Action research on "assessment for learning" in undergraduate psychology programmes

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara King ◽  
Delia Wakelin ◽  
Julie Seed ◽  
Anita Navin ◽  
Vicki Oley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Assessment For Learning ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology

Assessment : Basic Concepts, Thoughtful Decisions

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-21
Author(s):  
Milton Raul Licona Luna ◽  
Elizabeth Alvarado Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Foreign Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Assessment For Learning ◽  
Continuous Assessment ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Basic Concepts ◽  
Education In Mexico

Institutions from basic to higher education in Mexico that offer courses of English as a Foreign Language rely heavily on the administering of assessment, usually a formal type of assessment. However, the literature shows how important it is the involvement of other types of assessment in the classroom for effective language learning to take place. For instance, assessment for learning, which consist of a continuous assessment where learners receive feedback so greater learning occurs, what is more, it enables teachers to modify their teaching ways as they reflect on the learners’ progress. To show how assessment is carried out in our context, this research project focuses on a case study within the CAADI from FOD in the UANL.

Validation of a Musculoskeletal Digital Assessment Routing Tool (DART): Protocol for a Pilot Randomised Crossover Non-Inferiority Trial (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cabella Lowe ◽  
Harry Hanuman Sing ◽  
William Marsh ◽  
Dylan Morrissey
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Real World ◽  
User Satisfaction ◽  
Allocation Concealment ◽  
Trial Methodology ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Digital Assessment ◽  
System Usability Scale ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND Musculoskeletal conditions account for 16% of global disability, resulting in a negative effect on millions of patients and an increasing burden on healthcare utilization. Digital technologies to improve health care outcomes and efficiency are considered a priority; however, innovations are rarely tested with sufficient rigor in clinical trials, the gold standard for clinical proof of safety and efficacy. We have developed a new musculoskeletal Digital Assessment Routing Tool (DART) that allows users to self-assess and be directed to the right care. DART requires validation in a real-world setting prior to implementation. OBJECTIVE This pilot study will assess the feasibility of a future trial by exploring key aspects of trial methodology, assess the procedures and collect exploratory data to inform the design of a definitive, randomized, crossover, non-inferiority trial to assess DART safety and effectiveness. METHODS We will collect data from 76 adult participants presenting to an NHS England GP practice with a musculoskeletal condition. Participants will complete both a DART assessment and a physiotherapist-led triage with the order determined by randomization. The primary analysis will involve an absolute agreement ICC (A,1) estimate with 95% confidence intervals between DART and the clinician for assessment outcomes sign-posting to condition management pathways. Data will be collected to allow analysis of participant recruitment and retention, randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, data collection process and bias. In addition, the impact of trial burden and potential barriers to intervention delivery will be considered. DART user satisfaction will be measured using the System Usability Scale. RESULTS A UK NHS ethics submission will be submitted during June 2021 and pending approval, recruitment will commence during August 2021 with data collection anticipated to last for 3 months. Results will be reported in a follow-up paper later in 2021. CONCLUSIONS This study will inform the design of a randomized controlled crossover non-inferiority study that will provide evidence concerning mHealth DART system clinical sign posting in an NHS setting prior to real-world implementation. Success should produce evidence of a safe, effective system with excellent usability, facilitating quicker and easier patient access to appropriate care while reducing the burden on primary and secondary care musculoskeletal services. This rigorous approach to mHealth system testing could be used as a guide for other developers of similar applications. CLINICALTRIAL This trial is registered with Clinical Trials number NCT04904029

The Use of a Modified Script Concordance Test in Clinical Rounds to Foster and Assess Clinical Reasoning Skills

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan D. Tayce ◽  
Ashley B. Saunders
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Reasoning ◽  
Assessment For Learning ◽  
Learning Activity ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Valuable Insight ◽  
Script Concordance Test ◽  
Concordance Test ◽  
Script Concordance ◽  
Reasoning Skills ◽  
Clinical Reasoning Skills

The development of clinical reasoning skills is a high priority during clinical service, but an unpredictable case load and limited time for formal instruction makes it challenging for faculty to foster and assess students’ individual clinical reasoning skills. We developed an assessment for learning activity that helps students build their clinical reasoning skills based on a modified version of the script concordance test (SCT). To modify the standard SCT, we simplified it by limiting students to a 3-point Likert scale instead of a 5-point scale and added a free-text box for students to provide justification for their answer. Students completed the modified SCT during clinical rounds to prompt a group discussion with the instructor. Student feedback was positive, and the instructor gained valuable insight into the students’ thought process. A modified SCT can be adopted as part of a multimodal approach to teaching on the clinic floor. The purpose of this article is to describe our modifications to the standard SCT and findings from implementation in a clinical rounds setting as a method of formative assessment for learning and developing clinical reasoning skills.

A Systematic Review of the Current State and Validity of Digital Assessment Tools for Psychiatry (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayra Anna Martin-Key ◽  
Benedetta Spadaro ◽  
Erin Funnell ◽  
Eleanor Jane Barker ◽  
Thea Sofie Schei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Mental Healthcare ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Digital Assessment ◽  
Current State

BACKGROUND Given the role digital technologies are likely to play in the future of mental healthcare, there is a need for a comprehensive appraisal of the current state and validity (i.e., screening/diagnostic accuracy) of digital mental health assessments. OBJECTIVE To explore the current state and validity of question-and-answer-based digital tools for diagnosing and screening psychiatric conditions in adults. METHODS This systematic review was based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework and was carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, ASSIA, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for articles published between 2005 and 2020. A descriptive evaluation of the study characteristics and digital solutions and a quantitative appraisal of the screening/diagnostic accuracy of the included tools was conducted. Risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) guidelines. RESULTS A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria, with the most frequently evaluated conditions encompassing generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), major depressive disorder (MDD), and any depressive disorder. The majority of the studies employed digitized versions of existing pen-and-paper questionnaires, with findings revealing poor to excellent screening/diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity = 0.36-1.00, specificity = 0.37-1.00, AUC = 0.57-0.98) and a high risk of bias for most of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS The current state of the field of digital mental health tools is in its early stages and high-quality evidence is lacking. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/25382

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document