Assessment in Undergraduate Medical Education


(g) standard setting (paragraph 117)(h)



Download 405.2 Kb.
View original pdf
Page5/65
Date22.04.2018
Size405.2 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   65
(g)
standard setting (paragraph 117)
(h) disability (paragraph 118)
(i)
the Code of Practice published by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) (paragraph 119).


(b)
members of assessment boards or committees
(c)
members of teaching and learning committees
(d)
academic and clinical professionals involved in assessing students
(e)
external examiners
(f)
medical students.
Overview
Ensuring a clear strategy
19 Medical schools should take an overarching strategic and systematic approach to assessment that fits with the rest of the curriculum, delivers assessment methods that are valid, reliable and otherwise appropriate and is led by assessment experts with psychometric support and the necessary authority within the governance systems. There are risks in devolving decisions to particular leads in specialties or years who are not tied into a coordinated and strategic approach. An unstructured and devolved approach may compromise the school’s ability to monitor students progression and to ensure that outcomes are appropriately assessed. It may lead to disproportionate emphasis on particular specialties or perspectives.
20 In the GMC’s 2010 report on The state of basic
medical education
1
, Dr Katharine Boursicot writes:
Medical schools have had to scrutinise their own
assessment strategies and have endeavoured to
move away from disjointed, localised, inconsistent,
outmoded and often unmonitored (ie not quality
assured) assessments in various parts of their courses,
and take an overview of assessment over the whole
curriculum. This movement has been variably
successful and requires more work to ensure that
students are fairly and adequately assessed over
their whole undergraduate course. The development
and implementation of a coherent and consistent
assessment strategy in each institution is still a major
challenge.
21 The GMC report also states:
Reports from QABME reviews highlighted the
coordination and central leadership of assessment
across a programme as an area for improvement. Many
schools separate the management of assessment into
years or phases, but without strong oversight and
coordination, which can lead to inconsistencies. During
QABME reviews, many teams agreed on the benefit
to assessment systems of a central, coordinating
leadership group, or assessment-focused unit, with a
strong remit to work on assessment across modules
and years in order to build a consistent approach to
assessment throughout the course.



Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   65


The database is protected by copyright ©psyessay.org 2017
send message

    Main page
mental health
health sciences
gandhi university
Rajiv gandhi
Chapter introduction
multiple choice
research methods
south africa
language acquisition
Relationship between
qualitative research
literature review
Curriculum vitae
early childhood
relationship between
Masaryk university
nervous system
Course title
young people
Multiple choice
bangalore karnataka
state university
Original article
academic performance
essay plans
social psychology
psychology chapter
Front matter
United states
Research proposal
sciences bangalore
Mental health
compassion publications
workplace bullying
publications sorted
comparative study
chapter outline
mental illness
Course outline
decision making
sciences karnataka
working memory
Literature review
clinical psychology
college students
systematic review
problem solving
research proposal
human rights
Learning objectives
karnataka proforma