Open book tests: assessment of academic learning in clerkships

An examination of an open-book testing approach in a family medicine clerkship seeks to determine whether this method more closely mirrors the discipline of family medicine, where practitioners refer daily to written resource materials in order to make clinical decisions without compromising the learning and assessment process. Student scores on the multiple-choice test were analysed by year, by quarter and by site using ANOVA. Students in the experimental site were interviewed to determine preparation style, use of text during test, as well as attitudes toward open-book testing. Analysis of variance showed that the interaction of site and year was significant at p = 0.03. The mean score of 88.2 for Maine students in 2002 was significantly different from the other three mean scores. The desired qualitative outcomes of the intervention were confirmed: reducing the anxiety of students, wider reading of the textbook, knowing the structure of the textbook as a learning resource, and deeper understanding of concepts and principles rather than time spent on memorization. While the difference in scores did reach statistical significance, it is important to note that the difference in mean score was only four points on a 100-point scale. Given the percentage of the total grade represented by the test score, it is unlikely that this difference represents any real difference in grade for students in Maine compared with Vermont. The students appeared to approach the textbook and therefore, perhaps, the body of knowledge as a whole with the orientation of a generalist. The MMC Clerkship Director recommended the implementation of the open-book approach to the Family Practice clerkship at all sites and the University of Vermont Medical School accepted the proposal. This recommendation supports advising students on the preparation for an open-book test and on tactics for the best use of the textbook during the test.     

Genug ist Genug: A Fetus Is Not a Kidney

Transplantation of tissue from fetal cadavers threatens ethical values and our social ethos in complex and subtle ways, requiring restraints that can prevent harmful normative and attitudinal shifts yet permit pursuit of medical benefits for those desperately in need.     

Fetal Research: Response to the Recommendations

The June 1975 issue of the Hastings Center Report published the Deliberations and Recommendations of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects concerning the regulation of fetal experimentation. The Commission's most controversial conclusions were as follows: First, it voted to allow non-therapeutic research on the human fetus, provided important biomedical knowledge could not be gained in any other way, proper consent had been obtained, and the research imposed “minimal or no risk to the well-being of the fetus” (Recommendation 4). Because interpretations of the last phrase varied in the case of fetuses scheduled for abortion, the Commission recommended that a national ethical review body be able to rule on disputed cases (Recommendation 5). In the case of research during abortion and research on the non-viable fetus ex utero, the Commission's interpretation of permissible “harm” was restricted to the proviso that “no intrusion into the fetus [may be] made which alters the duration of life” (Recommendation 6). The Commission also recommended further research on abortion techniques (Recommendation 12). The Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare accepted the Commission's Recommendations almost without change—the major modification was to request paternal consent rather than to rely on the fact that “the father has not objected.” The DHEW regulations were published in the Federal Register on Friday, August 8, 1975, and written comments on them were invited. Already, however, a number of commentators including several members of the Commission had offered either dissenting or qualifying remarks. Some are printed here.     

Measurement practices: methods for developing content-valid student examinations

Measurement experts generally agree that a systematic approach to test construction will probably result in an instrument with sound psychometric properties. One fundamental method is called the blueprint approach to test construction. A test blueprint is a tool used in the process for generating content-valid exams by linking the subject matter delivered during instruction and the items appearing on the test. Unfortunately, this procedure as well as other educational measurement practices is often overlooked A survey of curriculum administrators at 144 United States and international medical schools was conducted to assess the importance and prevalence of test blueprinting in their school. Although most found test blueprinting to be very important, few require the practice. The purpose of this paper is to review the fundamental principals associated with achieving a high level of content validity when developing tests for students. The short-term efforts necessary to develop and integrate measurement theory into practice will lead to long-term gains for students, faculty and academic institutions.