Share this Article
Htwe TT, Sabaridah I, Low GK
Correspondence: Dr Than Than Htwe, lavenderhtwe@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION Assessment is an important factor that drives student learning, as students tend to mainly focus on the material to be assessed. The current practice in teaching pathology extensively applies objective-structured practical examination for the assessment of students. As students will have to deal with real patients during clinical years, it is preferred that students learn and practise via potted specimens and slides instead of picture plates. This study aimed to assess the preferred assesment method of pathology practical exercises.
METHODS This was a cross-sectional survey carried out in two consecutive batches of Phase 2 medical students. Student competency was assessed using both the traditional (TD) (i.e. use of potted specimens and slides) and picture plate (PP) methods. To compare the two assessment methods, we compared the mean scores obtained by the students and examined student perception of the two methods.
RESULTS The mean scores obtained via the PP method were significantly higher than those obtained via the TD method for almost all the components tested.
CONCLUSION We found that students performed significantly better (p < 0.05) when assessed using the PP method instead of the TD method. PP preparations might provide better visuals, thus aiding understanding, than the TD method. The findings of this study are valuable in identifying and improving our current teaching and assessment methods of medical students, in line with advancements in information technology.
Keywords: OSPE, pathology, undergraduate medical students
Singapore Med J 2014; 55(9): 502-505; http://dx.doi.org/10.11622/smedj.2014121
REFERENCES
| 1. Ben-David FM. Association of Medical Education in Europe guide no.14: outcome-based education: part 3- assessment in outcome-based education. Med Teach 1999; 21:23-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01421599979987 | ||||
| 2. Amin TT, Kaliyan F, Al-Muhaidib NS. Medical students' assessment preferences at King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia. Adv Med Educ Pract 2011; 2:95-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S12950 | ||||
| 3. Epstein RM. Assessment in medical education. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356:387-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra054784 | ||||
| 4. Domizio P. The changing role of Pathology in the Undergraduate Curriculum [online]. Available at: www.pathsoc.org/files/history/c12.pdf?phpMyAdmin=80eee55fe233044148a3957.... Accessed February 9, 2012. | ||||
| 5. Dissanayake AS, Ali BA, Nayar U. The influence of the introduction of objective structures practical examinations in physiology on student performance at King Faisal University Medical School. Med Teach 1990; 12:297-304 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/01421599009006634 | ||||
| 6. Rahman N, Ferdousi S, Hoq N, Amin R, Kabir J. Evaluation of objective structured practical examination and traditional practical examination. Mymensingh Med J 2007; 16:7-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/mmj.v16i1.239 | ||||
| 7. Anonymous 2003. Tomorrow's Doctor: recommendations on undergraduate medical education. General Medical Council [online]. Available at: www.gmc-uk.org/med-ed/tomdoc.pdf. Accessed December 3, 2003. | ||||
| 8. Mattick K, Marshall R and Bligh J. Tissue pathology in undergraduate medical education: atrophy or evolution? J Pathol 2004; 203:871-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/path.1601 | ||||
| 9. Marshall R, Cartwright N, Mattick K. Teaching and learning pathology: a critical review of the English literature. Med Edu 2004; 38: 302-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2004.01775.x | ||||
| 10. Htwe TT, Sabaridah I, Rajyaguru KM and Mazidah AM. Pathology crossword competition: an active and easy way of learning pathology in undergraduate medical education. Singapore Med J 2012; 53:121-3. PMid:22337187 | ||||