Introduction: Summative assessments play a major role in shaping the student’s learning. There is little literature available on validity of summative assessment question papers in Forensic Medicine & Toxicology. This study analyses 30 question papers from 6 reputed universities for content validity.
Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional record-based observational study was conducted where 30 university summative question papers in Forensic Medicine & Toxicology from 6 universities across India were evaluated for content validity. The learning domain assessed, the type of questions asked, and sampling of the content was compared and presented in the results.
Results: From the results of the study, it was noted that 80% weightage was allotted to recall in most papers and only one paper tested for application. 70 to 80% of the marks were allotted to Forensic Pathology leading to disproportionate sampling. Core areas in Toxicology and Medical Jurisprudence were sparsely assessed.
Conclusion: The content validity of the summative question papers in Forensic Medicine and Toxicology was unsatisfactory, emphasising the need for evaluation of the clarity and efficacy of the blueprints being used by the universities. Faculty training to motivate and influence a change in the mindset is necessary to bring about a course correction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.