The language of risk and the risk of language

This mini-dissertation is written towards an MA in Linguistics. As such, it falls within the domain of Humanities. However, its author is a doctor and the subject matter is medical, which falls within the domain of Science. The mini-dissertation thus bridges these different domains, and the references and background reading as well as the application of the research reflect this hybrid nature. A glossary of medical terms and acronyms is thus given. In addition to being a doctor, the author is also a mother of two children. Thus the subject matter of pregnancy and its unknowns is close to her professional and personal realms of experience. For this reason, although the author has tried to be objective, she cannot pretend that true objectivity is always achieved

Criteria for good assessment: consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference

In this article, we outline criteria for good assessment that include: (1) validity or coherence, (2) reproducibility or consistency, (3) equivalence, (4) feasibility, (5) educational effect, (6) catalytic effect, and (7) acceptability. Many of the criteria have been described before and we continue to support their importance here. However, we place particular emphasis on the catalytic effect of the assessment, which is whether the assessment provides results and feedback in a fashion that creates, enhances, and supports education. These criteria do not apply equally well to all situations. Consequently, we discuss how the purpose of the test (summative versus formative) and the perspectives of stakeholders (examinees, patients, teachers-educational institutions, healthcare system, and regulators) influence the importance of the criteria. Finally, we offer a series of practice points as well as next steps that should be taken with the criteria. Specifically, we recommend that the criteria be expanded or modified to take account of: (1) the perspectives of patients and the public, (2) the intimate relationship between assessment, feedback, and continued learning, (3) systems of assessment, and (4) accreditation systems