Medisur (Oct 2017)
Different questionnaires in written evaluation. Regarding the results of an internal medicine mid term test
Abstract
Foundation: the concern for the quality of evaluation instruments has been shared by several authors. Some have alluded to the impact of the deficiencies in such instruments on academic outcomes. Objective: to determine the possible influence of differences (content and format) among the instruments applied in a mid term test, in the scores obtained by the students. Methods: in each instrument the content explored and the format of the questions used were reviewed. The distribution of the scores was determined in a comparative way in each one of the batteries, both in the examination as a whole and in the different questions independently. The results were contrasted with those of the same control work of the previous course. Results: statistically significant differences were found in the scores between the two instruments of the 2016-2017 academic course, with a frank predominance of the best quality scores in Questionnaire A (58 % vs 30 %); the likelihood of failing the test was also significantly higher in Questionnaire B. On the other hand, there was little (non-significant) difference in the distribution of the scores of the first mid term test of the 2015-2016 academic year. Conclusions: conducting exams in which different questionnaires are applied, either in questions format or in their contents, can determine the occurrence of different results in scoring, favoring some students over others. It is suggested to incorporate the "fairness" quality to the general characteristics (already recognized in literature) which any evaluation instrument should have.
