Abstract
Abstract
Background
Analytic thinking skills are important to the development of physicians. Therefore, educators and licensing boards utilize multiple-choice questions (MCQs) to assess these knowledge and skills. MCQs are written under two assumptions: that they can be written as higher or lower order according to Bloom’s taxonomy, and students will perceive questions to be the same taxonomical level as intended. This study seeks to understand the students’ approach to questions by analyzing differences in students’ perception of the Bloom’s level of MCQs in relation to their knowledge and confidence.
Methods
A total of 137 students responded to practice endocrine MCQs. Participants indicated the answer to the question, their interpretation of it as higher or lower order, and the degree of confidence in their response to the question.
Results
Although there was no significant association between students’ average performance on the content and their question classification (higher or lower), individual students who were less confident in their answer were more than five times as likely (OR = 5.49) to identify a question as higher order than their more confident peers. Students who responded incorrectly to the MCQ were 4 times as likely to identify a question as higher order than their peers who responded correctly.
Conclusions
The results suggest that higher performing, more confident students rely on identifying patterns (even if the question was intended to be higher order). In contrast, less confident students engage in higher-order, analytic thinking even if the question is intended to be lower order. Better understanding of the processes through which students interpret MCQs will help us to better understand the development of clinical reasoning skills.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Education,Medicine (miscellaneous)
Reference17 articles.
1. Klatt EC. Who can pass the test? MedSciEduc. 2014;24:201–9.
2. Ross D, Loeffler K, Schipper S, Vandermeer B, Allan GM. Do scores on three commonly used measures of critical thinking correlate with academic success of health professions trainees? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med. 2013;88:724–34.
3. Surry LT, Torre D, Durning SJ. Exploring examinee behaviours as validity evidence for multiple-choice question examinations. Med Educ. 2017;51:1075–85.
4. Thompson AR, Kelso RS, Ward PJ, Wines K, Hanna JB. Assessment driven learning: the use of higher-order and discipline-integrated questions on gross anatomy practical examinations | SpringerLink. Medical Science Educator. 2016;26:587–96.
5. Bloom BS, Englehart MD, Furst EJ, Hill WH, Krathwohl DR. Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. London: Longmans, Green and Co LTD.; 1956.
Cited by
25 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献