scholarly journals Comparison of medical students' performance in multiple choice questions and integrated short answer essay questions in end unit examination at PBL School

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zuheir A. Hasan ◽  
Amer J. Almarabheh2 ◽  
Rima L. Abdul Razzak ◽  
Amer H. kamal
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Short Answer

scholarly journals Very Short Answer Questions: A Viable Alternative to Multiple Choice Questions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
THOMAS PUTHIAPARAMPIL ◽  
Md Mizanur Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Student Performance ◽  
Test Scores ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Viable Alternative ◽  
Rote Learning ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Short Answer ◽  
Short Answer Questions ◽  
True False

Abstract Background Multiple choice questions, used in medical school assessments for decades, have many drawbacks, such as: hard to construct, allow guessing, encourage test-wiseness, promote rote learning, provide no opportunity for examinees to express ideas, and do not provide information about strengths and weakness of candidates. Directly asked and answered questions like Very Short Answer Questions (VSAQ) is considered a better alternative with several advantages. Objectives This study aims to substantiate the superiority of VSAQ by actual tests and obtaining feedback from the stakeholders. Methods Conduct multiple true-false, one best answer and VSAQ tests in two batches of medical students, compare their scores and psychometric indexes of the tests and seek opinions from students and academics regarding these assessment methods. Results Multiple true-false and best answer test scores showed skewed results and low psychometric performance compared to better psychometrics and more balanced student performance in VSAQ tests. The stakeholders’ opinions were significantly in favour of VSAQ. Conclusion and recommendation This study concludes that VSAQ is a viable alternative to multiple choice question tests, and it is widely accepted by medical students and academics in the medical faculty.

CORRELATION OF DIFFICULTY INDEX AND DISCRIMINATING INDEX IN MEDICAL STUDENT’S ASSESSMENT.

2021 ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
Bhoomika R. Chauhan ◽  
Jayesh Vaza ◽  
Girish R. Chauhan ◽  
Pradip R. Chauhan
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Formative Assessment ◽  
Item Difficulty ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Discriminating Power ◽  
Good Discriminator ◽  
Difficulty Index ◽  
The Relationship

Multiple choice questions are nowadays used in competitive examination and formative assessment to assess the student's eligibility and certification.Item analysis is the process of collecting,summarizing and using information from students' responses to assess the quality of test items.Goal of the study was to identify the relationship between the item difficulty index and item discriminating index in medical student's assessment. 400 final year medical students from various medical colleges responded 200 items constructed for the study.The responses were assessed and analysed for item difficulty index and item discriminating power. Item difficulty index an item discriminating power were analysed by statical methods to identify correlation.The discriminating power of the items with difficulty index in 40%-50% was the highest. Summary and Conclusion:Items with good difficulty index in range of 30%-70% are good discriminator.

scholarly journals Analisis Deskriptif Soal Ujian Nasional dan Cambridge Checkpoint Pelajaran Matematika Tingkat Sekolah Menengah Pertama Tahun Ajaran 2014/2015 Berdasarkan Tipe Penyajian Soal dan Ruang Lingkup Materi

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zainal Abidin
Keyword(s):  
National Curriculum ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Secondary Level ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Short Answer ◽  
National Examination ◽  
Analysis Question ◽  
Short Answer Question ◽  
Mathematics Examination

National Examination and Cambridge Checkpoint are the instrument for evaluating the standard competence ofstudent which organized in Secondary Level. National Examination’s questions based on the National Curriculum ofIndonesia but Cambridge Checkpoint’s questions taken based on Cambridge Curriculum. The aims of this researchis analyzing the type of each question and distribution of each strands in the National Mathematics Examination 2015and Mathematics of Cambridge Checkpoint for Secondary Level 2015. This type of research is a descriptive studywith a qualitative approach. National Mathematics Examination 2015 has one paper only but Mathematics ofCambridge Checkpoint for Secondary Level 2015 has 2 papers for the test. It can be concluded that all question’stype of the National Mathematics Examination for Secondary Level 2015 are multiple choice questions. OnMathematics of Cambridge Checkpoint for Secondary Level 2015, there are various types of questions which consistof 11,43% short-answer question; 68,57% analysis question; 8,57% completing question; and 11,43% match questionfor paper 1, but 22,22% short-answer question; 58,33% analysis question; 11,11% completing question; 2,78% matchquestion; 2,78% multiple choice question; and 2,78% yes/no question for paper 2. Based on strands analyzing result,It can be determined that National Mathematics Examination for Secondary Level 2015 contain of 22,25% number;27,5 algebra; 40% geometry and measurement; 10% statistic and probability. On Mathematics of CambridgeCheckpoint for Secondary Level 2015, It can be explained that 45,72% number; 20% algebra; 17,14% geometry andmeasurement; and 17,14% statistic and probability for paper 1, and 33,33% number; 19,45% algebra; 25% geometryand measurement; and 22,22% statistic and probability for paper 2.

Single-choice or multiple true false questions (Kprime):Direct comparison of online tests in pharmacology over one year (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Neumann ◽  
Stephanie Simmrodt ◽  
Beatrice Bader ◽  
Bertram Opitz ◽  
Ulrich Gergs
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Learning Objectives ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Online Test ◽  
True Answer ◽  
Group A ◽  
One Year ◽  
Group B

BACKGROUND There remain doubts about whether multiple choice answer formats (single choice) offer the best option to encourage deep learning or whether SC formats simply lead to superficial learning or cramming. Moreover, cueing is always a drawback in the SC format. Another way to assess knowledge is true multiple-choice questions in which one or more answers can be true and the student is not aware of how many true answers are to be anticipated (K´ or Kprime question format). OBJECTIVE Here, we compared both single-choice answers (one true answer, SC) with Kprime answers (one to four true answers out of four answers, Kprime) for the very same learning objectives in a study of pharmacology in medical students. METHODS Two groups of medical students were randomly subjected to a formative online test: group A) was first given 15 SC (#1-15) followed by 15 different Kprime questions (#16-30). The opposite design was used for group B. RESULTS The mean number of right answers was higher for SC than for Kprime questions in group A (10.02 vs. 8.63, p < 0.05) and group B (9.98 vs. 6.66, p < 0.05). The number of right answers was higher for nine questions of SC compared to Kprime in group A and for eight questions in group B (pairwise T-Test, p < 0.05). Thus, SC is easier to answer than the same learning objectives in pharmacology given as Kprime questions. One year later, four groups were formed from the previous two groups and were again given the same online test but in a different order: the main result was that all students fared better in the second test than in the initial test; however, the gain in points was highest if initially mode B was given. CONCLUSIONS Kprime is less popular with students being more demanding, but could improve memory of subject matter and thus might be more often used by meidcal educators.

scholarly journals MSK30: a validated tool to assess clinical musculoskeletal knowledge

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e000495
Author(s):  
Danielle L Cummings ◽  
Matthew Smith ◽  
Brian Merrigan ◽  
Jeffrey Leggit
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
School Curriculum ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Multiple Choice Exam ◽  
Individual Education

BackgroundMusculoskeletal (MSK) complaints comprise a large proportion of outpatient visits. However, multiple studies show that medical school curriculum often fails to adequately prepare graduates to diagnose and manage common MSK problems. Current standardised exams inadequately assess trainees’ MSK knowledge and other MSK-specific exams such as Freedman and Bernstein’s (1998) exam have limitations in implementation. We propose a new 30-question multiple choice exam for graduating medical students and primary care residents. Results highlight individual deficiencies and identify areas for curriculum improvement.Methods/ResultsWe developed a bank of multiple choice questions based on 10 critical topics in MSK medicine. The questions were validated with subject-matter experts (SMEs) using a modified Delphi method to obtain consensus on the importance of each question. Based on the SME input, we compiled 30 questions in the assessment. Results of the large-scale pilot test (167 post-clerkship medical students) were an average score of 74 % (range 53% – 90 %, SD 7.8%). In addition, the tool contains detailed explanations and references were created for each question to allow an individual or group to review and enhance learning.SummaryThe proposed MSK30 exam evaluates clinically important topics and offers an assessment tool for clinical MSK knowledge of medical students and residents. It fills a gap in current curriculum and improves on previous MSK-specific assessments through better clinical relevance and consistent grading. Educators can use the results of the exam to guide curriculum development and individual education.

scholarly journals Open problem-based instruction impacts understanding of physiological concepts differently in undergraduate students

2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon M. Franklin ◽  
Lin Xiang ◽  
Jason A. Collett ◽  
Megan K. Rhoads ◽  
Jeffrey L. Osborn
Keyword(s):  
Student Performance ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Open Problem ◽  
Instructional Methods ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Short Answer ◽  
Upper Level ◽  
Based Instruction ◽  
Multiple Choice Exam

Student populations are diverse such that different types of learners struggle with traditional didactic instruction. Problem-based learning has existed for several decades, but there is still controversy regarding the optimal mode of instruction to ensure success at all levels of students' past achievement. The present study addressed this problem by dividing students into the following three instructional groups for an upper-level course in animal physiology: traditional lecture-style instruction (LI), guided problem-based instruction (GPBI), and open problem-based instruction (OPBI). Student performance was measured by three summative assessments consisting of 50% multiple-choice questions and 50% short-answer questions as well as a final overall course assessment. The present study also examined how students of different academic achievement histories performed under each instructional method. When student achievement levels were not considered, the effects of instructional methods on student outcomes were modest; OPBI students performed moderately better on short-answer exam questions than both LI and GPBI groups. High-achieving students showed no difference in performance for any of the instructional methods on any metric examined. In students with low-achieving academic histories, OPBI students largely outperformed LI students on all metrics (short-answer exam: P < 0.05, d = 1.865; multiple-choice question exam: P < 0.05, d = 1.166; and final score: P < 0.05, d = 1.265). They also outperformed GPBI students on short-answer exam questions ( P < 0.05, d = 1.109) but not multiple-choice exam questions ( P = 0.071, d = 0.716) or final course outcome ( P = 0.328, d = 0.513). These findings strongly suggest that typically low-achieving students perform at a higher level under OPBI as long as the proper support systems (formative assessment and scaffolding) are provided to encourage student success.

scholarly journals Does developing multiple-choice Questions Improve Medical Students’ Learning? A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Youness Touissi ◽  
Ghita Hjiej ◽  
Abderrazak Hajjioui ◽  
Azeddine Ibrahimi ◽  
Maryam Fourtassi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions

scholarly journals ANAESTHESIOLOGY AS A FUTURE SPECIALTY

2021 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 1152-56
Author(s):  
Khalid Mahmood ◽  
Asad Shamim ◽  
Muhammad Umair Khan ◽  
Tasneem Alam ◽  
Usman Khalid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Response Sheet ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Cross Sectional

Objective: To ascertain the various aspects directing the undergraduates at Quetta Institute of medical sciences towards anesthesiology as future profession/specialization. Study Design: Cross sectional study. Place and Duration of Study: Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences, Quetta Pakistan, from Mar to Apr 2019. Methodology: Study was conducted among final year medical students with the help of a printed questionnaire consisting of 15 Multiple Choice Questions. The questionnaire provided the required database to explore various factors that influence undergraduates to select their future specialization based on demography and specialty preferences. Results: A total of 65 undergraduates completed the response sheet. While 45 (68.8%) participants were females and 20 (31.2%) were males, 62 (95.4%) were single (unmarried or divorced) and had no children 63 (96.9%). Medicine proved to be the most favourate specialty with 20 (31.4%) student opting for it whereas anesthesiology was chosen by 4 (6.1%) students. Conclusion: Anesthesiology still remains a less popular choice among the medical students of Pakistan particularly Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences due to multifaceted factors. Inferior prestige of the specialty was the most significant factor in deciding against anaesthesiology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document