1 / 23

Anders Jönsson (LUT) & Nikos Mattheos (OD) Malmö University

Dynamic assessment and ‘Interactive Examination’. Anders Jönsson (LUT) & Nikos Mattheos (OD) Malmö University. How can professional-directed education foster reflecting and self-assessing practitioners?.

cruz
Download Presentation

Anders Jönsson (LUT) & Nikos Mattheos (OD) Malmö University

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dynamic assessment and ‘Interactive Examination’ Anders Jönsson (LUT) & Nikos Mattheos (OD) Malmö University

  2. How can professional-directed education foster reflecting and self-assessing practitioners? The students must be given the opportunity to practice these skills, as well as be assessed on them. Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  3. The Interactive Examination - a structured assessment methodology- aims to evaluate students’ content specific skills in parallel to their metacognitive Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  4. This presentation will: 1.Describe the methodology,2. Present some results from last years cohorts,3. Highlight some interesting differences between the two education centres. Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  5. doctor teacher Autumn 2004: 34 3rd semester dental students 174 1st semester student teachers

  6. Self-assessment Personal task Comparison task Feedback Assessment Evaluation Method 6 steps The Interactive Examination 6 steps Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  7. Self-assessment Personal task Comparison task Feedback Assessment Evaluation Method step 1 The Interactive Examination 1. Self-assessmentLikert-like questions from 1 (poor) to 6 (excellent) • - 11 competencies • match to instructors’ • judgement • 13 competencies • match to examination • results

  8. Self-assessment Personal task Comparison task Feedback Assessment Evaluation Method step 2 The Interactive Examination 2. Personal taskAn authentic problem from professional life • A patient walks is • your clinic and... • Internet based • case presentations Actual Classroom scenarios A series of short Internet video films

  9. Self-assessment Personal task Comparison task Feedback Assessment Evaluation Method step 3 The Interactive Examination 3. Comparison taska.identify differences between own and ‘expert’ answer, b. reflect on the reasons for these differences, c. define own needs for further learning.

  10. Self-assessment Personal task Comparison task Feedback Assessment Evaluation Method step 4 The Interactive Examination 4. EvaluationAsking the students to evaluate the whole experience, through a standardised form Standardised form – 10 fields 8 identical – 2comparable

  11. Self-assessment Personal task Comparison task Feedback Assessment Evaluation Method step 5 The Interactive Examination 5. Assessment of students- personal task, - comparison task.

  12. Self-assessment Personal task Comparison task Feedback Assessment Evaluation Method step 6 The Interactive Examination 6. Personalized feedbackComments on: - students’ self-assessment-the personal task –the comparison document.

  13. Results Evaluation Results Evaluation Results from the Likert-like questions that were identical in both centres:

  14. Results Self-assessment Results Self-assessment Students as a group: Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  15. Results Self-assessment Results Self-assessment Individual students: Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  16. Results Self-assessment Results Self-assessment Regression analysis: Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  17. Results qualitative analysis Qualitative analysis:comparison document • differences • arguments • learning needs, • which and how? Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  18. Results qualitative analysis Qualitative analysis:comparison document • differences in: • form- content • attitudes • interpretation Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  19. Results qualitative analysis • differences..! • mainly content- few attitude • few form • hardly any interpretation • Learning objectives: • mainly content driven • ”need to know more...” • - similarities..! • mainly attitude • some content • some interpretation • few form • Learning objectives: • need more in-service • training

  20. Results Comparison task Reflecting... • - differences in the nature of the assessed task? • differences in the institutional learning culture? • differences in student’s perception of the ”end product”? Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  21. Future research... • longitudinal observation of • self-assessment skills? • Evaluation of interventions? • investigate student’s perception of the ”end product”? Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  22. Thank You ! Jönsson, A. & Mattheos, N. Malmö University

  23. Dynamic assessment and ‘Interactive Examination’ Contact: Anders Jönsson anders.jonsson@lut.mah.se Nikos Mattheos nikolaos.mattheos@od.mah.se

More Related