Search

Workplace-Based Assessment (WBA) plays a pivotal role in present-day competency-based medical curricula. Validity in WBA mainly depends on how stakeholders (e.g. clinical supervisors and learners) use the assessments--rather than on the intrinsic qualities of instruments and methods. Current research on assessment in clinical contexts seems to imply that variable behaviours during performance assessment of both assessors and learners may well reflect their respective beliefs and perspectives towards WBA. We therefore performed a Q methodological study to explore perspectives underlying stakeholders' behaviours in WBA in a postgraduate medical training program. Five different perspectives on performance assessment were extracted: Agency, Mutuality, Objectivity, Adaptivity and Accountability. These perspectives reflect both differences and similarities in stakeholder perceptions and preferences regarding the utility of WBA. In comparing and contrasting the various perspectives, we identified two key areas of disagreement, specifically "the locus of regulation of learning" (i.e., self-regulated versus externally regulated learning) and 'the extent to which assessment should be standardised' (i.e., tailored versus standardised assessment). Differing perspectives may variously affect stakeholders' acceptance, use--and, consequently, the effectiveness--of assessment programmes. Continuous interaction between all stakeholders is essential to monitor, adapt and improve assessment practices and to stimulate the development of a shared mental model. Better understanding of underlying stakeholder perspectives could be an important step in bridging the gap between psychometric and socio-constructivist approaches in WBA.

Formula scoring (FS) is the use of a don't know option (DKO) with subtraction of points for wrong answers. Its effect on construct validity and reliability of progress test scores, is subject of discussion. Choosing a DKO may not only be affected by knowledge level, but also by risk taking tendency, and may thus introduce construct-irrelevant variance into the knowledge measurement. On the other hand, FS may result in more reliable test scores. To evaluate the impact of FS on construct validity and reliability of progress test scores, a progress test for radiology residents was divided into two tests of 100 parallel items (A and B). Each test had a FS and a number-right (NR) version, A-FS, B-FS, A-NR, and B-NR. Participants (337) were randomly divided into two groups. One group took test A-FS followed by B-NR, and the second group test B-FS followed by A-NR. Evidence for impaired construct validity was sought in a hierarchical regression analysis by investigating how much of the participants' FS-score variance was explained by the DKO-score, compared to the contribution of the knowledge level (NR-score), while controlling for Group, Gender, and Training length. Cronbach's alpha was used to estimate NR and FS-score reliability per year group. NR score was found to explain 27 % of the variance of FS [F(1,332) = 219.2, p < 0.0005], DKO-score, and the interaction of DKO and Gender were found to explain 8 % [F(2,330) = 41.5, p < 0.0005], and the interaction of DKO and NR 1.6 % [F(1,329) = 16.6, p < 0.0005], supporting our hypothesis that FS introduces construct-irrelevant variance into the knowledge measurement. However, NR-scores showed considerably lower reliabilities than FS-scores (mean year-test group Cronbach's alphas were 0.62 and 0.74, respectively). Decisions about FS with progress tests should be a careful trade-off between systematic and random measurement error.

Weaknesses in the nature of rater judgments are generally considered to compromise the utility of workplace-based assessment (WBA). In order to gain insight into the underpinnings of rater behaviours, we investigated how raters form impressions of and make judgments on trainee performance. Using theoretical frameworks of social cognition and person perception, we explored raters' implicit performance theories, use of task-specific performance schemas and the formation of person schemas during WBA. We used think-aloud procedures and verbal protocol analysis to investigate schema-based processing by experienced (N = 18) and inexperienced (N = 16) raters (supervisor-raters in general practice residency training). Qualitative data analysis was used to explore schema content and usage. We quantitatively assessed rater idiosyncrasy in the use of performance schemas and we investigated effects of rater expertise on the use of (task-specific) performance schemas. Raters used different schemas in judging trainee performance. We developed a normative performance theory comprising seventeen inter-related performance dimensions. Levels of rater idiosyncrasy were substantial and unrelated to rater expertise. Experienced raters made significantly more use of task-specific performance schemas compared to inexperienced raters, suggesting more differentiated performance schemas in experienced raters. Most raters started to develop person schemas the moment they began to observe trainee performance. The findings further our understanding of processes underpinning judgment and decision making in WBA. Raters make and justify judgments based on personal theories and performance constructs. Raters' information processing seems to be affected by differences in rater expertise. The results of this study can help to improve rater training, the design of assessment instruments and decision making in WBA.

Although other web-based approaches to assessment of professional behaviour have been studied, no publications studying the potential advantages of a web-based instrument versus a classic, paper-based method have been published to date. This study has two research goals: it focuses on the quantity and quality of comments provided by students and their peers (two researchers independently scoring comments as correct and incorrect in relation to five commonly used feedback rules (and resulting in an aggregated score of the five scores) on the one, and on the feasibility, acceptability and perceived usefulness of the two approaches on the other hand (using a survey). The amount of feedback was significantly higher in the web-based group than in the paper based group for all three categories (dealing with work, others and oneself). Regarding the quality of feedback, the aggregated score for each of the three categories was not significantly different between the two groups, neither for the interim, nor for the final assessment. Some, not statistically significant, but nevertheless noteworthy trends were nevertheless noted. Feedback in the web-based group was more often unrelated to observed behaviour for several categories for both the interim and final assessment. Furthermore, most comments relating to the category "Dealing with oneself" consisted of descriptions of a student's attendance, thereby neglecting other aspects of personal functioning. The survey identified significant differences between the groups for all questionnaire items regarding feasibility, acceptability and perceived usefulness in favour of the paper-based form. The use of a web-based instrument for professional behaviour assessment yielded a significantly higher number of comments compared to the traditional paper-based assessment. Unfortunately, the quality of the feedback obtained by the web-based instrument as measured by several generally accepted feedback criteria did not parallel this increase. (Contains 5 tables and 1 figure.)

In a previous study, we established that compared to a written case, a video case enhances observable cognitive processes in the verbal interaction in a postgraduate problem-based learning format. In a new study we examined non-observable cognitive processes using a stimulated recall procedure alongside a reanalysis of the data from the first study. We examined the development of shared cognition as reflected in collaborative concept link formation, an approach to connecting a series of concepts related to a particular topic. Eleven paediatric residents were randomly allocated to two groups. After both analysing the same written case vignette, one group watched a video of the case in the vignette and the other group read a written description of the video. Both groups then reanalysed the vignette. After the group sessions, time-logged transcripts were made of the verbal interaction in both groups and all residents individually took part in a stimulated recall procedure. Causal reasoning concept links were labelled as individual or collaborative depending on whether they originated from individual residents or were directly elicited by verbal utterances from others. The video led to a significantly increased frequency ratio (after intervention: before intervention) of collaborative concept links but did not affect the frequency of individual concept links. This novel process approach to chronological registration of concept link formation offered additional evidence that shared cognition by means of co-elaboration of concept formation is stimulated by the use of patient video recordings in small group learning.

Progress testing provides data on the growth of students' knowledge over the course of the curriculum obtained from the results of all students in the curriculum on periodical similar tests pitched at end-of-curriculum level. Since 2001, three medical schools have jointly constructed and administered four progress tests annually. All students in the 6-year undergraduate curricula of these schools take the same tests resulting in 24 distinct measurements per academic year (four tests for six student year groups), which may be used to compare performance between and within schools. Because single point measurements had proven unreliable, we devised a method to use cumulative information to compare schools' test performance. This cumulative deviation method involves calculation of the deviations of schools' scores from the cross-institutional average score for 24 measurement moments in 1 year. The current study shows that it appears to be feasible to use a combination of the cumulative deviation method and trend analysis for subdomains of medical knowledge to detect strengths and weaknesses in knowledge development in medical curricula. We illustrate the method by applying it to data from 16 consecutive progress tests administered to all students (4,300) of three medical schools in the academic years 2001/2002 through 2004/2005.

Background: To establish credible, defensible and acceptable passing scores for written tests is a challenge for health profession educators. Angoff procedures are often used to establish pass/fail decisions for written and performance tests. In an Angoff procedure judges' expertise and professional skills are assumed to influence their ratings of the items during standard-setting. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of judges' item-related knowledge on their judgement of the difficulty of items, and second, to determine the stability of differences between judges. Method: Thirteen judges were presented with two sets of 60 items on different occasions. They were asked to not only judge the difficulty of the items but also to answer them, without the benefit of the answer key. For each of the 120 items an Angoff estimate and an item score were obtained. The relationship between the Angoff estimate and the item score was examined by applying a regression analysis to the 60 items (Angoff estimate, score) for each judge at each occasion. Results and conclusions: This study shows that in standard-setting the individual judgement of the individual item is not only a reflection of the difficulty of the item but also of the inherent stringency of the judge and his/her subject-related knowledge. Considerable variation between judges in their stringency was found, and Angoff estimates were significantly affected by a judge knowing or not knowing the answer to the item. These findings stress the importance of a careful selection process of the Angoff judges when making pass/fail decisions in health professions education. They imply that judges should be selected who are not only capable of conceptualising the "minimally competent student", but who would also be capable of answering all the items.

Sequential testing is applied to reduce costs in SP-based tests (OSCEs). Initially, all candidates take a screening test consisting of a part of the OSCE. Candidates who fail the screen sit the complete test, whereas those who pass the screen are qualified as a pass of the complete test. The procedure may result in a reduction of testing resources, but at the cost of false positives (candidates who pass the screen but would fail the complete test). In a diagnostic test an optimum cutpoint is obtained by minimizing the weighted sum of false negatives and false positives using Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analysis. However, in the sequential procedure there are no false negatives, because the result of the complete test is considered the final outcome. Several authors ignored this difference and applied classic ROC analysis to a sequential test. Earlier, we doubted the validity of the procedure and proposed to set the cutpoint by minimizing the loss, defined as the weighted sum of the screen negatives and the false positives. Recently, Regehr and Colliver (2003) argued that under certain theoretically derived conditions the use of the loss formula in sequential testing is functionally identical to using classic ROC analysis. The current study shows (a) the conclusion of Regehr and Colliver is based on assumptions that can be challenged, and (b) ROC analysis indeed can be used in sequential testing, but only if the procedure is modified according to the results of a corresponding loss function analysis.

Introduction: In health science education clinical clerkships serve the twofold purpose of guiding student learning and assessment of performance. Evidently, both formative and summative assessment procedures are needed in clerkship assessment. In-training evaluation (ITE) has the potential to serve both assessment functions. Implementation of effective ITE, however, has been shown to be problematic, partly because integration of assessment functions may have negative consequences for teaching and learning. This study investigates student perceptions of the impact of an integrated assessment approach, seeking to refine criteria for effective ITE. Method: In the curriculum of Maastricht Midwifery School (MMS), clerkship assessment is based on ITE serving both assessment functions. The ITE model is based on principles of extensive work sampling, and frequent documentation of performance. A focus group technique was used to explore student perceptions on the impact of the ITE approach on student learning and supervisor teaching behaviour, and on the usefulness of information for decision making. Results: Results indicate that the assessment approach is effective in guidance of student learning. Furthermore, students consider the frequent performance documentation essential in clerkship grading. Acceptance and effectivity of ITE requires a learning environment which is safe and respectful. Transparency of assessment processes is the key to success. Suggestions for improvement focus on variation in evaluation formats, improvement of feedback (narrative, complete) and student involvement in assessment. Conclusion: ITE can fulfill both its formative and summative purposes when some crucial conditions are taken into account. Careful training of both supervisors and students in the use of ITE for student learning and performance measurement is essential.

Workplace-Based Assessment (WBA) plays a pivotal role in present-day competency-based medical curricula. Validity in WBA mainly depends on how stakeholders (e.g. clinical supervisors and learners) use the assessments-rather than on the intrinsic qualities of instruments and methods. Current research on assessment in clinical contexts seems to imply that variable behaviours during performance assessment of both assessors and learners may well reflect their respective beliefs and perspectives towards WBA. We therefore performed a Q methodological study to explore perspectives underlying stakeholders' behaviours in WBA in a postgraduate medical training program. Five different perspectives on performance assessment were extracted: Agency, Mutuality, Objectivity, Adaptivity and Accountability. These perspectives reflect both differences and similarities in stakeholder perceptions and preferences regarding the utility of WBA. In comparing and contrasting the various perspectives, we identified two key areas of disagreement, specifically 'the locus of regulation of learning' (i.e., self-regulated versus externally regulated learning) and 'the extent to which assessment should be standardised' (i.e., tailored versus standardised assessment). Differing perspectives may variously affect stakeholders' acceptance, use-and, consequently, the effectiveness-of assessment programmes. Continuous interaction between all stakeholders is essential to monitor, adapt and improve assessment practices and to stimulate the development of a shared mental model. Better understanding of underlying stakeholder perspectives could be an important step in bridging the gap between psychometric and socio-constructivist approaches in WBA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traditional psychometric approaches towards assessment tend to focus exclusively on quantitative properties of assessment outcomes. This may limit more meaningful educational approaches towards workplace-based assessment (WBA). Cognition-based models of WBA argue that assessment outcomes are determined by cognitive processes by raters which are very similar to reasoning, judgment and decision making in professional domains such as medicine. The present study explores cognitive processes that underlie judgment and decision making by raters when observing performance in the clinical workplace. It specifically focuses on how differences in rating experience influence information processing by raters. Verbal protocol analysis was used to investigate how experienced and non-experienced raters select and use observational data to arrive at judgments and decisions about trainees' performance in the clinical workplace. Differences between experienced and non-experienced raters were assessed with respect to time spent on information analysis and representation of trainee performance; performance scores; and information processing--using qualitative-based quantitative analysis of verbal data. Results showed expert-novice differences in time needed for representation of trainee performance, depending on complexity of the rating task. Experts paid more attention to situation-specific cues in the assessment context and they generated (significantly) more interpretations and fewer literal descriptions of observed behaviors. There were no significant differences in rating scores. Overall, our findings seemed to be consistent with other findings on expertise research, supporting theories underlying cognition-based models of assessment in the clinical workplace. Implications for WBA are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]