A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Experiences in adding multiple-choice questions to an objective structural clinical examination (OSCE) in undergraduate dental education
Tekijät: Näpänkangas R, Harila V, Lahti S
Julkaisuvuosi: 2012
Journal: European Journal of Dental Education
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe
Lehden akronyymi: Eur J Dent Educ
Vuosikerta: 16
Numero: 1
Aloitussivu: e146
Lopetussivu: 50
Sivujen määrä: 5
ISSN: 1396-5883
eISSN: 1600-0579
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0579.2011.00689.x
Tiivistelmä
In the University of Oulu, the competencies of fourth-year dental students have traditionally been assessed with a written examination before they go to work for the first time as dentists outside the Institute of Dentistry. In 2009, the objective structural clinical examination (OSCE) modified with multiple-choice questions was introduced as a tool for assessing clinical competencies. The aim of the study was to evaluate the validity of the modified OSCE (m-OSCE) by measuring the attitude of examiners (teachers) and dental students towards the m-OSCE and to evaluate whether the OSCE is preferred to the written examination in the assessment of knowledge and clinical skills. Additionally, the aim was to evaluate the reliability of the multiple-choice examination. Altogether 30 students (86%) and 11/12 examiners (92%) responded to the questionnaire. Most of the students considered the multiple-choice questions easy, but complained about the complex formulation of the questions. The test stations were easy for 87% of the students, but the time allocated was too short. Most of the students (73%) and examiners (91%) preferred the m-OSCE to the written examination. All students and examiners found the immediate assessment of the tasks good. Based on the evaluations of m-OSCE, it could be concluded that both students and examiners preferred the m-OSCE to the pure written examination in assessment, which indicate that m-OSCE had good face validity. Combining multiple methods in assessment of knowledge and clinical skills whilst simultaneously taking into account the feasibility and available resources provides more valid results.
In the University of Oulu, the competencies of fourth-year dental students have traditionally been assessed with a written examination before they go to work for the first time as dentists outside the Institute of Dentistry. In 2009, the objective structural clinical examination (OSCE) modified with multiple-choice questions was introduced as a tool for assessing clinical competencies. The aim of the study was to evaluate the validity of the modified OSCE (m-OSCE) by measuring the attitude of examiners (teachers) and dental students towards the m-OSCE and to evaluate whether the OSCE is preferred to the written examination in the assessment of knowledge and clinical skills. Additionally, the aim was to evaluate the reliability of the multiple-choice examination. Altogether 30 students (86%) and 11/12 examiners (92%) responded to the questionnaire. Most of the students considered the multiple-choice questions easy, but complained about the complex formulation of the questions. The test stations were easy for 87% of the students, but the time allocated was too short. Most of the students (73%) and examiners (91%) preferred the m-OSCE to the written examination. All students and examiners found the immediate assessment of the tasks good. Based on the evaluations of m-OSCE, it could be concluded that both students and examiners preferred the m-OSCE to the pure written examination in assessment, which indicate that m-OSCE had good face validity. Combining multiple methods in assessment of knowledge and clinical skills whilst simultaneously taking into account the feasibility and available resources provides more valid results.
Turun yliopiston Tutkimustietojärjestelmän portaali