Setting the standard of student performance: An alternative borderline method

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: The method of student assessment of UKM undergraduate medical programme has undergone a series of changes both in the theory as well as clinical skills components in line with changes in the curriculum. The knowledge domain was assessed by Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) of the One Best Answer (OBA) and Extended Matching Question (EMQ) types, Modified Essay Questions (MEQ) and Key Feature Questions (KFQ). The current practice, 50% mark is taken as a pass mark in all subjects tested. Objective: (1) To perform standard setting either Nedelsky's or Angoff methods to all basic sciences modules to determine the cut scores of each module. (2) To compare the cut scores derived from standard setting methods with cut scores derives from borderline students. Results: The results showed that the cut score values varied according to the method of assessment. The mean cut scores for OBA, EMQ, MEQ, and OSPE in the End-of-Semester Examination are 41.3%, 45.7%, 56.7%, 53.2% respectively. The MCQ cut scores generated from the standard setting exercise were consistently lower than 50% in all modules whilst the MEQ cut score were generally higher than 50% except in the musculoskeletal module. The cut scores of each module ranged from 46.1% to 57.6%. The cut scores generated from the 'borderline group' of students were more stable in a sense that it did not fluctuate probably due to narrow definition of the borderline. Conclusion: Although the cut scores generated by standard setting were reasonable but it was rather tedious and time consuming. The possibility of generating the cut scores from the borderline groups of students could be used as an alternative.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)176-180
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Medical Journal
Volume19
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2012

Fingerprint

Students
Clinical Competence
Curriculum
Exercise

Keywords

  • Assessment
  • Borderline students
  • Cut score
  • Standard setting

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Setting the standard of student performance : An alternative borderline method. / Mohamad, Nabishah; Awang Besar, Mohd Nasri; Salam, Abdus; Siraj @ Ramli, Harlina Halizah; Soelaiman, Ima Nirwana.

In: International Medical Journal, Vol. 19, No. 2, 06.2012, p. 176-180.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{220e3bd95d9d4ab6a5b63782f8b38417,
title = "Setting the standard of student performance: An alternative borderline method",
abstract = "Introduction: The method of student assessment of UKM undergraduate medical programme has undergone a series of changes both in the theory as well as clinical skills components in line with changes in the curriculum. The knowledge domain was assessed by Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) of the One Best Answer (OBA) and Extended Matching Question (EMQ) types, Modified Essay Questions (MEQ) and Key Feature Questions (KFQ). The current practice, 50{\%} mark is taken as a pass mark in all subjects tested. Objective: (1) To perform standard setting either Nedelsky's or Angoff methods to all basic sciences modules to determine the cut scores of each module. (2) To compare the cut scores derived from standard setting methods with cut scores derives from borderline students. Results: The results showed that the cut score values varied according to the method of assessment. The mean cut scores for OBA, EMQ, MEQ, and OSPE in the End-of-Semester Examination are 41.3{\%}, 45.7{\%}, 56.7{\%}, 53.2{\%} respectively. The MCQ cut scores generated from the standard setting exercise were consistently lower than 50{\%} in all modules whilst the MEQ cut score were generally higher than 50{\%} except in the musculoskeletal module. The cut scores of each module ranged from 46.1{\%} to 57.6{\%}. The cut scores generated from the 'borderline group' of students were more stable in a sense that it did not fluctuate probably due to narrow definition of the borderline. Conclusion: Although the cut scores generated by standard setting were reasonable but it was rather tedious and time consuming. The possibility of generating the cut scores from the borderline groups of students could be used as an alternative.",
keywords = "Assessment, Borderline students, Cut score, Standard setting",
author = "Nabishah Mohamad and {Awang Besar}, {Mohd Nasri} and Abdus Salam and {Siraj @ Ramli}, {Harlina Halizah} and Soelaiman, {Ima Nirwana}",
year = "2012",
month = "6",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "176--180",
journal = "International Medical Journal",
issn = "1341-2051",
publisher = "Japan International Cultural Exchange Foundation",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Setting the standard of student performance

T2 - An alternative borderline method

AU - Mohamad, Nabishah

AU - Awang Besar, Mohd Nasri

AU - Salam, Abdus

AU - Siraj @ Ramli, Harlina Halizah

AU - Soelaiman, Ima Nirwana

PY - 2012/6

Y1 - 2012/6

N2 - Introduction: The method of student assessment of UKM undergraduate medical programme has undergone a series of changes both in the theory as well as clinical skills components in line with changes in the curriculum. The knowledge domain was assessed by Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) of the One Best Answer (OBA) and Extended Matching Question (EMQ) types, Modified Essay Questions (MEQ) and Key Feature Questions (KFQ). The current practice, 50% mark is taken as a pass mark in all subjects tested. Objective: (1) To perform standard setting either Nedelsky's or Angoff methods to all basic sciences modules to determine the cut scores of each module. (2) To compare the cut scores derived from standard setting methods with cut scores derives from borderline students. Results: The results showed that the cut score values varied according to the method of assessment. The mean cut scores for OBA, EMQ, MEQ, and OSPE in the End-of-Semester Examination are 41.3%, 45.7%, 56.7%, 53.2% respectively. The MCQ cut scores generated from the standard setting exercise were consistently lower than 50% in all modules whilst the MEQ cut score were generally higher than 50% except in the musculoskeletal module. The cut scores of each module ranged from 46.1% to 57.6%. The cut scores generated from the 'borderline group' of students were more stable in a sense that it did not fluctuate probably due to narrow definition of the borderline. Conclusion: Although the cut scores generated by standard setting were reasonable but it was rather tedious and time consuming. The possibility of generating the cut scores from the borderline groups of students could be used as an alternative.

AB - Introduction: The method of student assessment of UKM undergraduate medical programme has undergone a series of changes both in the theory as well as clinical skills components in line with changes in the curriculum. The knowledge domain was assessed by Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) of the One Best Answer (OBA) and Extended Matching Question (EMQ) types, Modified Essay Questions (MEQ) and Key Feature Questions (KFQ). The current practice, 50% mark is taken as a pass mark in all subjects tested. Objective: (1) To perform standard setting either Nedelsky's or Angoff methods to all basic sciences modules to determine the cut scores of each module. (2) To compare the cut scores derived from standard setting methods with cut scores derives from borderline students. Results: The results showed that the cut score values varied according to the method of assessment. The mean cut scores for OBA, EMQ, MEQ, and OSPE in the End-of-Semester Examination are 41.3%, 45.7%, 56.7%, 53.2% respectively. The MCQ cut scores generated from the standard setting exercise were consistently lower than 50% in all modules whilst the MEQ cut score were generally higher than 50% except in the musculoskeletal module. The cut scores of each module ranged from 46.1% to 57.6%. The cut scores generated from the 'borderline group' of students were more stable in a sense that it did not fluctuate probably due to narrow definition of the borderline. Conclusion: Although the cut scores generated by standard setting were reasonable but it was rather tedious and time consuming. The possibility of generating the cut scores from the borderline groups of students could be used as an alternative.

KW - Assessment

KW - Borderline students

KW - Cut score

KW - Standard setting

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84863682449&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84863682449&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84863682449

VL - 19

SP - 176

EP - 180

JO - International Medical Journal

JF - International Medical Journal

SN - 1341-2051

IS - 2

ER -