BMC Research Notes (Jan 2012)

Assessment of scientific thinking in basic science in the Iranian second national Olympiad

  • Azarpira Negar,
  • Amini Mitra,
  • Kojuri Javad,
  • Pasalar Parvin,
  • Soleimani Masud,
  • Hossein Khani Saman,
  • Ebrahimi Marzieh,
  • Niknejhad Hassan,
  • Karimian Zahra,
  • Lotfi Farhad,
  • Shahabi Shahram,
  • Saadat Iraj,
  • Dehghani Mohammad Reza,
  • Mohagheghi Mohammad Ali,
  • Adibi Payman,
  • Bagheri Lankarani Kamran

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-5-61
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 5, no. 1
p. 61

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background To evaluate the scientific reasoning in basic science among undergraduate medical students, we established the National Medical Science Olympiad in Iran. In this Olympiad, the drawing of a concept map was used to evaluate a student's knowledge framework; students' ability in hypothesis generation and testing were also evaluated in four different steps. All medical students were invited to participate in this program. Finally, 133 undergraduate medical students with average grades ≥ 16/20 from 45 different medical schools in Iran were selected. The program took the form of four exams: drawing a concept map (Exam I), hypothesis generation (Exam II), choosing variables based on the hypothesis (Exam III), measuring scientific thought (Exam IV). The examinees were asked to complete all examination items in their own time without using textbooks, websites, or personal consultations. Data were presented as mean ± SE of each parameter. The correlation coefficient between students' scores in each exam with the total final score and average grade was calculated using the Spearman test. Results Out of a possible score of 200, the mean ± SE of each exam were as follows: 183.88 ± 5.590 for Exam I; 78.68 ± 9.168 for Exam II; 92.04 ± 2.503 for exam III; 106.13 ± 2.345 for Exam IV. The correlation of each exam score with the total final score was calculated, and there was a significant correlation between them (p The average grade was significantly correlated with the total final score (R = 0.770), (p p R = 0.7708) and the average grade. This means students with higher average grades had better grades in each exam, especially in drawing the concept map. Conclusions We hope that this competition will encourage medical schools to integrate theory and practice, analyze data, and read research articles. Our findings relate to a selected population, and our data may not be applicable to all medical students. Therefore, further studies are required to validate our results.