PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9488847

Problem-based examining: a different approach to assessment.

Abstract

An attempt to achieve problem-based examining by the structured assessment of presentations is described. Students can choose to participate in the scheme in teams and then elect to use their awarded mark instead of part of the formal examination assessment. The element of choice of the study or examination method is seen as being a valuable element of the scheme. The scheme can be introduced without radical revision of existing curricula or substantial investment of staff time, and meets some of the expressed desires of the UK General Medical Council in terms of the introduction of novel methods of assessment.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J C McLachlan. 1997. Problem-based examining: a different approach to assessment.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1997.tb02929.x

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↗