Do OSCE progress test scores predict performance in a national high-stakes examination?

Abstract

CONTEXT Progress tests, in which learners are repeatedly assessed on equivalent content at different times in their training and provided with feedback, would seem to lend themselves well to a competency-based framework, which requires more frequent formative assessments. The objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) progress test is a relatively new form of assessment that is used to assess the progression of clinical skills. The purpose of this study was to establish further evidence for the use of an OSCE progress test by demonstrating an association between scores from this assessment method and those from a national high-stakes examination. CONCLUSIONS This study provides further evidence for the use of OSCE progress testing by demonstrating a correlation between scores from an OSCE progress test and a national high-stakes examination. Furthermore, there is evidence that OSCE progress test scores are predictive of future performance on a national high-stakes examination.

Percepção e desempenho de graduandos de enfermagem em avaliação de metodologias ativas

“…As found in this study, we observed that in the area of medicine, the PT is considered to be a "training" so that students, after completing their undergraduate course, were better prepared to take the medical qualification tests. (18) The effective development of these questions, however, is so laborious that a software was developed (19) able to measure cognitive knowledge in tests with multiple choice questions.…”

Taking the sting out of assessment: is there a role for progress testing?

“…Progress tests appear to have tangible benefits beyond those of simply measuring progress. The use of written progress tests has been linked to improved performance in a national licensure examination, whereas objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) used as progress tests have been shown to be useful in identifying residents at risk of subsequently failing a high‐stakes national examination of clinical skills …”

“…The use of written progress tests has been linked to improved performance in a national licensure examination, 20 whereas objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) used as progress tests have been shown to be useful in identifying residents at risk of subsequently failing a high-stakes national examination of clinical skills. 21 Perhaps more importantly, however, the comprehensiveness of progress tests, coupled with the relatively low-stakes nature of the format, may serve to mitigate some of the subversive effects of AOL on learning. For example, because there is no functional limit on the content being assessed, strategies such as targeted studying, memorisation, cramming and teaching to the test are unlikely to be particularly useful.…”

“…41 Because of their relatively low-stakes nature, learners can even be provided with copies of their progress tests to further guide their learning. 15 Of interest, progress tests also appear to be useful in predicting poor performance in national high-stakes examinations, 21,26 which can be used as an important source of feedback to promote learning.…”

Cross-institutional OSCE Quality Assurance in Europe using a mutual assessment strategy; are we equipped for it?

“…A series of publications has utilized electronic OSCE scoring systems for exam practice and for prospective research 19 ,21,22 . Cross-institutional comparison of student achievements in a progress test have been published for benchmarking purposes [23][24][25][26] . Studies evaluating the context between education and assessments largely reported comparisons between different methods of teaching 27,28 .…”