Assessment in a problem-based medical curriculum

Abstract

The problem-based learning curriculum differs from a conventional curriculum with regard to the cumulation of achieved knowledge. Instead of successively ordered topics, the student must learn to solve problems which are related to several topics. It is assumed that by the end of the course the student has mastered the intended goals. Comparisons of problem-based and conventional curricula regarding academic achievement show that differences between curricula-outcomes are very small, if there are any differences at all (Schmidt et aL, 1987). But summative evaluation is not enough. The student and the institute are interested also in the growth of the student during the course. For this purpose a progress test is used.The aim of this paper is to describe how a problem-based curriculum is evaluated. It accents the progress test. Part I. Conventional vs. problem-based medical curricula1.

Problem-Based Learning, Part 1: An Innovation Whose Time Has Come?

“…The development of skills has become increasingly important as higher education in the 1990s is being encouraged to move towards developing students' knowledge and abilities which are both flexible and market related (Bridges, 1993;Barnett, 1994). A number of authors (Van Berkel, 1990;Blosser and Jones, 1991;Des Marchais et ai, 1992;De Virgilio, 1993) see the development of skills-as the underlying purpose of implementing PBL. It may be that the development of these skills is also included in traditional curricula.…”

Two decades of higher education

“…An international journal with a wide readership cannot enter into specialist discussion of particular aspects of the curriculum though certain areas such as medicine (e.g., van Berkel et al 1990), science (e.g., Kirschener et al 1988) and language teaching (e.g., Fatt 1991) and others are of sufficient general interest to be worthy of consideration by those not specialising in that field. It would be valuable to have more studies such as that of Donald (1986) which seeks to develop a conceptual framework for understanding what -and how -knowledge is acquired in different university disciplines of study.…”

Understanding Expert Perceptions of PBL Integration in Introductory Aerospace Engineering Courses: Thematic Analysis of Focus Groups with PBL and Aerospace Engineering Instructors

“…Non-traditional methods of assessment, such as compiling portfolios or completing self, peer, and/or instructor-based student assessments have been shown to have some promise for improving assessments in PBL by capturing both the technical and problem-solving/professional elements [15], [16]. One example of this alternative assessment method is to numerically evaluate student performance in the following 5 areas [16]: 1) contribution to the analysis of the problem and to the statement of the learning goals; 2) keeping one's agreement to the group/team; 3) contribution to the discussion concerning the collected data; 4) fulfilling a leadership role in a group session; and 5) contribution to the promotion of the group process.…”

“…While these considerations have value as a solid starting point for future work, there are some concern areas for broad application. For example, this assessment approach has been shown to yield higher scores for those who speak the most in the group [16].…”

“…While some divergent opinions were expressed between groups, this is also the only area where there is any commonality between the two groups found. Both PBL and aerospace experts expressed that it is important to include a peer component in assessments, a belief which has been expressed by other researchers as well [15], [16].…”