Testing strategies can either have a very positive or negative effect on the learning process. The aim of this study was to examine the degree of consistency in evaluating the practicality and logic of questions from a medical school pathophysiology test, between students and family medicine doctors. The study engaged 77 family medicine doctors and 51 students. Ten questions were taken from cardiac pathophysiology and 10 questions from pulmonary pathophysiology, and each question was assessed on the criteria of practicality and logic. A nonparametric Mann-Whitney test was used to test the difference between evaluators. On the criteria of logic, only four out of 20 items were evaluated differently by students in comparison to doctors, two items each from the fields of cardiology and pulmonology. On the criteria of practicality, for six of the 20 items there were statistically significant differences between the students and doctors, with three items each from cardiology and pulmonology. Based on these indicative results, students should be involved in the qualitative assessment of exam questions, which should be performed regularly under a strictly regulated process.
The Method of Socratic Proofs Meets Correspondence Analysis