777/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30430439 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0481-2 |
_version_ | 1783379214695661568 |
---|---|
author | Bok, Harold G. J. de Jong, Lubberta H. O’Neill, Thomas Maxey, Connor Hecker, Kent G. |
author_facet | Bok, Harold G. J. de Jong, Lubberta H. O’Neill, Thomas Maxey, Connor Hecker, Kent G. |
author_sort | Bok, Harold G. J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Competency-based education (CBE) is now pervasive in health professions education. A foundational principle of CBE is to assess and identify the progression of competency development in students over time. It has been argued that a programmatic approach to assessment in CBE maximizes student learning. The aim of this study is to investigate if programmatic assessment, i. e., a system of assessment, can be used within a CBE framework to track progression of student learning within and across competencies over time. METHODS: Three workplace-based assessment methods were used to measure the same seven competency domains. We performed a retrospective quantitative analysis of 327,974 assessment data points from 16,575 completed assessment forms from 962 students over 124 weeks using both descriptive (visualization) and modelling (inferential) analyses. This included multilevel random coefficient modelling and generalizability theory. RESULTS: Random coefficient modelling indicated that variance due to differences in inter-student performance was highest (40%). The reliability coefficients of scores from assessment methods ranged from 0.86 to 0.90. Method and competency variance components were in the small-to-moderate range. DISCUSSION: The current validation evidence provides cause for optimism regarding the explicit development and implementation of a program of assessment within CBE. The majority of the variance in scores appears to be student-related and reliable, supporting the psychometric properties as well as both formative and summative score applications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6283777 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Bohn Stafleu van Loghum |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62837772018-12-26 Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education Bok, Harold G. J. de Jong, Lubberta H. O’Neill, Thomas Maxey, Connor Hecker, Kent G. Perspect Med Educ Original Article INTRODUCTION: Competency-based education (CBE) is now pervasive in health professions education. A foundational principle of CBE is to assess and identify the progression of competency development in students over time. It has been argued that a programmatic approach to assessment in CBE maximizes student learning. The aim of this study is to investigate if programmatic assessment, i. e., a system of assessment, can be used within a CBE framework to track progression of student learning within and across competencies over time. METHODS: Three workplace-based assessment methods were used to measure the same seven competency domains. We performed a retrospective quantitative analysis of 327,974 assessment data points from 16,575 completed assessment forms from 962 students over 124 weeks using both descriptive (visualization) and modelling (inferential) analyses. This included multilevel random coefficient modelling and generalizability theory. RESULTS: Random coefficient modelling indicated that variance due to differences in inter-student performance was highest (40%). The reliability coefficients of scores from assessment methods ranged from 0.86 to 0.90. Method and competency variance components were in the small-to-moderate range. DISCUSSION: The current validation evidence provides cause for optimism regarding the explicit development and implementation of a program of assessment within CBE. The majority of the variance in scores appears to be student-related and reliable, supporting the psychometric properties as well as both formative and summative score applications. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2018-11-14 2018-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6283777/ /pubmed/30430439 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0481-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 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 unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided 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 Bok, Harold G. J. de Jong, Lubberta H. O’Neill, Thomas Maxey, Connor Hecker, Kent G. Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education |
title | Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education |
title_full | Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education |
title_fullStr | Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education |
title_full_unstemmed | Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education |
title_short | Validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education |
title_sort | validity evidence for programmatic assessment in competency-based education |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6283777/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30430439 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0481-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bokharoldgj validityevidenceforprogrammaticassessmentincompetencybasededucation AT dejonglubbertah validityevidenceforprogrammaticassessmentincompetencybasededucation AT oneillthomas validityevidenceforprogrammaticassessmentincompetencybasededucation AT maxeyconnor validityevidenceforprogrammaticassessmentincompetencybasededucation AT heckerkentg validityevidenceforprogrammaticassessmentincompetencybasededucation |