Practical Exams Used in Evaluation of Anatomic Knowledge

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 46 Sayı: 3, 413 - 419, 01.12.2020

Senem Turan Ozdemır , Meriç Yıldız Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.32708/uutfd.773358

Cited By: 1

Öz

Anatomy is an essential pillar of the Medical Education curriculum before graduation. Evaluating anatomy teaching-learning outcomes is a complex task, as anatomy is a broad and fundamental science discipline. Inter-institutional differences in practice, measurement, and evaluation mainly involve three areas: theoretical knowledge, practical knowledge, and clinical expertise. This review tried to give information about the main types of practice exams widely used to measure anatomy practical knowledge.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Anatomy , Evaluation , Exam , Practical Examination

Anatomi Bilgisini Değerlendirmede Kullanılan Uygulama Sınavları

Öz

Anatomi mezuniyet öncesi Tıp Eğitimi müfredatının önemli bir ayağıdır. Anatomi öğretme-öğrenme çıktılarının değerlendirilmesi süreci, bu temel bilim disiplini geniş bir konu olduğundan karmaşık bir iştir. Uygulamada kurumlar arası farklılıklar olmakla birlikte ölçme ve değerlendirme temel olarak üç alanı içerir: teorik bilgi, pratik bilgi ve klinik bilgi. Bu derlemede anatomi pratik bilgisinin ölçülmesinde kullanılan belli başlı uygulama sınav tipleri hakkında bilgi verilmeye çalışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

anatomi , değerlendirme , sınav , Uygulama Sınavı

Kaynakça

• 1. Turney BW. Anatomy in a modern medical curriculum. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2007;89:104–7.
• 2. Lukić IK, Gluncić V, Katavić V, Petanjek Z, Jalšovec D, Marušić A. Weekly quizzes in ex-tended‐matching format as means of monitoring students' progress in gross anatomy. Ann Anat 2001;183:575–9.
• 3. Rowland S, Ahmed K, Davies DC, Ashrafian H, Patel V, Darzi A, Paraskeva PA, Athana-siou T. Assessment of anatomical knowledge for clinical practice: perceptions of clinicians and students. Surg Radiol Anat 2011;33:263–9.
• 4. Sagoo MG, Smith CF, Gosden E. Assessment of anatomical knowledge by practical exami-nations: The effect of question design on student performance. Anat Sci Educ 2016;9:446–52.
• 5. Yaqinuddin A, Zafar M, Ikram MF, Ganguly P. What is an objective structured practical ex-amination in anatomy? Anat Sci Educ 2013;6:125–33.
• 6. Zafar M, Yaqinuddin A, Ikram F, Ganguly P. Practical Examinations OSPE, OSCE and SPOT. In: Ganguly P (eds). Education in Anatomical Sciences. New York: Nova Publishers; 2013. 223-37.
• 7. Smith CF, McManus B. The integrated anatomy practical paper: A robust assessment method for anatomy education today. Anat Sci Educ 2015;8:63–73.
• 8. Ranjan R, Jain A, Bhujade R. OSPE in anatomy: New dimensions in assesment. Int J Anat Res 2016;4(1):1789-94.
• 9. Tirpude AP, Gaikwad M, Tirpude PA, Jain M, Bora S. Retrospective analysis of prevalent anatomy spotter’s examination: an educational audit. Korean J Med Educ 2019;31(2):115-24.
• 10. Schoeman S, Chandratilake M. The anatomy competence score—A new marker for anato-mical ability. Anat Sci Educ 2012;5:33-40.
• 11. Chirculescu AR, Chirculescu M, Morris JF. Anatomical teaching for medical students from the perspective of European Union enlargement. Eur J Anat 2007;11:63-5.
• 12. Choudhury B, Gouldsborough I, Shaw FL. The intelligent anatomy spotter: A new ap-proach to incorporate higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. Anat Sci Educ 2016;9:440–5.
• 13. Alraddadi A, Khawaji B, Alharbi Y, Agha S, Masuadi E, Magzoub ME. Introducing short answer questions in anatomy spot test. 35th Annual Meeting of American Association of Clini-cal Anatomists. Atlanta. 2018
• 14. Newble DI, Entwistle NJ. Learning styles and approaches: implications for medical educa-tion. Med Educ 1986;20(3):162-75.
• 15. Choudhury B, Freemont A. Assessment of anatomical knowledge: Approaches taken by higher education institutions. Clinical Anatomy 2017;30:290–9.
• 16. Chakravarty M, Latif NA, Abu-Hijleh MF, Osman M, Dharap AS, Ganguly PK. Assess-ment of anatomy in a problem-based medical curriculum. Clin Anat 2005;18(2):131-6.
• 17. Nayar U, Malik SL, Bijlanı RL. Objective structured practical examination: a new concept in assessment of laboratory exercises in preclinical sciences. Med Edu 1986;20(3):204-9.
• 18. Cherian SB. COSPE in anatomy: An innovative method of evaluation. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2017;5(5):325-7.
• 19. Torke S, Upadhya S, Abraham RR, Ramnarayan K. Computer-assisted objective-structured practical examination: an innovative method of evaluation. Adv Physiol Educ. 2006;30(1):48-9.
• 20. Meyer AJ, Innes SI, Stomski NJ, Armson AJ. Student performance on practical gross anatomy examinations is not affected by assessment modality. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9(2):111-20.
• 21. Dennick R, Wilkinson S, Purcell N. Online eAssessment: AMEE guide no. 39. Med Teach. 2009;31:192–206.
• 22. Daly FJ. Use of electronic anatomy practical examinations for remediating “at risk” students. Anat Sci Educ. 2010;3:46–9.
• 23. Inuwa IM, Taranikanti V, Al‐Rawahy M, Habbal O. Anatomy practical examinations: How does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format? Anat Sci Educ. 2012;5:27–32.
• 24. Inuwa IM, Al Rawahy M, Taranikanti V, Habbal O. Anatomy “steeplechase” online: Ne-cessity sometimes is the catalyst for innovation. Anat Sci Educ. 2011;4:115–8.
• 25. Inuwa IM, Taranikanti V, Al‐Rawahy M, Habbal O. Perceptions and attitudes of medical students towards two methods of assessing practical anatomy knowledge. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2011;11:383–90.