scholarly journals Impact of a longitudinal faculty development program on the quality of multiple-choice question item writing in medical education

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
LukmanFemi Owolabi ◽  
Bappa Adamu ◽  
MagajiGarba Taura ◽  
AdamuImam Isa ◽  
AbubakarMuhammed Jibo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Faculty Development ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Multiple Choice Question ◽  
Faculty Development Program ◽  
Question Item ◽  
Item Writing

scholarly journals A Dialogic Approach to Teaching Person-Centered Care in Graduate Medical Education

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 460-467
Author(s):  
Ayelet Kuper ◽  
Victoria A. Boyd ◽  
Paula Veinot ◽  
Tarek Abdelhalim ◽  
Mary Jane Bell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Faculty Development ◽  
Graduate Medical Education ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Faculty Development Program ◽  
Dialogic Teaching ◽  
Graduate Medical ◽  
Person Centered Care ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Education Model

ABSTRACT Background Training future physicians to provide compassionate, equitable, person-centered care remains a challenge for medical educators. Dialogues offer an opportunity to extend person-centered education into clinical care. In contrast to discussions, dialogues encourage the sharing of authority, expertise, and perspectives to promote new ways of understanding oneself and the world. The best methods for implementing dialogic teaching in graduate medical education have not been identified. Objective We developed and implemented a co-constructed faculty development program to promote dialogic teaching and learning in graduate medical education. Methods Beginning in April 2017, we co-constructed, with a pilot working group (PWG) of physician teachers, ways to prepare for and implement dialogic teaching in clinical settings. We kept detailed implementation notes and interviewed PWG members. Data were iteratively co-analyzed using a qualitative description approach within a constructivist paradigm. Ongoing analysis informed iterative changes to the faculty development program and dialogic education model. Patient and learner advisers provided practical guidance. Results The concepts and practice of dialogic teaching resonated with PWG members. However, they indicated that dialogic teaching was easier to learn about than to implement, citing insufficient time, lack of space, and other structural issues as barriers. Patient and learner advisers provided insights that deepened design, implementation, and eventual evaluation of the education model by sharing experiences related to person-centered care. Conclusions While PWG members found that the faculty development program supported the implementation of dialogic teaching, successfully enabling this approach requires expertise, willingness, and support to teach knowledge and skills not traditionally included in medical curricula.

scholarly journals Item Analysis of Multiple Choice Questions in Pharmacology

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Imtiaz Uddin ◽  
Iftikhar Uddin ◽  
Izaz Ur Rehman ◽  
Muhammad Siyar ◽  
Usman Mehboob
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Item Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Teaching Programme ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Item Writing ◽  
Difficulty Index

Background: MCQs type assessment in medical education is replacing old theory style. There are concerns regarding the quality of the Multiple Choice Questions.Objectives: To determine the quality of Multiple Choice Questions by item analysis. Material and Methods: Study was a cross sectional descriptive .Fifty Multiple Choice Questions in the final internal evaluation exams in 2015 of Pharmacology at Bacha khan Medical College were analyzed. The quality of each Multiple Choice Questions item was assessed by the Difficulty index (Dif.I), Discriminative Index (D.I) and Distracter Efficiency (D.E).Results: Multiple Choice Questions that were of moderate difficulty were 66%. Easy were 4% and high difficulty were 30%.Reasons for high difficult Multiple Choice Questions were analyzed as Item Writing Flaws 41%, Irreverent Difficulty 36% and C2 level 23%. Discrimination Index shows that majority of MCQs were of Excellent Level (DI greater than 0.25) i.e 52 , Good 32% . (DI=2.15-0.25), Poor 16%. MCQs Distracter Effectiveness (DE)= 4, 3,2,1 were 52%, 34%, 14%, and 0% respectively. Conclusion: Item analysis gives us different parameters with reasons to recheck MCQ pool and teaching programme. High proportions of difficult and sizable amount of poor discriminative indices MCQs were the finding in this study and need to be resolved

scholarly journals MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS;

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (09) ◽  
pp. 1409-1414
Author(s):  
Muhammad Zafar Iqbal ◽  
Shumaila Irum ◽  
Muhammad Sohaib Yousaf
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Item Writing

Objectives: The main objective of this study was to judge the quality of MCQs interms of their cognition level and item writing flaws, developed by the faculty of a public sectormedical college. Setting: This study was conducted in Sheikh Zayed Medical College, RahimYar Khan. Duration with Dates: Data was collected between June 2014 to March 2015 andthis study was completed in July 2016. Sample Size: A sample of 500 MCQs collected from25 faculty members were included in the study. Study Design: Quantitative method. StudyType: Cross sectional descriptive analysis. Material and Methods: This quantitative study wasconducted in Sheikh Zayed Medical College Rahim Yar Khan over six months period after theapproval of the study proposal. Every faculty member is supposed to write 25 MCQs in order tobecome supervisor. I collected 500 multiple choice questions from 25 faculty members readyfor submission to CPSP. The quality of all MCQs was checked in terms of item writing flawsand cognition level by panel of experts. Results: Absolute terms were observed in 10(2%),vague terms in 15(3%), implausible distracters in 75(15%), extra detail in correct option 15(3%),unfocused stem 63(12.6%), grammatical clues 39(7.8%), logical clues 18(3.6%), word repeats19(3.8%), >then one correct answer 21(4.2%), unnecessary information in stem 37(7.4%),lost sequence in data 15(3%), all of above16(3.2%), none of above 12(2.4%) and negativestem 23(4.6%). Cognition level l (recall) was observed in 363(72.6%), level ll (interpretation) in115(23%) and level lll (problem solving) in 22(4.4%) items. Total 378(75.6%) flaws were identifiedand four commonest flaws were implausible distracter 75(15%), unfocused stem 63(12.6%),grammatical clues 39(7.8%) and unnecessary information in stem 37(7.4%). Conclusion: It isconcluded that assessment of medical students is very demanding and need of the time. A wellconstructed,peer-reviewed single best type MCQ is best one to complete this task becauseof cost effectiveness, better reliability and computerized marking. It is very important to startfaculty development program in order to decrease the number of item writing flaws and improvecognition level towards problem solving and application of knowledge.

Measuring Return on Investment of an Intensive Faculty Development Program in Medical Education

2005 ◽  
Vol 147 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patience H. White ◽  
Mark L. Batshaw ◽  
Edwin K. Zechman ◽  
Bernhard L. Wiedermann
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Faculty Development ◽  
Return On Investment ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Faculty Development Program

Evaluating the impact of faculty development programme initiative: are we really improving skills in MCQ writing?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faiza Kiran ◽  
Rukhsana Ayub ◽  
Ayesha Rauf ◽  
Khadija Qamar
Keyword(s):  
Faculty Development ◽  
Writing Skills ◽  
Training Session ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Faculty Development Program ◽  
Quality Test ◽  
Test Items ◽  
Feedback Questionnaire ◽  
Item Writing ◽  
The Impact

Objective: This study was done to evaluate the effectiveness of a 3-hour workshop in improving faculty competence in developing high quality test items. Methodology: The study took place in National University of Medical Sciences and its affiliated institutes in Pakistan, during a period of six months in year 2018. It was a descriptive, cross sectional study. A series of seven workshops on quality assurance in writing MCQs was conducted as part of faculty development program, emphasizing hand-on experience and prompt feedback. Participants’ satisfaction was evaluated with a post-workshop feedback questionnaire (Kirkpatrick 1). A self-made structured questionnaire was given as a pre-test and post-test, to check improvement in cognition, behaviour and item writing skills of faculty (Kirkpatrick 2). Paired t test was applied and difference in mean scores of responses was evaluated. Results: Total 141 faculty members were trained.  The training session led to high satisfaction in all elements of workshop, significant improvements in boosting confidence in item writing skills(p=0.000), recognizing parts of MCQs (p=0.000), identifying item writing flaws (p=0.000) and levels of Millers pyramid and blooms taxonomy (p=0.000). Conclusion: Training sessions of short duration are effective in improving the competence of faculty in writing quality test items, provided hands-on experience is built-in and effective feedback is provided.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document