Cargando…

Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME

Curricular revision efforts have resulted in learner-centered programs that value content integration and active learning. Yet, less attention has been placed on assessment methods that are learner-centered and promote assessment for learning. The use of context rich short answer question (CR-SAQ) e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bird, Jeffrey B., Olvet, Doreen M., Willey, Joanne M., Brenner, Judith
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6720218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31438809
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1649959
_version_ 1783448074342891520
author Bird, Jeffrey B.
Olvet, Doreen M.
Willey, Joanne M.
Brenner, Judith
author_facet Bird, Jeffrey B.
Olvet, Doreen M.
Willey, Joanne M.
Brenner, Judith
author_sort Bird, Jeffrey B.
collection PubMed
description Curricular revision efforts have resulted in learner-centered programs that value content integration and active learning. Yet, less attention has been placed on assessment methods that are learner-centered and promote assessment for learning. The use of context rich short answer question (CR-SAQ) exams in the preclinical years of medical school was evaluated to determine if this format aligns with the criteria for assessment for learning. Medical students and preclinical faculty members were sent a survey comprised of closed and open-ended questions about their experience using CR-SAQ exams. Data were analyzed using a mixed-method design. Open-ended responses were evaluated using thematic analysis within the framework of criteria for assessment for learning. A total of 274 students (94%) and 24 faculty (75%) completed the survey. Fifty four percent of students reported preferring a CR-SAQ exam format over multiple choice questions (MCQ) format. Quantitative data and qualitative comments by students supported that CR-SAQ exams aligned with criteria for assessment for learning, including acceptability, authenticity, educational effect, and the cueing effect. Student concerns included preparation for USMLE Step 1 exam, as well as the validity and reproducibility of CR-SAQ assessments. Faculty largely agreed with the benefits of the CR-SAQ, but were concerned about feasibility, acceptability and reproducibility. The CR-SAQ exam format assessment strategy supports assessment for learning in an undergraduate medical education setting. Both benefits and drawbacks of this method are presented, however students and faculty describe a broader impact that this assessment method has on their development as a physician.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6720218
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67202182019-09-06 Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME Bird, Jeffrey B. Olvet, Doreen M. Willey, Joanne M. Brenner, Judith Med Educ Online Research Article Curricular revision efforts have resulted in learner-centered programs that value content integration and active learning. Yet, less attention has been placed on assessment methods that are learner-centered and promote assessment for learning. The use of context rich short answer question (CR-SAQ) exams in the preclinical years of medical school was evaluated to determine if this format aligns with the criteria for assessment for learning. Medical students and preclinical faculty members were sent a survey comprised of closed and open-ended questions about their experience using CR-SAQ exams. Data were analyzed using a mixed-method design. Open-ended responses were evaluated using thematic analysis within the framework of criteria for assessment for learning. A total of 274 students (94%) and 24 faculty (75%) completed the survey. Fifty four percent of students reported preferring a CR-SAQ exam format over multiple choice questions (MCQ) format. Quantitative data and qualitative comments by students supported that CR-SAQ exams aligned with criteria for assessment for learning, including acceptability, authenticity, educational effect, and the cueing effect. Student concerns included preparation for USMLE Step 1 exam, as well as the validity and reproducibility of CR-SAQ assessments. Faculty largely agreed with the benefits of the CR-SAQ, but were concerned about feasibility, acceptability and reproducibility. The CR-SAQ exam format assessment strategy supports assessment for learning in an undergraduate medical education setting. Both benefits and drawbacks of this method are presented, however students and faculty describe a broader impact that this assessment method has on their development as a physician. Taylor & Francis 2019-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6720218/ /pubmed/31438809 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1649959 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bird, Jeffrey B.
Olvet, Doreen M.
Willey, Joanne M.
Brenner, Judith
Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME
title Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME
title_full Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME
title_fullStr Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME
title_full_unstemmed Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME
title_short Patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in UME
title_sort patients don’t come with multiple choice options: essay-based assessment in ume
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6720218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31438809
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1649959
work_keys_str_mv AT birdjeffreyb patientsdontcomewithmultiplechoiceoptionsessaybasedassessmentinume
AT olvetdoreenm patientsdontcomewithmultiplechoiceoptionsessaybasedassessmentinume
AT willeyjoannem patientsdontcomewithmultiplechoiceoptionsessaybasedassessmentinume
AT brennerjudith patientsdontcomewithmultiplechoiceoptionsessaybasedassessmentinume