@2024 Afarand., IRAN
ISSN: 2228-5468 Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2015;8(2):91-97
ISSN: 2228-5468 Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2015;8(2):91-97
Evaluation Methods of the Academic Achievement of Students Ilam University of Medical Sciences
ARTICLE INFO
Article Type
Descriptive & Survey StudyAuthors
Mirzaei A.R. (1)Kawarizadeh F. (1)
Lohrabian V. (*)
Yegane Z. (1)
(*) Medical Physics Department, Medicine Faculty, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran
(1) Medical Education Development Center, Medical Education Development Center, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran
(1) Medical Education Development Center, Medical Education Development Center, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran
(1) Medical Education Development Center, Medical Education Development Center, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran
Correspondence
Address: Medical Education Development Center, Educational Deputy of Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Banganjab, Pajohesh Blvd., Ilam, Iran. Postal Code: 69391-77143.Phone: +98843223083
Fax: +98843223083
vahidlohrabian@yahoo.com
Article History
Received: January 10, 2015Accepted: June 2, 2015
ePublished: June 6, 2015
ABSTRACT
Aims
Academic achievement exams have long played an important role in education and so have been always judged, reviewed and restudied. The aim of this study was to investigate the use of different types of academic achievement exams (evaluation methods) by faculty of Ilam University of Medical Sciences.
Instrument & Methods In this descriptive and cross-sectional study, faculty members of Ilam University of Medical Sciences in the second semester of 2013-14 academic year (N=90) were studied by total counting. Data were gathered by a researcher made questionnaire by 29 questions that was assessing the application level of educational progress evaluation methods by faculty members. For data analysis, SPSS 16 software was used and descriptive and inferential statistics (Student T test and one-way ANOVA) were performed.
Findings 76 of participants (93.8%) placed a greater emphasis on the final exam. The most widely used methods for students' progress evaluation was multiple-choice questions (93.8%; n=76), and low used assessment method was 360 degree evaluation (4.9%; n=4). Comparing of mean scores of participants based on gender and academic degree, were not showed a significant differences, but comparison of the mean scores of participants based on faculty showed a significant difference (p<0.05).
Conclusion With respect to faculty member's emphasis on use and application of the final evaluation results and preferably less effort and common procedures, as well as less variety of evaluation methods of students' progress, paying attention to the new methods of educational achievement evaluation and implementation training courses for teachers is essential.
Instrument & Methods In this descriptive and cross-sectional study, faculty members of Ilam University of Medical Sciences in the second semester of 2013-14 academic year (N=90) were studied by total counting. Data were gathered by a researcher made questionnaire by 29 questions that was assessing the application level of educational progress evaluation methods by faculty members. For data analysis, SPSS 16 software was used and descriptive and inferential statistics (Student T test and one-way ANOVA) were performed.
Findings 76 of participants (93.8%) placed a greater emphasis on the final exam. The most widely used methods for students' progress evaluation was multiple-choice questions (93.8%; n=76), and low used assessment method was 360 degree evaluation (4.9%; n=4). Comparing of mean scores of participants based on gender and academic degree, were not showed a significant differences, but comparison of the mean scores of participants based on faculty showed a significant difference (p<0.05).
Conclusion With respect to faculty member's emphasis on use and application of the final evaluation results and preferably less effort and common procedures, as well as less variety of evaluation methods of students' progress, paying attention to the new methods of educational achievement evaluation and implementation training courses for teachers is essential.
CITATION LINKS
[1]Ghafourian Boroujerdnia M, Shakurnia AH, Elhampour H. The opinions of academic members of Ahvaz University of Medical Sciences about the effective factors on their evaluation score variations. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2006;3(1):19-25. [Persian]
[2]Hamidzadeh B. Introduction to measurement and evaluation of academic achievement. Morabbian J. 2002;4:146-64. [Persian]
[3]Shahrabadi A, Rezaeian M, Haghdoost A. Prediction of academic achievement evaluation in university of medical sciences, based on the students' course experience. J Stride Dev Med Educ. 2013;10(4):485-93. [Persian]
[4]Amaechi CI, Ifeyinwa EO. The role of measurement and evaluation in national development. J Integr Know. 2014;3(1):173-84.
[5]Abe TO, Isanbor PO. Philosophical notation of ethics for educational measurement and evaluation. Res J Bus Ethics. 2013;1(1):1-9.
[6]Delaram M. A Comparison of student’s performances in multiple- choice and essay questions in mother and child Health examination. J Med Educ Dev. 2014;7(14):31-7. [Persian]
[7]Khademi Zare H, Fakhrzad MB. Integration of collaborative management and fuzzy systems for evaluating of students’ educational performance. J Res Plann High Educ. 2013;69:23-40. [Persian]
[8]Haghani N. Analysis of the learning progress tests based on electronic tests in Passwort Deutsch. J Res Foreign Lang. 2006;33:37-48. [Persian]
[9]Mesrabady J. Introduce and accreditation of concept map evaluation in learning progress and academic performance evaluation. J Educ Innov. 2011;10(38)7-24. [Persian]
[10]Komeili G, Rezaei G. Study of student evaluation by basic sciences` instructors in Zahedan University of medical sciences in 2001. Iran J Med Edu. 2002;2(8):36. [Persian]
[11]Mousavi M, Maghami H. Comparison of new and old educational evaluation methods' efficacy on student's attitudes to innovation and academic achievement in elementary schools students. Inven Creat Hum J. 2012;2(6):125-46. [Persian]
[12]Delaram M. Evaluation of Students by Faculty Members and Educational Staff at Shahr-e-Kord University of Medical Sciences in 2007-2008. J Med Educ Dev. 2008;2(2):9-15. [Persian]
[13]Seif A. Educational measurement, assessment, and evaluation. Tehran: Doran Publication; 2008. pp. 125-200. [Persian]
[14]Dandis MA. The assessment methods that are used in a secondary mathematics class. J Educ Teach Train. 2013;4(2):133-43.
[15]Mozafari M. Evaluation of an educational experience: Nursing student's viewpoints about the new course of nursing ethics and professional regulation in Ilam medical university. Iran J Med Hist. 2010;3(8):173-90. [Persian]
[16]Abbasi S, Einollahi N, Gharib M, Nabatchian F, Dashti N, Zarebavani M. Evaluation methods of theoretical and practical courses of paramedical faculty laboratory sciences undergraduate students at Tehran University Of Medical Sciences in the academic year 2009-2010. Payavard-e-Salamat. 2012;6(5):342-53. [Persian]
[17]Kouhpayezadeh J, Dargahi H, Soltani Arabshahi K. Clinical assessment methods in Medical Sciences Universities of Tehran: Clinical instructors’ viewpoint. J Hormozgan Univ Med Sci. 2011;16(5):395-402. [Persian]
[18]Sepasi H, Attari YA. The study of psychometric characteristics of Shahid Chamran University Faculty members final test scores. J Edu Psy Sci .2006;12(4):1-20. [Persian]
[19]Ashraf Pour M, Beheshti Z, Molook Zadeh S. Quality of final examination in students of Babol Medical University 1999-2000. J Babol Univ Med Sci. 2003;5(2):42-7. [Persian]
[20]Meaiari A, Beiglar Khani M. Improving the quality of multiple-choice questions designed to Upgrade Assistant by giving feedback. Stride Dev Med Educ. 2012;10(1):109-18. [Persian]
[21]Resaeian N, Nakhaei S, Sadegh N. Comparison of three exam techniques in medical students: Multi ple- choice, true- false and short answer question. Hakim. 2002;5(4):271-80. [Persian]
[22]Dawn Marie W. Classroom assessment techniques: An assessment and student evaluation method. J Creat Educ. 2012;3:903-7.
[23]Olde Bekkink M, Donders R, van Muijen GN, Ruiter DJ. Challenging medical students with an interim assessment: A positive effect on formal examination score in a randomized controlled study. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012;17(1):27-37.
[24]Yanying Xu. Principles of constructing multiple-choice in reading comprehension of cet-4 and their enlightening to general college English teaching. Int J Eng Ling. 2011;1(1):219-22.
[25]Soleimani Asl H, Mehran Nia K. A survey of student viewpoints about the checking of present and absence of them and reasons for absence from class in Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2002;2(1):50. [Persian]
[26]Simkin MG, Kuechler WL. Multiple-choice test and students understanding: What is the connection?. Decis Sci J Innov Educ. 2005;3(1):73-97.
[27]Molahadi M. Evaluating by multichoice tests. Educ Strateg Med Sci. 2010;2(4):177-82. [Persian]
[28]Atif Eid A. Types of achievement tests which are preferred by outstanding students at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University. J Educ Prac. 2012;3(13):149-55.
[2]Hamidzadeh B. Introduction to measurement and evaluation of academic achievement. Morabbian J. 2002;4:146-64. [Persian]
[3]Shahrabadi A, Rezaeian M, Haghdoost A. Prediction of academic achievement evaluation in university of medical sciences, based on the students' course experience. J Stride Dev Med Educ. 2013;10(4):485-93. [Persian]
[4]Amaechi CI, Ifeyinwa EO. The role of measurement and evaluation in national development. J Integr Know. 2014;3(1):173-84.
[5]Abe TO, Isanbor PO. Philosophical notation of ethics for educational measurement and evaluation. Res J Bus Ethics. 2013;1(1):1-9.
[6]Delaram M. A Comparison of student’s performances in multiple- choice and essay questions in mother and child Health examination. J Med Educ Dev. 2014;7(14):31-7. [Persian]
[7]Khademi Zare H, Fakhrzad MB. Integration of collaborative management and fuzzy systems for evaluating of students’ educational performance. J Res Plann High Educ. 2013;69:23-40. [Persian]
[8]Haghani N. Analysis of the learning progress tests based on electronic tests in Passwort Deutsch. J Res Foreign Lang. 2006;33:37-48. [Persian]
[9]Mesrabady J. Introduce and accreditation of concept map evaluation in learning progress and academic performance evaluation. J Educ Innov. 2011;10(38)7-24. [Persian]
[10]Komeili G, Rezaei G. Study of student evaluation by basic sciences` instructors in Zahedan University of medical sciences in 2001. Iran J Med Edu. 2002;2(8):36. [Persian]
[11]Mousavi M, Maghami H. Comparison of new and old educational evaluation methods' efficacy on student's attitudes to innovation and academic achievement in elementary schools students. Inven Creat Hum J. 2012;2(6):125-46. [Persian]
[12]Delaram M. Evaluation of Students by Faculty Members and Educational Staff at Shahr-e-Kord University of Medical Sciences in 2007-2008. J Med Educ Dev. 2008;2(2):9-15. [Persian]
[13]Seif A. Educational measurement, assessment, and evaluation. Tehran: Doran Publication; 2008. pp. 125-200. [Persian]
[14]Dandis MA. The assessment methods that are used in a secondary mathematics class. J Educ Teach Train. 2013;4(2):133-43.
[15]Mozafari M. Evaluation of an educational experience: Nursing student's viewpoints about the new course of nursing ethics and professional regulation in Ilam medical university. Iran J Med Hist. 2010;3(8):173-90. [Persian]
[16]Abbasi S, Einollahi N, Gharib M, Nabatchian F, Dashti N, Zarebavani M. Evaluation methods of theoretical and practical courses of paramedical faculty laboratory sciences undergraduate students at Tehran University Of Medical Sciences in the academic year 2009-2010. Payavard-e-Salamat. 2012;6(5):342-53. [Persian]
[17]Kouhpayezadeh J, Dargahi H, Soltani Arabshahi K. Clinical assessment methods in Medical Sciences Universities of Tehran: Clinical instructors’ viewpoint. J Hormozgan Univ Med Sci. 2011;16(5):395-402. [Persian]
[18]Sepasi H, Attari YA. The study of psychometric characteristics of Shahid Chamran University Faculty members final test scores. J Edu Psy Sci .2006;12(4):1-20. [Persian]
[19]Ashraf Pour M, Beheshti Z, Molook Zadeh S. Quality of final examination in students of Babol Medical University 1999-2000. J Babol Univ Med Sci. 2003;5(2):42-7. [Persian]
[20]Meaiari A, Beiglar Khani M. Improving the quality of multiple-choice questions designed to Upgrade Assistant by giving feedback. Stride Dev Med Educ. 2012;10(1):109-18. [Persian]
[21]Resaeian N, Nakhaei S, Sadegh N. Comparison of three exam techniques in medical students: Multi ple- choice, true- false and short answer question. Hakim. 2002;5(4):271-80. [Persian]
[22]Dawn Marie W. Classroom assessment techniques: An assessment and student evaluation method. J Creat Educ. 2012;3:903-7.
[23]Olde Bekkink M, Donders R, van Muijen GN, Ruiter DJ. Challenging medical students with an interim assessment: A positive effect on formal examination score in a randomized controlled study. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012;17(1):27-37.
[24]Yanying Xu. Principles of constructing multiple-choice in reading comprehension of cet-4 and their enlightening to general college English teaching. Int J Eng Ling. 2011;1(1):219-22.
[25]Soleimani Asl H, Mehran Nia K. A survey of student viewpoints about the checking of present and absence of them and reasons for absence from class in Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2002;2(1):50. [Persian]
[26]Simkin MG, Kuechler WL. Multiple-choice test and students understanding: What is the connection?. Decis Sci J Innov Educ. 2005;3(1):73-97.
[27]Molahadi M. Evaluating by multichoice tests. Educ Strateg Med Sci. 2010;2(4):177-82. [Persian]
[28]Atif Eid A. Types of achievement tests which are preferred by outstanding students at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University. J Educ Prac. 2012;3(13):149-55.