Correlation between continuous assessment performance and end of posting performance: The importance of appropriate rubric in continuous assessment
Assessment method is important in determining clinical performance. Assessment relies strongly on how good the marking scheme is. For the session of 2016/2017, family medicine unit in the Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin had taken some steps to improve its assessment marking sc...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.unisza.edu.my/5828/1/FH02-FP-18-13156.pdf http://eprints.unisza.edu.my/5828/ |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Assessment method is important in determining clinical performance. Assessment relies strongly on how good
the marking scheme is. For the session of 2016/2017, family medicine unit in the Faculty of Medicine,
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin had taken some steps to improve its assessment marking scheme as well as the
method of assessment for family medicine rotation. Assessment rubrics for subjective marking were refined and
a more objective assessment was used for the continuous assessment. The objective is to determine the
correlation between end of posting performance and continuous assessment performance before and after an
improved marking scheme for continous assessment. Medical students‟ examination results for family medicine
rotation for the session of 2015/2016 (pre intervention) and session 2016/2017 (post intervention) were analyzed
for correlation of end of posting performance with continuous assessment, and mean difference between end of
posting results and continuous assessment. Correlation was analyzed using Pearson correlation test and mean
difference was analyzed using t-test. For the session of 2015/2016, the correlation coefficient (r) value for
continuous assessment was 0.147 (p<0.001), while for 2016/2017 it was 0.484 (p<0.001). The mean difference
of marks between end of posting and continuous assessment was 12.54 for 2015/2016 and 5.68 for 2016/2017.
Both differences were statistically significant (p<0.001).Improvement in continuous assessment marking
scheme and a more objective continuous assessment have increased the correlation between continuous
assessment performance and end of posting performance. The correlation was poor for 2015/2016 and improved
to high fair for 2016/2017. Improved marking scheme has also reduced the difference in mean marks between
continuous assessment and end of posting marks. Thus it is worth to revise the marking scheme of especially
subjective assessment to reflect the true performance of medical students. |
|---|