Progress testing in postgraduate medical education
Authors:
M. G. K. Dijksterhuis a;
F. Scheele b;
L. W. T. Schuwirth c;
G. G. M. Essed c;
J. G. Nijhuis d;
D. D. M. Braat e
(Show Biographies)
| Affiliations: | a Ikaziaziekenhuis, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Netherlands |
| b University of Maastricht, Netherlands | |
| c University Hospital Maastricht, Netherlands | |
| d Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Netherlands | |
| e Sint Lucas Andreas Ziekenhuis, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Netherlands |
DOI:
10.3109/01421590902849545
Publication Frequency:
12 issues per year
Subjects:
Allied Health;
Medical Education;
Formats available:
HTML
(English)
:
PDF
(English)
You have:
FREE ACCESS
View Article:
View Article (PDF)
View Article (HTML)
Abstract
Background: The role of knowledge in postgraduate medical education has often been discussed. However, recent insights from cognitive psychology and the study of deliberate practice recognize that expert problem solving requires a well-organized knowledge database. This implies that postgraduate assessment should include knowledge testing. Longitudinal assessment, like progress testing, seems a promising approach for postgraduate progress knowledge assessment.
Aims: To evaluate the validity and reliability of a national progress test in postgraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology training. Methods: Data of 10 years of postgraduate progress testing were analyzed on reliability with Cronbach's alpha and on construct validity using one-way ANOVA with a post hoc Scheffe test. Results: Average reliability with true-false questions was 0.50, which is moderate at best. After the introduction of multiple-choice questions average reliability improved to 0.65. Construct validity or discriminative power could only be demonstrated with some certainty between training year 1 and training year 2 and higher training years. Conclusion: Validity and reliability of the current progress test in postgraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology training is unsatisfactory. Suggestions for improvement of both test construct and test content are provided. |
| view references (27) |


Download Citation

CiteULike
Del.icio.us
BibSonomy
Connotea