Steering the medical maze beyond memorization: Harnessing the potential of open-book tests in medical learning

Author:

Shrivastava Saurabh RamBihariLal1,Shrivastava Prateek Saurabh2

Affiliation:

1. Deputy Director (Research and Development), Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research Nagpur, Off Campus, Department of Community Medicine, Datta Meghe Medical College, Off-Campus Centre of Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wanadongri, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

2. Department of Community Medicine, Datta Meghe Medical College, Off-Campus Centre of Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wanadongri, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Abstract

Abstract In the field of medical education, we have employed the closed-book test format as the standard approach for carrying out assessments for many decades. An open-book test in medical education is an assessment method wherein medical students are permitted to refer to learning resources during the examination. Thus, students do not rely primarily on their memory and understanding of the subject rather can access external resources to supplement their problem-solving and decision-making abilities. Even though multiple merits have been attributed to open-book tests, we must give attention to the time duration and the kind of references students can access during such tests. At this juncture, we must reiterate that we are not advocating that open-book tests should be introduced and they should replace the conventional closed-book tests. However, there is immense scope for open-book tests in medical education, and every medical institution must explore the scope and feasibility to introduce open-book tests within their settings.

Publisher

Medknow

Reference14 articles.

1. Open Book versus Closed Book Testing: An Experimental Comparison;Anaya;2010 Annual Conference and Exposition,2010

2. A systematic review comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: Evaluating effects on development of critical thinking skills;Johanns;Nurse Educ Pract,2017

3. Examining the testing effect with open-and closed-book tests;Agarwal;Appl Cogn Psychol,2008

4. Open-book versus closed-book tests in university classes: A field experiment;Rummer;Front Psychol,2019

5. Comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: A systematic review;Durning;Acad Med,2016

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3