Aligning the clinical assessment practices with the assessment practices

[摘要] ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Removable Prosthetic Dentistry (PRO400) is a fourth year module of the undergraduate dentistry programme which consists of a large clinical component. After reviewing relevant literature and conducting module evaluations, clinical tests were introduced and implemented in 2008 as an additional clinical assessment method. The intention of introducing the clinical tests was an attempt to ensure that students were assessed fairly, that their theoretical knowledge and the ability to apply it clinically were properly assessed, and to provide feedback on their clinical performance.The purpose of this concurrent mixed methods study was to compare the relationship between the students‟ performance in the clinical tests and daily clinical grades with their theoretical performance in the PRO400 module. The second part of the study explored the academic staff s‟ perceptions of the clinical test as clinical assessment tool in the PRO400 module.The case study design enabled the researcher to explore the question at hand in considerable depth. The mixed methods approach was useful to capture the best of both the qualitative and quantitative approaches. For the quantitative data-collection, record reviews of the results of fourth-year dental students‟ who completed the PRO400 module at the end of 2007 were used, and included 110 students. For the qualitative component three full-time lecturers within the Prosthetic department were interviewed.The clinical test marks and clinical session marks of all the students (n=109) in PRO400 were compared to their theory mark of that year. The tests marks were entered into a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel and the data analysis was done with the assistance of a statistician.The analytical abstraction method was used to assist with the qualitative data analysis; first the basic level of analysis was done in the narrative form, followed by second higher level of data analysis. The basic and higher levels of analysis were discussed under the following themes: clinical tests, student performances, alignment of theory and clinical assessment and personal influence on supervisors‟ assessment practices and attitude. Role-taking and the supervisors‟ perceptions and concerns regarding the students were explored as emergent themes. The quantitative findings were displayed using tables and graphs. Forty five students. clinical marks were 10% higher than their theory mark, while only 8 students. theory marks were 10% higher than their clinical test mark. There appeared to be hardly any relationship between the students. clinical daily grade assessment marks and their theory marks. The average theory mark was 47%, the average clinical test marks were 55% and the average daily clinical grade was 63%. Integration of the data obtained from the different data collection methods was done at the level of data interpretation.The clinical test as an assessment tool is well accepted by the supervisors and they agreed that it is more reliable and accurate than the clinical daily grade assessment method. The quantitative findings relate well to other reported studies that concluded that the daily grade was poorly correlated with the competency exams (a similar phenomenon in the clinical test of the PRO400 module). From the findings of this study it appeared that there is a better correlation of the clinical test mark and the theory mark, than clinical daily mark and the theory mark. This finding related well with the lecturers. views that the clinical tests were more reliable as a clinical assessment tool than the daily clinical mark.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University