PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16211666

Use of course-embedded projects for program assessment.

Abstract

There is increasing demand on science faculty to develop authentic assessment measures for both individual courses and undergraduate programs. We report here on a quarter-long group project used in a neurophysiology course that can be used for either purpose. Small groups of four to five students critically analyze at least 10 articles from the primary scientific literature. The end result of this process is the equivalent of a scientific review article that is presented in two formats, a 10-min oral presentation and a scientific poster presentation. Students perform better on application tasks than on analysis, synthesis, or evaluation tasks associated with the project (P < 0.025) and generally respond positively to process questions (59-82%) but less positively to task questions (36-76%) about group dynamics. The cognitive skills and basic content knowledge required to complete this project are developed throughout the undergraduate program. Thus the project is a type of culminating program experience. However, the project also assesses basic course proficiency, because students cannot analyze primary neuroscience research without an understanding of neurophysiological principles.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B L Krilowicz, T Downs. 1999. Use of course-embedded projects for program assessment.. https://doi.org/10.1152/advances.1999.276.6.s39

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Conditional reliability of admissions interview ratings: extreme ratings are the most informative.

CONTEXT: Admissions interviews are unreliable and have poor predictive validity, yet are the sole measures of non-cognitive skills used by most medical school admissions departments. The low reliability may be due in part to variation in conditional reliability across the rating scale. OBJECTIVES: To describe an empirically derived estimate of conditional reliability and use it to improve the predictive validity of interview ratings. METHODS: A set of medical school interview ratings was compared to a Monte Carlo simulated set to estimate conditional reliability controlling for range restriction, response scale bias and other artefacts. This estimate was used as a weighting function to improve the predictive validity of a second set of interview ratings for predicting non-cognitive measures (USMLE Step II residuals from Step I scores). RESULTS: Compared with the simulated set, both observed sets showed more reliability at low and high rating levels than at moderate levels. Raw interview scores did not predict USMLE Step II scores after controlling for Step I performance (additional r2 = 0.001, not significant). Weighting interview ratings by estimated conditional reliability improved predictive validity (additional r2 = 0.121, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Conditional reliability is important for understanding the psychometric properties of subjective rating scales. Weighting these measures during the admissions process would improve admissions decisions.

Education, Medical, Undergraduate↗