A Comparative Study between the Conventional MCQ Scores and MCQ with the CBA Scores at the Standardized Clinical Knowledge Exam for Clinical Medical Students

Mahmood Ghadermarzi; Shahram Yazdani; Arash Poolad; Mojdeh Bahram-Rezaei

doi:10.22037/jme.v14i1.8027

Journal of Medical Education for Future Demands

Former Title: Journal of Medical Education | The Official Journal of School of Medical Education and Learning Technologies

https://doi.org/10.22037/jme.v14i1.8027

A Comparative Study between the Conventional MCQ Scores and MCQ with the CBA Scores at the Standardized Clinical Knowledge Exam for Clinical Medical Students

Author(s):

Mahmood Ghadermarzi¹,

Shahram Yazdani²,

Arash Poolad^2,*,

Mojdeh Bahram-Rezaei²

1PhD of Biochemistry, Assistant Professor of Kurdistan University of medical sciences

2Education Development Center (EDC), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Journal of Medical Education for Future Demands:Vol. 14, issue 1; e105419

Published online:Jun 04, 2015

Article type:Research Article

Received:Jan 25, 2015

Accepted:Jan 25, 2015

How to Cite:Mahmood GhadermarziShahram YazdaniArash PooladMojdeh Bahram-RezaeiA Comparative Study between the Conventional MCQ Scores and MCQ with the CBA Scores at the Standardized Clinical Knowledge Exam for Clinical Medical Students.J Med Edu.14(1):e105419.https://doi.org/10.22037/jme.v14i1.8027.

Abstract

Background and purpose: Partial knowledge is one of the main factors to be considered when dealing with the improvement of the administration of Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) in testing. Various strategies have been proposed for this factor in the traditional testing environment. Therefore, this study proposed a Confidence Based Assessment (CBA) as a pertinent solution and aims at comparing the effect of the CBA Scoring system with that of the conventional scoring systems (with and without negative score estimation as penalty) on the students’ scores and estimating their partial knowledge on clinical studies.Methods: This comparative study was conducted using a standardized clinical knowledge exam for 117 clinical students. After two-step training, both the conventional MCQ and CBA examination was given in a single session simultaneously. The exam included 100 questions and the volunteers were requested to complete a questionnaire regarding their attitude and satisfaction on their first experience of the CBA after exam. A new confidence based marking system was selected for the scoring, which was a hybrid of the UCL and MUK2010 systems. The MCQ-Assistant, SPSS and Microsoft office Excel software were used for scoring and data analysis.Results: The mean age of the volunteers was 27.3±5.47, of whom 43.6% were men and 69.2% were senior medical students. Exam reliability was 0.977. The fit line of the MCQ scores without penalty estimation was R2=0.9816 and Intercept=18.125 or approximately.2 deviation in the low scores. The MCQ scoring with penalty had a fit line approximately parallel to the 45-degree line but on or above it and the CBA scoring fit line was nearer to the 45-degree line, parallel to it and a little below it. These two sets of scores had a significant p value0.037. The response percentage to the CBA is higher (p value=0.0001). The discrimination power of the MCQ and the CBA for the upper and lower 1/3 of the students was not significantly different (p value=0.34). The students’ satisfaction score was high and acceptable to the CBA system and expressed a positive perspective on this system for their examinations.Conclusions: The CBA method can increase the competencies of the MCQ exams. It was found to have a greater fairness assessment, was an effective examination, an authentic testing method, with precise estimation and higher constructs validity than the conventional MCQ exam. The CBA simulate the reflection for deeper learning among the students.

Keywords

Student Assessment

Partial Knowledge

MCQ

Confidence-Based Assessment

Exam Scoring System

Fulltext

The body of the article can be found in the PDF file.

References

1.
References are available in the PDF file.

comments

Crossmark

Checking

Share on

Comments

Number of Comments:0

Cited by

CrossRef 0

Metrics

Get Permission (article level)

Purchasing Reprints

Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) handles bulk orders for article reprints for Brieflands. To place an order for reprints, please click here ( https://www.copyright.com/landing/reprintsinquiryform/ ). Clicking this link will bring you to a CCC request form where you can provide the details of your order. Once complete, please click the ‘Submit Request’ button and CCC’s Reprints Services team will generate a quote for your review.

Search Relations

Author(s):

Mahmood Ghadermarzi:[PubMed][Scholar]
Shahram Yazdani:[PubMed][Scholar]
Arash Poolad:[PubMed][Scholar]
Mojdeh Bahram-Rezaei:[PubMed][Scholar]