• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Advances in health sciences education: theory and practice >Estimating the Minimum Number of Judges Required for Test-centred Standard Setting on Written Assessments. Do Discussion and Iteration have an Influence?
【24h】

Estimating the Minimum Number of Judges Required for Test-centred Standard Setting on Written Assessments. Do Discussion and Iteration have an Influence?

机译：估计书面评估中以考试为中心的标准制定所需的最少法官人数。讨论和迭代有影响吗？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Absolute standard setting procedures are recommended for assessment in medical education. Absolute, test-centred standard setting procedures were introduced for written assessments in the Liverpool MBChB in 2001. The modified Angoff and Ebel methods have been used for short answer question-based and extended matching question-based papers, respectively. Data collected has been analysed to investigate whether reliable standards can be achieved for small-scale, medical school-based assessments, to establish the minimum number of judges required and the effect of a discussion phase on reliability. The root mean squared error (RMSE) has been used as a measure of reliability and used to compute 95% confidence intervals for comparison to the examination statistics. The RMSE has been used to calculate the minimum number of judges required to obtain a predetermined minimum level of reliability, and the effect of the number of judges and number of items have been examined. Values of the RMSE obtained vary from 0.9 to 2.2%. Using average variances across each paper type, the minimum number of judges to obtain a RMSE of less than 2% is 10 or more judges before discussion or 6 or more judges after discussion. The results indicate that including a discussion phase improves the reliability and reduces the minimum number of judges required. Decision studies indicate that increasing the number of questions included in the assessments would not significantly improve the reliability of the standard setting.
机译：建议采用绝对标准制定程序进行医学教育评估。 2001年，在利物浦MBChB中引入了以测试为中心的绝对标准制定程序来进行书面评估。改进的Angoff和Ebel方法分别用于基于问题的简短答案和基于扩展匹配的问题的论文。已对收集到的数据进行了分析，以调查是否可以针对基于医学院的小规模评估达到可靠的标准，从而确定所需的最少法官人数以及讨论阶段对可靠性的影响。均方根误差（RMSE）已用作可靠性的度量，并用于计算95％置信区间以与检查统计数据进行比较。 RMSE已用于计算获得预定最小可靠性级别所需的最少法官人数，并且已检查了法官人数和项目数的影响。获得的RMSE值在0.9到2.2％之间变化。使用每种纸质类型的平均方差，获得小于2％的RMSE的最少法官人数是讨论前10名或以上，讨论后6名或以上。结果表明，包括讨论阶段可以提高可靠性，并减少所需法官的最少人数。决策研究表明，增加评估中包含的问题数量不会显着提高标准设置的可靠性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号