Journal of Education and Health Promotion

Faculty’s perspective on skill assessment in undergraduate medical education: Qualitative online forum study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

. Meenakshi P. Khapre
. Harshal Sabane 1
. Sonia Singh 2
. Rashmi Katyal 3
. Anil Kapoor 4
. Dinesh K. Badyal 5

1 Department of Community Medicine, SSR Medical College, Belle Rive, Mauritius

2 Department of Anatomy, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab

3 Department of Community Medicine, Rohilkhand Medical College and Hospital, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh

4 Department of Medicine, Peoples College of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh

5 Department of Pharmacology, Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, Punjab, India

Abstract
BACKGROUND: India is at the nascent stage of competency‑based medical education. Faculties
trained in medical education are the main driving force for change. The present study explores
the perception of faculties about the current practices and problems in medical/dental/nursing
undergraduate assessment, barriers to adoption of best practices, and solutions for addressing them.
METHODOLOGY: A qualitative study was designed and data collected through an asynchronous
online discussion forum. A group of 31 health professionals (FAIMER fellows selected on the basis
of active participation in department of medical education of respective colleges) participated in the
forum. An open‑ended topic guide with prompts was designed. The forum was initiated by release
of discussion topics (threads) at the start of the month and remained in forum throughout the month.
Researchers moderated and recorded day‑to‑day events. All online forum data were coded line by
line and analyzed using conventional content analysis.
RESULTS: Four categories generated were: (1) Low utility of current skill assessment system due
to low validity and reliability; (2) Barrier in adopting newer assessment tool due to the absence of
felt need of faculties and students, mistaken beliefs, and limited resources; (3) Poor implementation
of newer assessment tools such as formatives and objective structured clinical examination with
no blueprinting; and (4) Solutions proposed were regular formative assessment, criterion‑based
examination, quality‑assured faculty development programs, and administrative support.
CONCLUSIONS: Barriers in adopting newer assessment tools are related to the faculty’s perception
and resource constraint. This can be addressed by quality‑assured faculty development programs
and effective implementation of competency‑based education.

Keywords

Assessment
competency
faculty
medical education
qualitative study
1. Densen P. Challenges and opportunities facing medical education.
Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 2011;122:48‑58.
2. Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/
performance. Acad Med 1990;65:S63‑7.
3. Assessment methods in medical education. Int J Health
Sci (Qassim) 2008;2:3‑7.
4. Exploring the ACGME Core Competencies (Part 1 of 7) – NEJM
Knowledge+. Available from: https://knowledgeplus.nejm.
org/blog/exploring‑acgme‑core‑competencies. [Last accessed
on 2019 Mar 22].
5. Lockyer J, Carraccio C, Chan MK, Hart D, Smee S, Touchie C,
et al. Core principles of assessment in competency‑based medical
education. Med Teach 2017;39:609‑16.
6. Goswami S. Problems and challenges in medical education in
India. Eur J Contemp Educ 2015;11:31‑7.
7. Gupta P. Assessment in medical education: Time to move
ahead. Ann Natl Acad Med Sci 2015;51 (4):156‑165. Available from: http://www.annals‑nams.in/index.php/annals/article/
view/93. [Last accessed on 2019 Mar 22].
8. Im EO, Chee W. Practical guidelines for qualitative research using
online forums. Comput Inform Nurs 2012;30:604‑11.
9. Mary H, Linda A, Maria R, Dale M. Focus group data saturation:
A new approach to data analysis. Qual Rep 2016;21:2124‑30.
Available from: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.
cgi?article=2330&context=tqr. [Last accessed on 2019 Sep 10].
10. Bengtsson M. How to plan and perform a qualitative study
using content analysis. NursingPlus Open 2016;2:8‑14. Available
from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S2352900816000029. [Last accessed on 2019 Mar 21].
11. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing
Evidence for Nursing Practice. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott,
Williams & Wilkins; 2012.
12. Medical Council of India. Competency Based Under Graduate
Curriculum. Available from: https://www.mciindia.org/CMS/
information‑desk/for‑colleges/ug‑curriculum. [Last accessed on
2019 Mar 20].
13. Olson LG, Coughlan J, Rolfe I, Hensley MJ. The effect of a
structured question grid on the validity and perceived fairness
of a medical long case assessment. Med Educ 2000;34:46‑52.
14. Norcini J. The validity of long cases. Med Educ 2001;35:720‑1.
15. Ponnamperuma GG, Karunathilake IM, McAleer S, Davis MH.
The long case and its modifications: A literature review. Med
Educ 2009;43:936‑41.
16. Eva KW. On the generality of specificity. Med Educ 2003;37:587‑8.
17. AbounaGM, HamdyH. The Integrated Direct Observation Clinical
Encounter Examination (IDOCEE)Ðan objective assessment
of students’ clinical competence in a problem‑based learning
curriculum. Med Teach 1999;21:67‑72. Available from: https://
gmu.ac.ae/wp‑content/uploads/2018/10/35‑The‑Integrated‑
Direct‑Observation‑Clinical‑Encounter.pdf. [Last accessed on
2019 Sep 12].
18. Pavlakis N, Laurent R. Role of the observed long case in
postgraduate medical training. Intern Med J 2001;31:523‑8.
19. Memon MA, Joughin GR, Memon B. Oral assessment and
postgraduate medical examinations: Establishing conditions for
validity, reliability and fairness. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory
Pract 2010;15:277‑89.
20. Weersink K, HallAK, Rich J, SzulewskiA, Dagnone JD. Simulation
versus real‑world performance: A direct comparison of
emergency medicine resident resuscitation entrustment scoring.
Adv Simul (Lond) 2019;4:9.
21. Deswal BS, Singhal VK. Problems of medical education in India.
Int J Community Med Public Health 2016;3:1905‑9.
22. Zodpey S, Sharma A, Zahiruddin QS, Gaidhane A, Shrikhande S.
Faculty development programs for medical teachers in India.
J Adv Med Educ Prof 2016;4:97‑101.
23. Mahajan R, Uma E, Khapre M, Katyal R, Das S, Sharma M, et al.
Academic leadership: Concept and applications. J Res Med Educ
Ethics 2018;8:16‑23. Available from: http://www.indianjournals.
com/ijor.aspx?target=ijor: jrmee&volume=8&issue=si
&article=003. [Last accessed on 2019 Mar 20].
24. Evans DJ, Zeun P, Stanier RA. Motivating student learning using
a formative assessment journey. J Anat 2014;224:296‑303.
25. Yazbeck Karam V, Park YS, Tekian A, Youssef N. Evaluating the
validity evidence of an OSCE: Results from a new medical school.
BMC Med Educ 2018;18:313.
26. Patil SY, Gosavi M, Bannur HB, Ratnakar A. Blueprinting in
assessment: A tool to increase the validity of undergraduate
written examinations in pathology. Int J Appl Basic Med Res
2015;5:S76‑9.
27. Sunita P, Nayana H, Bhagyashri H. Blueprinting in assessment:
How much is imprinted in our practice? J Educ Res Med
Teach 2014;2:4‑6. Available from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/
viewdoc/download; jsessionid=E657B78EE42BFFBAC0803B
AE90C6AB24?doi=10.1.1.683.9469&rep=rep1&type=pdf. [Last
accessed on 2019 Sep 12].
28. Sood R, Adkoli BV. Medical education in India – Problems and
prospects. J Indian Acad Clin Med 2000;1:210‑2.
29. Tavakol M, Dennick R. The foundations of measurement and
assessment in medical education. Med Teach 2017;39:1010‑5.
30. van der Vleuten CP, Schuwirth LW. Assessing professional
competence: From methods to programmes. Med Educ
2005;39:309‑17.
Journal of Education and Health Promotion
Volume 10, Issue 1
January 2020
Pages 1-7

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us