ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Descriptive & Survey Study

Authors

Ghanbari   S. (*)
Ardalan   M.R. (1)
Karimi   I. (1)






(*) Educational Sciences Department, Humanities Faculty, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
(1) Educational Sciences Department, Humanities Faculty, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
(1) Educational Sciences Department, Humanities Faculty, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran

Correspondence

Address: Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Shahid Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan Chahar Bagh, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran. Postal code: 6517838695
Phone: +988138292614
Fax: +988138292614
siroosghanbari@yahoo.com

Article History

Received:  April  27, 2015
Accepted:  June 2, 2015
ePublished:  June 6, 2015

BRIEF TEXT


… [1-11] Deliberate practice is based on deliberation and meditation to achieve maximum progress [12]. Deliberate practice study is a style of active study aimed at achievement to a deep understanding instead of memorization. In other words, it is an approach to study leading to conscious learning [13]. … [14, 15]

The assessment methods significantly affect the selection of the type of the study approach and the students’ learning [16-21]. Challenges in the assessment method of the students, especially in the medical students, have been less studied. … [22-28]

The aim of this study was to evaluate the assessment challenges of the medical students’ learning and their effects on the deliberate study practice approach.

This is an applicable descriptive-survey study.

Undergraduate and graduate students of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences (Iran) were studied in 2014.

The sample size was assessed 357 persons based on Krejcie-Morgan Table. The study sample was selected, using Simple Random Sampling method.

Data was collected, using Students’ Assessment Challenges Identification [6] and Deliberative Practice Study Approach [17] questionnaires. The former includes 32 items, which include 6 challenges about assessment the students’ learning. These are challenges about excessive emphasis on the final evaluation (5 items), no utilization of current and process evaluation (7 items), no utilization of non-objective evaluations (4 items), no-respect to the individual differences (4 items), no respect to the learning goals including cognitive, emotional, and psychomotor goals (5 items), and teachers’ unawareness of the philosophy and goal of the evaluation (7 items). The latter questionnaire, i. e. Deliberative Practice Study Approach questionnaire, includes 25 items containing planning (7 items), size/allocation (4 items), repetition/review (4 items), and reading style/self-reflection (10 items). The questionnaires are based on Likert’s Scale with “very low” (1), “low” (2), “moderate” (3), “high” (4), and “very high” (5) scoring. Total reliability coefficients of Students’ Assessment Challenges Identification and Deliberative Practice Study Approach questionnaires were 0.91 and 0.90, respectively. Factor Analysis was used to determine validity showing λ>0.50 that was significant. In Iran, reliability and validity of the scales have been reported favorable [6, 12, 17]. Data was analyzed, using SPSS 20 software. Inferential analysis was done via LISREL and Simple LISREL, Maximum Likelihood Estimation, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, and Structural Equations Modeling.

From 360 distributed questionnaires, 349 (97%) were completed and analyzed. 208 persons (59%) and 141 persons (41%) were female and male, respectively. 48 persons (14%), 36 persons (10%), 73 persons (21%), 79 persons (23%), 32 persons (9%), 47 persons (13%), and 34 persons (10%) were from Medical, Dentistry, Health, Nursing and Midwifery, Rehabilitation, Paramedical, and Pharmacy faculties, respectively. The challenges of each domain were identified and analyzed, using Measurement Model and Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The challenges of each domain were separately investigated and the most effective indices were determined (Table 1). Structural Equations Technics were used to investigate the effects of the assessment challenges on the students’ deliberative practice study approach. And the standardized regression coefficient was computed -0.74 that was significant (Fig. 1). The measures of the fit goodness indices of the study structure model were acceptable (Table 2).

“Excessive emphasis on the final evaluation” and “induce the students to unfavorable compete with the classmates” had the highest load factors. The present results are consistent with other studies [6, 29, 30]. “Too lasting” and “too concentration of the students in the classrooms”, having successively the highest load factors, were the most effective factors leading to lack of required bases to the current evaluation. The present results are consistent with other studies [28, 31, 32]. “Teachers’ unawareness with other new evaluation methods” had the highest effect and load factor. The result is consistent with other studies [33-35]. “No respect to the interests of the students in the exams” and “no respect to the students’ free practice” had successively the highest load factors. The results are consistent with other studies [6, 27]. “Induce the students to superficial learning” and “no utilization of deep and inferential questions in most of the present ways” had successively the highest effects. The results are consistent with other studies [22, 23, 29]. “Improper feedback to the students in the present ways of evaluation” and “students’ evaluation by teachers with inappropriate prejudice” had successively the highest effects. The results are consistent with other studies [6, 36, 37]. The evaluation challenges had a negative and significant effect on the students’ deliberative practice study approach. The result is consistent with other studies [16, 17, 38-40].

The education deputies of medical faculties should enhance the students’ utilization of deliberative practice study approach thorough proper educational interventions, valid planning, and determining the evaluation standards.

Students’ low motivation to participate in the study and no collection of the teachers’ viewpoints were of the limitations for the present study.

The more the sensible and interactive educational experiences for the students alongside identification and recognition of the individual differences and abilities of the students, and the more the respect to the principles in designing the educational progress tests and their utilization, the less the challenges in the present evaluation ways are, affecting the students’ deliberative practice study approach.

Education Deputy and all the participating students are appreciated.

Non-declared

Non-declared

Non-declared

TABLES and CHARTS

Show attach file


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Ebrahimi M. Behrooznia S. Fasting: Benefits and Probable Health Harmfulness from the Islamic Perspective. J Fasting Health. 2015;3(2):50-3.
[2]Majdzadeh R, Nedjat S, Keshavarz H, Rashidian A, Eynollahi B, Larijani B, et al. A new experience in medical student admission in Iran. Iran J Publ Health. 2009;38(1):36-9.
[3]Rahbar darshekasteh H. Evaluation in education. J Growth Teach. 2001;157:66-9. [Persian]
[4]Seraji F, Attaran M. E-learning (principles, designing, implementation and evaluation). 2nd edition. Hamedan: Bu Ali Sina University; 2012. pp. 78-82. [Persian]
[5]Razeghi T, Seraji F. The important challenges for the evaluation of student learning in higher education in Iran. Iran, Tehran: 2nd National Conference on Evaluation and Quality Assurance in Education with a Focus on the Integration of the Educational System; 2013, 1 Mar. [Persian]
[6]Razeghi T. Indentification challeges related to evaluation method of students learning in Bu-Ali Sina University [Dissertation]. Hamadan: Bu-Ali Sina University; 2012. pp. 5-188. [Persian]
[7]Leung SF, Mok E, Wong D. The impact of assessment methods on the learning of nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2008;28(6):711-9.
[8]Saif AA, Fathabadi J. Different approaches to lesson study and the relationship of study skills with academic achievement, gender and educational experience of university students. Daneshvar Raftar. 2009;15(33):29-40. [Persian]
[9]Roshanaei M. The Relationship between learning approaches and preferences for instructional methods. Q J Res Plan Higher Educ. 2007;13(3):109-42. [Persian]
[10]Gijbels D, Segers M, Struyf E. Constructivist learning environments and the (im)possibility to change students' perceptions of assessment demands and approaches to learning. Instr Sci. 2008;36(5-6):431-43.
[11]Diseth A, Martinsen O. Approaches to learning, cognitive style, and motives as predictors of academic achievement. Educ Psychol. 2003;23(2):195-207.
[12]Haghjooy Javanmard S, Mansourian M. Factors affecting deliberate learning in first year students of nursing and midwifery school of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2011;10(5):675-82. [Persian]
[13]Moulaert V, Verwijnen MG, Rikers R, Scherpbier AJ. The effects of deliberate practice in undergraduate medical education. Med Educ. 2004;38(10):1044-52.
[14]Ericsson KA. The scientific study of expert levels of performance: General implications for optimal learning and creativity. High Ability Stud. 1998;9(1):75-100.
[15]Bourbonnais FF, Langford S, Giannantonio L. Development of a clinical assessment tool for baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Pract. 2008;8(1):62-71.
[16]Abbas Zadeh A, Borhani F, Sabzevari S, Eftekhari Z. The assessment methods and its relationship to learning approaches of nursing students in Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2013;10(2):260-70. [Persian]
[17]Abdi H, Nilli MR. The Relationship between course experience and deliberate practice study approach among nursing students. Iran J Med Educ. 2014;14(9):758-66. [Persian]
[18]Mahmoodi MR. Validation of studying and Learning Approaches Questionnaire to identify students’ studying and learning methods. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2014;10(4):421-30. [Persian]
[19]Dlouhá J, Burandt S. Design and evaluation of learning processes in an international sustainability oriented study programme. In search of a new educational quality and assessment method. J Cleaner Product. 2015;106:247-58.
[20]Grift W, Helms Lorenz M, Maulana R. Teaching skills of student teachers: Calibration of an evaluation instrument and its value in predicting student academic engagement. Stud Educ Eval. 2014;43:150-9.
[21]Klimova BF. Evaluation Methods as an effective tool for the development of students’ learning. Procedia. 2014;152:112-5.
[22]Ebrahimi Z. Study strengths and weaknesses of undergraduate university students' progress evaluation practices of teachers and students [Dissertation]. Isfahan: Isfahan University; 2012. [Persian]
[23]Fath Abadi J, Rezaei A. Examining the effects of descriptive-qualitative evaluation approach in achieving cognitive, affective and psycho- motor educational objectives at primary schools. J Manag Plann Educ Sys. 2009;(2)3:31-52. [Persian]
[24]Dehghani Poudeh M, Shams B, Ashourioun V, Esmaeilee A, Asilian A, Nasri P, et al. Internal assessment of Isfahan general medicine curriculum based on basic standards of Ministry of Health and Medical Education. A Model for evaluation and analysis of results. Iran J Med Educ. 2011;10(5):552-65. [Persian]
[25]Dehghani Poudeh M, Shams B, Ashourioun V, Esmaeilee A, Asilian A, Nasri P, et al. Internal assessment of Isfahan general medicine curriculum based on basic standards of Ministry of Health and Medical Education. A Model for evaluation and analysis of results. Iran J Med Educ. 2011;10(5):552-65. [Persian]
[26]Dehghani Poudeh M, Shams B, Ashourioun V, Esmaeilee A, Asilian A, Nasri P, et al. Internal assessment of Isfahan general medicine curriculum based on basic standards of Ministry of Health and Medical Education. A Model for evaluation and analysis of results. Iran J Med Educ. 2011;10(5):552-65. [Persian]
[27]Sabzevari S, Abbaszadeh A, Borhani F. Perception of nursing faculties from clinical assessment challenges in students: A qualitative study. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2013;10(3):385-97. [Persian]
[28]Alavi M, Irajpour A. Optimum characteristics of nursing students’ clinical evaluation: Clinical nursing teachers’ viewpoints in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2014;13(10):796-808. [Persian]
[29]Levin A, Sun CJ. Barriers With in the Academy. J Internet Higher Educ. 2003;(4):34-45.
[30]Suen HK, Wu Q. Psychometric paradox of very high-stakes assessment and solutions. J Educ Policy. 2006;3(1):113.
[31]Tarant S. The evaluation of a collaborative teaching team in higher education. J Acc Educ. 2008;16(3-4):120-35.
[32]Marsh H, Roche LA. Making students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility. Am Psychol Assoc. 1997;52(11):1187-97.
[33]Keshtiarray N, Karimi Alavijeh A, Foroughi Abari AA. Identifying the barriers and challenges in performing the descriptive evaluation plan. Res Curriculum Plann Q J Sci Res. 2014;10(12):53-68. [Persian]
[34]Sepasi H. Check formative assessment on student progress. J Soc Sci Hum Univ Shiraz. 2004;20(1):1-10. [Persian]
[35]Heidari F, Ahmdi Gh. Identifying problems and offering solutions a curriculum to meet the Curriculum evaluation process. Res Curriculum Plann Q J Sci Res. 2013;10(9):126-36. [Persian]
[36]Gollickson N. Assessment and classroom learning, assessment in education: Principles policy and practice. Educ Res. 1967;5(1):73-7.
[37]Shakila T, Amos R. Synthesis of research on classroom management. J Educ Leader. 1983;83(4):342-7.
[38]Bostton C. The concept of formative assessment. Pract Assess Res Eval. 2002;8(9). Available from: http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=9
[39]Shareefiaan F, Nasr AR, Aabedee L. Exemplary professors' approach to academic evaluation and the extent of its use by other faculty members. Q J New Thoughts Educ. 2009;5(1):9-34. [Persian]
[40]Diseth A. Approaches to learning, course experience and examination grade among undergraduate psychology students: Testing of mediator effects and construct validity. Stud Higher Educ. 2007;32(3):373-88.
[41]McKee G, Costello P, Adams A, Porter M. The Use of a Supplementary Online Learning Course, and its Effect on Academic Achievement within an Undergraduate Nursing Programme. Irland J Teach Learn Higher Educ. 2010;2(1):1-15.
[42]Gulikers JTM, Bastiaens TJ, Kirschner PA, Kester L. Relations between student perceptions of assessment authenticity, study approaches and learning outcome. Stud Educ Eval. 2006;32(4):381-400.