Masters Degrees (Office of the Dean: Health Sciences)

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11660/321

Browse

Browsing Masters Degrees (Office of the Dean: Health Sciences) by Subject "Assessment"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    An evaluation of the assessment tool used for extensive mini-dissertations in the Master's degree in Family Medicine at the School of Medicine, University of the Free State
    (University of the Free State, 2013-08-23) Brits, Hanneke; Bezuidenhout, J.; Steinberg, W. J.
    English: Family Medicine became a speciality in South Africa in 2007. Postgraduate studies in Family Medicine changed from part-time MFamMed to a full-time MMed(Fam) degree with changes in curriculum and assessment criteria. The overall goal of this study was to evaluate the current assessment tool for extensive mini-dissertations in the postgraduate programme for Family Medicine, UFS and, if necessary to produce a valid and reliable assessment tool that is user-friendly. An Action Research approach was used in this study, using mixed methods. In the first phase, the current assessment tool was evaluated and the data analysed quantitatively. In phase two, the quantitative results of phase one was discussed during a focus group interview and data were analysed qualitatively. Phase three was the production of a new, improved assessment tool. The evaluation of the new assessment tool did not form part of this study. In phase one, 11 internal and four external assessors evaluated four extensive mini-dissertations with the current assessment tool. In phase two, the internal assessors took part in a focus group interview and evaluated the current tool for validity regarding regulations of the assessment bodies as well as reasons for the differences in marks allocated to specific assessment categories (reliability). The current assessment tool complied with all the regulations of the assessment bodies. In four out of the possible 12 assessment categories the median scores allocated to specific categories varied more than 15%. During the focus group interview, reasons for this were identified and the assessment tool was adapted accordingly. A lack of training and experience in the assessment of extensive mini-dissertations was also identified as a contributing factor. The existing assessment tool currently still in use is valid, but not reliable for all assessment categories. The new assessment tool addresses these areas and will be implemented after training of assessors in 2012.