The educational impact of assessment: a comparison of DOPS and MCQs

Aim: To evaluate the impact of two different assessment formats on the approaches to learning of final year veterinary students. The relationship between approach to learning and examination performance was also investigated. Method: An 18-item version of the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) was sent to 87 final year students. Each student responded to the questionnaire with regards to DOPS (Direct Observation of Procedural Skills) and a Multiple Choice Examination (MCQ). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 of the respondents to gain a deeper insight into the students’ perception of assessment. Results: Students’ adopted a deeper approach to learning for DOPS and a more surface approach with MCQs. There was a positive correlation between an achieving approach to learning and examination performance. Analysis of the qualitative data revealed that deep, surface and achieving approaches were reported by the students and seven major influences on their approaches to learning were identified: motivation, purpose, consequence, acceptability, feedback, time pressure and the individual difference of the students. Conclusions: The format of DOPS has a positive influence on approaches to learning. There is a conflict for students between preparing for final examinations and preparing for clinical practice

Barriers to the uptake and use of feedback in the context of summative assessment

Despite calls for feedback to be incorporated in all assessments, a dichotomy exists between formative and summative assessments. When feedback is provided in a summative context, it is not always used effectively by learners. In this study we explored the reasons for this. We conducted individual interviews with 17 students who had recently received web based feedback following a summative assessment. Constant comparative analysis was conducted for recurring themes. The summative assessment culture, with a focus on avoiding failure, was a dominant and negative influence on the use of feedback. Strong emotions were prevalent throughout the period of assessment and feedback, which reinforced the focus on the need to pass, rather than excel. These affective factors were heightened by interactions with others. The influence of prior learning experiences affected expectations about achievement and the need to use feedback. The summative assessment and subsequent feedback appeared disconnected from future clinical workplace learning. Socio-cultural influences and barriers to feedback need to be understood before attempting to provide feedback after all assessments. A move away from the summative assessment culture may be needed in order to maximise the learning potential of assessments

Students benefit from developing their own emergency medicine OSCE stations: a comparative study using the matched-pair method

Background: Students can improve the learning process by developing their own multiple choice questions. If a similar effect occurred when creating OSCE (objective structured clinical examination) stations by themselves it could be beneficial to involve them in the development of OSCE stations. This study investigates the effect of students developing emergency medicine OSCE stations on their test performance. Method: In the 2011/12 winter semester, an emergency medicine OSCE was held for the first time at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Leipzig. When preparing for the OSCE, 13 students (the intervention group) developed and tested emergency medicine examination stations as a learning experience. Their subsequent OSCE performance was compared to that of 13 other students (the control group), who were parallelized in terms of age, gender, semester and level of previous knowledge using the matched-pair method. In addition, both groups were compared to 20 students who tested the OSCE prior to regular emergency medicine training (test OSCE group). Results: There were no differences between the three groups regarding age (24.3 +/- 2.6; 24.2 +/- 3.4 and 24 +/- 2.3 years) or previous knowledge (29.3 +/- 3.4; 29.3 +/- 3.2 and 28.9 +/- 4.7 points in the multiple choice {[} MC] exam in emergency medicine). Merely the gender distribution differed (8 female and 5 male students in the intervention and control group vs. 3 males and 17 females in the test OSCE group). In the exam OSCE, participants in the intervention group scored 233.4 +/- 6.3 points (mean +/- SD) compared to 223.8 +/- 9.2 points (p < 0.01) in the control group. Cohen's effect size was d = 1.24. The students of the test OSCE group scored 223.2 +/- 13.4 points. Conclusions: Students who actively develop OSCE stations when preparing for an emergency medicine OSCE achieve better exam results

An Anatomy Massive Open Online Course as a Continuing Professional Development Tool for Healthcare Professionals

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) remain a novel and under-evaluated learning tool within anatomical and medical education. This study aimed to provide valuable information by using an anatomy MOOC to investigate the demographic profile, patterns of engagement and self-perceived benefits to healthcare professionals. A 21-item survey aimed at healthcare professionals was embedded into the Exploring Anatomy: The Human Abdomen MOOC, in April 2016. The course attracted 2711 individual learners with 94 of these completing the survey, and 79 of those confirming they worked full- or part-time as healthcare professionals. Variations in use across healthcare profession (allied healthcare professional, nurse or doctor) were explored using a Fisher’s exact test to calculate significance across demographic, motivation and engagement items; one-way ANOVA was used to compare self-perceived benefits. Survey data revealed that 53.2% were allied healthcare professionals, 35.4% nurses and 11.4% doctors. Across all professions, the main motivation for enrolling was to learn new things in relation to their clinical practice, with a majority following the prescribed course pathway and utilising core, and clinically relevant, material. The main benefits were in relation to improving anatomy knowledge, which enabled better support for patients. This exploratory study assessing engagement and self-perceived benefits of an anatomy MOOC has shown a high level of ordered involvement, with some indicators suggesting possible benefits to patients by enhancing the subject knowledge of those enrolled. It is suggested that this type of learning tool should be further explored as an approach to continuing professional, and interprofessional, education