NDLI: Use of a Committee Review Process to Improve the Quality of Course Examinations

Please wait, while we are loading the content...

Measuring what Medical Students Think about Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM): A Pilot Study of the Complementary and Alternative Medicine Survey

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Simulation-Based Teaching versus Traditional Instruction in Medicine: A Pilot Study among Clinical Medical Students

Determining the Need for Simulated Training of Invasive Procedures

Relationships Between Self-Assessment Skills, Test Performance, and Demographic Variables in Psychiatry Residents

Use of a Committee Review Process to Improve the Quality of Course Examinations

Alternative Approaches to Concept Mapping and Implications for Medical Education: Commentary on Reliability, Validity and Future Research Directions

Theory in Practice: Why “Good Medicine” and “Scientific Medicine” are not Necessarily the Same Thing

Viewing Clinical Research Career Development Through the Lens of Social Cognitive Career Theory

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 10

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 9

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 8

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 7

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 6

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 5

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 4

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 3

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Volume 2

Use of a Committee Review Process to Improve the Quality of Course Examinations

Content Provider	Springer Nature Link
Author	Wallach, P. M. Crespo, L. M. Holtzman, K. Z. Galbraith, R. M. Swanson, D. B.
Copyright Year	2006
Abstract	Purpose:In conjunction with curricular changes, a process to develop integrated examinations was implemented. Pre-established guidelines were provided favoring vignettes, clinically relevant material, and application of knowledge rather than simple recall. Questions were read aloud in a committee including all course directors, and a reviewer with National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) item writing and review experience. This study examines the effectiveness of this process to improve the quality of in-house examinations. Methods:Five hundred and twenty items were randomly selected from two academic years for initial comparison; 270 from 2000 to 2001, and 250 from 2001 to 2002. The first set of items represented the style, content and format when courses and tests were departmentally/discipline based, assembled by course directors, and administered separately. The latter group represented similar characteristics when courses and tests were organ-system-based, committee-reviewed and administered in an integrated examination. Items were randomized, blinded for year of origin, and rated by three NBME staff members with extensive item review experience. A five-point rating scale was used: one indicated a technically flawed item assessing recall of an isolated fact; five indicated a technically unflawed item assessing application of knowledge. To assess continued improvement, a follow-up set of 250 items from the 2002 to 2003 academic year was submitted to the same three reviewers who were not informed of the purpose or origin of this set of test items Results:The mean rating for items from 2000 to 2001 was 2.51 ± 1.27; analogous values for 2001–2002 were 3.16 ± 1.33, (t = 5.83; p < 0.0001), and in 2002–2003; 3.59 ± 1.15 (t = 10.11; p<0.0001). Conclusion:Pre-established guidelines and an interdisciplinary review process resulted in improved item quality for in-house examinations.
Starting Page	61
Ending Page	68
Page Count	8
File Format	PDF
ISSN	13824996
Journal	Advances in Health Sciences Education
Volume Number	11
Issue Number	1
e-ISSN	15731677
Language	English
Publisher	Kluwer Academic Publishers
Publisher Date	2006-01-01
Publisher Place	Dordrecht
Access Restriction	One Nation One Subscription (ONOS)
Subject Keyword	assessment curricular reform integrated exams multiple-choice questions quality assessment score Medical Education
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Education Medicine

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Using cognitive models to develop quality multiple-choice questions.

Question-writing as a learning tool for students – outcomes from curricular exams

Pick-N multiple choice-exams: a comparison of scoring algorithms

Assessment in undergraduate medical education: a review of course exams

Peer review improves psychometric characteristics of multiple choice questions.

Assessment in undergraduate medical education: a review of course exams

Multiple integrated examinations: an observational study of different academic curricula based on a business administration assessment

Against multiple choice questions.

For multiple choice questions.

Use of a Committee Review Process to Improve the Quality of Course Examinations

Similar Documents

Using cognitive models to develop quality multiple-choice questions.

Question-writing as a learning tool for students – outcomes from curricular exams

Pick-N multiple choice-exams: a comparison of scoring algorithms

Assessment in undergraduate medical education: a review of course exams

Peer review improves psychometric characteristics of multiple choice questions.

Assessment in undergraduate medical education: a review of course exams

Multiple integrated examinations: an observational study of different academic curricula based on a business administration assessment

Against multiple choice questions.

For multiple choice questions.

Use of a Committee Review Process to Improve the Quality of Course Examinations