Doctoral Degrees (Office of the Dean: Health Sciences)
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing Doctoral Degrees (Office of the Dean: Health Sciences) by Subject "Assessment policy"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access An assessment model for the training of medical postgraduate students in urology(University of the Free State, 2012-11) Wentzel, Schalk Willem; Van Zyl, G. J.; Nel, M. M.English: The researcher realised that there was a need to revisit assessment of postgraduate students in Urology and therefore decided to conduct a study on the current assessment model in Urology. The aim of the study was to develop an assessment model for postgraduate students in Urology that would comply with the principles of Higher Education (HE) and also be acceptable and advantageous to both the postgraduate students and assessors in Urology. A study was undertaken to identify the changes that have taken place in assessment as well as the different principles of assessment that should be included in a sound assessment model. The study investigated the role of formative and summative assessment, feedback in assessment and quality assurance as part of assessment. The research included an investigation of the assessment methods that will be most suitable for the assessment of postgraduate students in Urology. The research undertaken in this study followed a quantitative approach with some elements of qualitative research. The researcher made use of a literature review, a questionnaire survey among Urologists in South Africa and a Delphi process that included experts in the fields of Urology and HE. In the questionnaire survey the participants were asked to answer questions about the changes in HE and the assessment methods available to assess postgraduate students in Urology. The questions in the questionnaire survey were compiled by the researcher with the help of the literature review. The information gathered by the questionnaire survey supported by the literature review enabled the researcher to prepare some statements that could be included in the proposed assessment model for registrars in Urology. The statements prepared by the researcher were presented to a Delphi panel and they were asked to rate the statements as essential, useful or unnecessary parts of the assessment model. The Delphi panel consisted of ten experts in Urology and HE that were selected by the researcher and his moderators. A four-round Delphi process took place from September 2011 until January 2012. A total of 189 statements were presented to the Delphi panel in Round One of the Delphi process. At the end of the fourth round of the Delphi process consensus was reached on 163 out of a possible 189 statements (86%). The researcher approached the compilation of the assessment model in three parts. In the first part the researcher proposed that assessors of postgraduate students in Urology should have adequate knowledge about assessment in HE. In the second part of the assessment model, the researcher proposed an assessment policy for the College of Urology and described the characteristics thereof. In the final part of the assessment model the researcher proposed the assessment methods that should form the framework of formative and summative assessment of postgraduate students in Urology. The researcher stressed the importance of the dissertation as the student’s contribution towards the available literature in their field of study and included some proposals on the format of the dissertation project. The results of the study indicated that there were areas in the current assessment model of postgraduate students in Urology that could be improved. The assessment model as proposed by the researcher could be considered by the College of Urologists for future use in the assessment of postgraduate Urology students. If accepted, the assessment model can also serve as an example for the other colleges of the Colleges of Medicine of South Africa to formulate an assessment model of their own. The project attempted to make a contribution towards the improvement of assessment in urology students. The assessment model, if implemented, may assist in improvement of quality assurance in and fairness, validity and trustworthiness of assessment. It will stimulate other researchers in the field of HE to pursue other aspects of assessment that warranted further research. The assessment model can be an effective and valuable instrument to enhance student learning and produce topclass Urologists to serve the needs of the South African public.