student assessment

Master in Medical and Health Professional Education
Faculty of Medicine Universitas Gadjah Mada

Majoring Assessment Development in
Medical and HPE 2

- Instructions-

Block Coordinator
dr. Gandes Retno Rahayu, MMedEd, Ph.D

Vice Block Coordinator
dr. Yoyo Suhoyo, MMEdEd

Module Writer
dr. Gandes Retno Rahayu, MMedEd, Ph.D

dr. Rachmadya NurHidayah, M.Sc.
Block Teaching Team

dr. Gandes Retno Rahayu, MMedEd, Ph.D
dr. Yoyo Suhoyo, MMEdEd

dr. Rachmadya Nur Hidayah, M.Sc.

Questions and interest can be addressed to
Block Coordinator:

dr. Gandes Retno Rahayu, MMedEd, Ph.D
Department of Medical Education Faculty of Medicine UGM
Radiopoetro Building 6th floor. Phone: +62274562139, Fax: +62274561196

Email: [email protected]

Table of Contents Page
About the block
Pre –requisite
Objectives
Topics
Themes and content

Part 1: Assessment Programming
Part 2: Assessing the Assessment
Part 3: Working onliterature review for thesis

2

About this block
Introduction

This block is structured based on two general themes: Programmatic Assessment
and Assessing the Assessment. As a continuation of Block 4 Student Assessment
Development 1, this block offers a more advanced understanding in assessment, as
well as its application in the real context. Students will face challenges in applying
their knowledge and understanding in assessment and dealing with more complex
problems within the context of higher education.
This module is equal to 4 (four) credits semester unit (CSU).

Pre-requisite

Prior to taking this block student has to accomplish Block 4 Student Assessment
Development 1.

Objectives

After completion of this block, students are able to:
1. Design an assessment program applied in their own context supported by
best available evidences.
2. Design program to evaluate the quality of assessment program.
3. Write short review of the literatures concerning their proposed thesis topic.

Learning Activities

The main delivery methods used are interactive lectures, peer-teaching, critical
appraisal, practical session and self-directed learning. Main references are indicated
and several readings are included in this block; it is expected that students spend
some time in advance to read recommended references or related readings, so that
scheduled learning activities become interactive ones. Prior knowledge or current
practices of student assessment in your own institution could be a trigger for
discussion during all learning activities.

The relation between module objectives, learning topics, and
learning methods in this module

Learning objectives Topics Learning Methods

3

1. Design an a. Logics of programmatic Interactive Lecture
assessment assessment Peer teaching
program applied Critical appraisal
in their own b. Step by step in designing
context programmatic assessment
supported by
best available c. Programmatic assessment in
evidences. action

d. The essences of programmatic
assessment

2. Design program a. Quality assurance framework Interactive Lecture
to evaluate the for student assessment Peer teaching
quality of Critical appraisal
assessment b. Level 1 Evaluation: Item
program. Analysis

c. Level 2 Evaluation: Validity and
Reliability

d. Level 2 Evaluation: The use of
Kane’s validity theory

e. Level 3 Evaluation: External
Examiner/evaluator

f. Level 4 Evaluation: Long term
impact

g. Assessing the assessment in
action

3. Write short Proposed thesis topics Critical appraisal,
review of the writing,
literatures Presentation and
concerning their feedback
proposed thesis
topic.

E. Assessment

There are two types of assessment, namely formative and summative
1. Formative assessment: oral and/or written feedback from facilitators during
and after peer-teaching and critical appraisal
2. Summative assessment: there are 2 assignment for summative assessment

4

Method Instruction Aspect to be assessed Weighting

Essay Part 1: Part 1: Part 1: 40 %
Design an assessment 1. Comprehension regarding the Part 2: 35 %
program applied either in pre-
clinical or clinical phase in principle of programmatic
your own context.The design assessment
should include at least: 2. The congruency between the
a. The context context and the proposed
b. The visual map of design
3. Feasibility to implement the
assessment program design
c. The rationale/ justification 4. Comprehension of the
literatures cited
of the design
d. How to implement the

design

Part 2: Part 2:
Design how you will evaluate 1. Clarity to decide the aspects
your proposed programmatic
assessment. Your evaluative will be evaluated
design should include at least: 2. Appropriatness in choosing
a. aspects will be evaluated
b. method for evaluation the method for evaluation
c. the possible expected 3. Capability to collect the data
4. Coherence in proposing the
results
d. how you would interpret way for interpretation and
the use of the results
and use the results 5. Comprehension of the
literatures cited

The essay should be:
a. Consisting of 2000-4000

words
b. Minimum 5 text books

cited
c. Minimum 15 relevant

papers cited

Essay Write appropriate Demonstrate comprehension of 25%
theoretical background for the theories
your thesis.  Comprehension of theories
 Quality of references
 1500 - 2500 words

 Minimum 3 text books
cited

 Minimum 10 relevant
papers cited

5

Part 1:
Programmatic Assessment

Topics and Learning Activities

No Topic Scheduled Duration Teacher/
1. Block overview and Learning Activities 1 x 2 hour Facilitator
Overview GRR
how to connect and 2 x 2 hours
employ your prior Interactive Lecture 1 x 2 hours GRR
knowledge with the Interactive Lecture YS
content of this block Critical appraisal 1: 1 x 2 hours
2. Logics of programmatic 2 paper 1 x 2 hours YS
assessment Critical appraisal 2: 1 x 2 hours GRR
3. Step by step in 2 paper 1 x 2 hours GRR
designing Peer-teaching YS
programmatic Presentation on 16 hours
assessment the design of
4. Programmatic programmatic
assessment in action assessment and
5. The essences of feedback for
programmatic revision
assessment
6. My proposed
programmatic
assessment

Total

Instruction for Critical Appraisal:
1. Individually, select 1 paper from Journal relates to medical and/or
health professions education sciences with impact factor of more
than 1
2. Email the selected journal to facilitator at least two days before the
critical appraisal with cc to administrator of Master Program
3. Do critical appraisal based on guideline that is suitable for the type
of study conducted in the paper
4. Draw the key messages

6

5. Make a power point presentation for discussion and getting
feedback from your peer and facilitator.

Key words for searching article: programmatic assessment, assessment of
professional competence
Instruction for peer-teaching:

1. Each student learns about the essence of programmatic assessment
2. Each student teaches others what he/she has learnt followed by

discussion (@15 minutes).
3. Feedback from teacher/facilitator.

7

Part 2:
Assessing the assessment

Topics and activities:

No Topic Learning Activities Duration Teacher/
1 x 2 hours Facilitator
1. Quality assurance Interactive Discussion GRR
framework for student 1 x 2 hours
assessment 2 x 2 hours GRR
2. Level 1 Evaluation: Item Practical Session 1 x 2 hours From
Analysis psychology
3. Level 2 Evaluation: 1 x 2 hours GRR
Validity and Reliability Practical Session
1 x 2 hours YS
4. Level 2 Evaluation: The Interactive Lecture 1 x 2 hours
use of Kane’s validity 1 x 2 hours GRR
theory YS
5. Level 3 Evaluation: YS
External Interactive Lecture

Examiner/evaluator
6. Level 4 Evaluation: Long Interactive Lecture
term impact
7. Assessing the
assessment in action Critical appraisal 1: 2
papers
Critical appraisal 2: 2
papers

8. The way to assess the Peer teaching 1 x 2 hours GRR
assessment Presentation of the 1 x 2 hours YS
work on assessing the
7. My proposed programmatic 22 hours
assessment evaluation assessment and
feedback for revision
Total

Trigger for Discussion
The trigger for interactive discussion is document from LINQED, titled:
“Quality assurance framework for student assessment: Guidelines for design and
implementation of effective student assessment”
Before the discussion, please read carefully the document.

8

Instruction for Critical Appraisal:
1. Individually, select 1 paper from Journal relates to medical and/or
health professions education sciences with impact factor of more
than 1
2. Email the selected journal to facilitator at least two days before the
critical appraisal with cc to administrator of Master Program
3. Do critical appraisal based on guideline that is suitable for the type
of study conducted in the paper
4. Draw the key messages
5. Make a power point presentation for discussion and getting
feedback from your peer and facilitator.

Key words for searching article: assessing the assessment, evaluation of student
assessment
Instruction for peer-teaching:

1. Each student learns about the essence of programmatic
assessment

2. Each student teaches others what he/she has learnt followed by
discussion (@15 minutes).

3. Feedback from teacher/facilitator.

9

Part 3:
Working on thesis

The main aim of this part is to facilitate student to write short review of the
literatures concerning the proposed thesis topic.
The main activities are reading related articles, writing, and feedback.

A. Topics and learning activities

No Topic Learning Activities Duration Facilitator
1 x 2 hours YS
1. Student’ proposed Critical Appraisal I 1 x 2 hours
1 x 2 hours RR
thesis topic 1 x 2 hours
HNK
2. Student’ proposed Critical Appraisal II 8 hours
GRR
thesis topic

3. Student’ proposed Critical Appraisal III

thesis topic

4. Student’ proposed Critical Appraisal IV

thesis topic

5. Writing theoretical Independent work

background for

student’ thesis

Total of Scheduled Face to Face Meeting

B. Instruction for Critical Appraisal:
1. Individually, select 1 paper from Journal relates to medical and/or
health professions education sciences with impact factor of more
than 1
2. Email the selected journal to facilitator at least two days before the
critical appraisal with cc to administrator of Master Program
3. Do critical appraisal based on guideline that is suitable for the type
of study conducted in the paper
4. Draw the key messages that you will use it to your thesis proposal
5. Make a power point presentation for discussion and getting
feedback from your peer and facilitator.

10