1 / 19

Nikos Mattheos Malmö University, Sweden

Interactive software and self-assessment skills. Nikos Mattheos Malmö University, Sweden. Self assessment ability:. Evaluate professional actions – process /outcome Compare to standards Identify weaknesses Define new learning objectives. reflection. feedback. self assessment ability.

shlomo
Download Presentation

Nikos Mattheos Malmö University, Sweden

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. Interactive softwareand self-assessment skills Nikos MattheosMalmö University, Sweden IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  2. Self assessment ability: • Evaluate professional actions – process /outcome • Compare to standards • Identify weaknesses • Define new learning objectives IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  3. reflection feedback self assessment ability IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  4. The Leo: A free Internet-based platform for assessing and training of self-assessment skills in oral health education (A. Nattestad – R. Attström) http://tmk.odont.ku.dk/leo/ IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  5. IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  6. IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  7. IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  8. ? improvement Primary feedback: Expert’s essay reflection Student’s essay IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  9. Assessment Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 1 2 3 4 Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 1 2 3 4 week 1 week 2 week 3 week 4 week 5 Leo n=26 Baseline Static n=26 IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  10. Baseline measurements: Baseline • background data, demographics • competence with computers (score 1-50) IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  11. Weekly evaluations: 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 • use of the software • attitudes, acceptance, expectations • (Visual Analogue Scale 1-16) IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  12. The Interactive Examination: Assessment • self assessment as staring point (Internet) • oral + essay + written comparison with expert Mattheos N, Nattestad A, Falk Nilsson E, Attström R. The Interactive Examination: Assessing students’ self-assessment ability. Med Educ 2004, in press. IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  13. Results • Improved performance in general • No significant difference between groups • (moderate agreement between 2 assessors) • Time on task correlates to written performance • Computer competence correlates to written performance IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  14. Results • students judged 3 out of 4 cases as “easy” • students were positive on Internet cases, but some complained about workload • Attitude swifts IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  15. 1. What do you think of the Internet application you used? (VAS 1-16) Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 10,15 8,3 p>0,05 mean after case 4 10,5 10,8 p>0,05 difference p>0,05 p = 0,0148  2. How much do you think that the software you used will help you at the exams? Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 11,2 8,8 p = 0,0091 mean after case 4 10,9 9,9 p>0,05 difference p>0,05 p>0,05 3. How much have you learned through the Internet cases? Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 6,7 5,43 p>0,05 mean after case 4 10 9,43 p>0,05 difference p = 0,0032 p = 0,0004 IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  16. 1. What do you think of the Internet application you used? (VAS 1-16) Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 10,15 8,3 p>0,05 mean after case 4 10,5 10,8 p>0,05 difference p>0,05 p = 0,0148  2. How much do you think that the software you used will help you at the exams? Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 11,2 8,8 p = 0,0091 mean after case 4 10,9 9,9 p>0,05 difference p>0,05 p>0,05 3. How much have you learned through the Internet cases? Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 6,7 5,43 p>0,05 mean after case 4 10 9,43 p>0,05 difference p = 0,0032 p = 0,0004 IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  17. 1. What do you think of the Internet application you used? (VAS 1-16) Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 10,15 8,3 p>0,05 mean after case 4 10,5 10,8 p>0,05 difference p>0,05 p = 0,0148  2. How much do you think that the software you used will help you at the exams? Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 11,2 8,8 p = 0,0091 mean after case 4 10,9 9,9 p>0,05 difference p>0,05 p>0,05 3. How much have you learned through the Internet cases? Leo group Non Leo group difference mean after case 1 6,7 5,43 p>0,05 mean after case 4 10 9,43 p>0,05 difference p = 0,0032 p = 0,0004 IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  18. Reflections… • Human feedback irreplaceable? • Content and cases too easy? • Time not enough? • Assessment procedure not sensitive enough ? IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

  19. ”The Kiss”. Gunnar Lundh, Malmö , 1949 Thank you ! nikolaos.mattheos@od.mah.se IADR Honolulu Nikos Mattheos

More Related