scholarly journals The OSCE as a formative evaluation tool for substance abuse teaching

2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 529-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa R Stein ◽  
Sharon J Parish ◽  
Julia H Arnsten
PEDIATRICS ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-172
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Quattlebaum ◽  
Paul M. Darden ◽  
John B. Sperry

Previous attempts to predict resident clinical performance based solely on measures of cognitive skills have been uniformly unsuccessful. For the past 8 years, a formative residency evaluation system has been used that includes yearly comprehensive oral in-training examinations (OITEs) assessing each resident's performance in the three areas of professional competence: cognitive, psychomotor, and affective. The results of these examinations and scores received on the written in-training examination (WITE) given by the American Board of Pediatrics were compared with faculty ratings received during the subsequent year of residency. No significant correlation was found at any level of training between WITE scores and clinical performance. Analysis based on clinical setting did not improve these results. Oral intraining examination scores, however, were highly correlated with clinical performance ratings. In addition, with oral in-training examination scores, the "problem" interns—those whose clinical performance rating placed them in the lower 10% of interns—were predicted with a high degree of significance, sensitivity, and specificity. Predictions based on WITEs were not significant. Simultaneous evaluation of all three areas of professional competence should be done when predictions of resident performance are attempted. The OITE is a powerful formative evaluation tool, providing valuable learning experiences as residents are objectively assessed while they perform patient-centered tasks that represent critical skills in the practice of medicine. It allows early detection and possible amelioration of future problems in the clinical performance of a resident.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-27
Author(s):  
Russell K. Schutt ◽  
Whitney Gecker ◽  
Heather Zaykowski

BackgroundYouth in communities with high rates of crime and low rates of collective efficacy are at risk of depression, substance abuse, and other types of delinquency.ObjectiveThis article presents a formative evaluation of an empowerment-oriented program intended to reduce depression and risky behaviors by improving social support, providing adult mentors, and facilitating prosocial action.MethodsQualitative interviews and observations are used to describe program delivery and a quantitative survey is used to identify correlates of program participation.FindingsQualitative data describe a systematic process of program engagement that supported individual and group empowerment. The analysis of quantitative survey results identifies an association of program participation with less depression and more self-esteem—with reduced feelings of loneliness as the mechanism of these effects—although without comparable patterns for substance abuse and other risky behaviors.ConclusionsEmpowerment-oriented programs that involve young people in supportive peer teams should be developed to help foster constructive social change.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 231-243
Author(s):  
James D. Basham ◽  
J. Emmett Gardner ◽  
Sean J. Smith

The design, flexibility, and iterative nature that is inherent to Universal Design for Learning (UDL) makes it difficult to consistently measure. With federal policy encouraging the implementation of UDL, there is an increased need for practitioners to reliably measure the occurrence of UDL. The UDL Observation Measurement Tool (UDL-OMT) was developed to measure UDL implementation in classrooms. This article presents the conceptual underpinnings of UDL measurement and the results of an initial field test. Results indicate that the UDL-OMT has good to excellent internal consistency and can characterize differences in UDL implementation across a continuum of settings. Discussion focuses on the reliability of the UDL-OMT and its potential as a formative evaluation tool for practitioners and school-based personnel. Additional considerations include promising research applications and how the nature and context of classroom instructional factors as well as observers’ UDL knowledge influence interpretations of observations.


2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Mondal ◽  
S Sarkar ◽  
M Nandi ◽  
A Hazra

Background The use of objective structured clinical examination in pediatrics is not common in undergraduate evaluation process. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of objective structured clinical examination as compare to conventional examination as formative assessment tool in Pediatrics. Methods We conducted a cross sectional comparative study in defined population of 9th semester MBBS students to evaluate the effectiveness of objective structured clinical examination as comparison to conventional examination as formative assessment tool in Pediatrics. We analyzed the perception of objective structured clinical examination among the students. Results Fifty-two students appeared for the objective structured clinical examination evaluation on the first day and 42 turned up for conventional examination on the next day. The 42 students who turned up for both examinations were asked to respond to the perception evaluation questionnaire. Comparison of the two examination styles showed that students fared better in objective structured clinical examination than in conventional examination both with respect to mean total score (p < 0.001) as well as mean percentage score. Out of the 42 subjects who appeared in both examinations, all passed in objective structured clinical examination and 35 passed in conventional examination – this difference was significant by McNemar’s chi-square test (p = 0.016). 73.8% of the students opined in favor of objective structured clinical examination as a better formative assessment tool whereas 9.5% students preferred conventional examination. Conclusions Objective structured clinical examination a statistically significant better evaluation tool with comparison to conventional examination. KATHMANDU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL JOURNAL  VOL.10 | NO. 1 | ISSUE 37 | JAN - MAR 2012 | 62-65 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/kumj.v10i1.6917


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document